Guided Missile Cruiser Moskva

[thewood1]

The second link in this post shows deployment of the Moskva in the weeks prior to the incident.

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 3#p4986863

[Gunner98]

I built a simple Moskva ambush scenario with two units on the Ukraine side: the Bal SSM unit and and the Bayraktar drone. That's the drone that was rumored to be flying around Snake Island just before the missiles hit. I had the 2019 version of the Moskva patrolling from Snake Island to 35 nm off Odessa. I chose that because of the some of the reported positions of the ship over the last couple of weeks.

Had the SSM and drone on an ASuW mission so that as soon as the drone found the Moskva it fired two missiles. If the Moskva was caught without radar on, it got hit by both missiles. There was heavy damage and it was 50/50 whether the fires and flooding eventually led to a sinking. If any search radar was on, two missiles couldn't get through. This was regardless of proficiency. At very low proficiency, one missile always got close, but it was eventually destroyed. With a radar on, it took at least eight missiles in a salvo for at least two to get through.

Based on CMO, the Moskva would have had to have its radars cold. I heard that there might have been up to three escorting frigates and got a couple names, but I'm not sure they were kept in a defensive formation that would have helped. I will play around with different escorts and such, but my simulated conclusion is that the Russians just plain weren't prepared for a missile attack in the open sea. There's a pretty good chance they didn't expect the Neptun system to be operational and a threat.

That is about as plausible of an explanation as there is. Hubris, complacency, malfunction, who knows but a powerful AD ship being sunk by apparently two missiles... they must not have thought it possible... very dangerous to underestimate an enemy in war...

The other semi-plausible explanation of a fire breaking out somehow and a failure to get it under control isn't much better from a Russian perspective. My only concern is that we haven't seen any OSINT supporting the missile launch or track, and the Ukrainians have been very good at having cameras ready, and/or with Bayraktar footage. Or have I missed that?

B

[thewood1]

Several news sources stated that the Moskva moved back and forth to Sevastopol unescorted for resupply and refuel. I think its pretty safe to assume that the Russians never expected any ASM threat. It was also stated the Moskva was stationed relatively close to Odessa to provide Anti-Air coverage to Crimea and parts of eastern Ukraine. To put to task the Russian claims of an accident, As soon as the Moskva was hit, all Russian ships moved beyond the 80 km mark from the coast.

One thing I heard on a radio news program from a former RN admiral is that there's a good chance older Russian radars can't pick up drones effectively. He also stated that unlike USN and RN ships, all the multitude of radars and sensors in Slava cruisers are not integrated into a "fused" station so that one operator can have a full picture of the battlespace. This forces a workload problem for the officer(s) and can cause confused and delayed decision-making. The Slava doesn't have the signal processing and computing power to manage that. It reminds of reading about the details on the Excocet attack on the USS Stark in the 80s. There was a lot of orders, counter orders, and confusion amongst officers that was caused by info overload. This translates to a longer OODA loop in CMO terms. I think it also translates into the USN's very heavy investment in signal and compute power for Aegis and the like.

[elxaime]

On the human side of the equation, Ukraine has a new Vice-Admiral, promoted for actions "everyone knows about."

https://twitter.com/AlexKhrebet/status/ ... 1267608582

https://www.promoteukraine.org/ukraine- ... -the-navy/

[Gunner98]

I tend to agree that the Ukrainian story is plausible, and I want to believe it, although it matters not except for pride & propaganda. The Russians are down one very important ship and they either look foolish, incompetent or both.

The points above are valid considerations but still circumstantial. Why only 2 missiles and not a full salvo? Why no video to bolster the infowar piece? Why hasn't Ukraine shared the tracking data? Why hasn't the very effective OSINT community picked up anything solid? Why hasn't the US or NATO come out with evidence, they would certainly have it. There are a whole bunch of questions remaining. Maybe the Ukrainian Navy pulled off a masterful attack, or maybe they are spinning an advantageous situation into a heroic story...Hero's of Snake Island, Ghost of Kiev, brave babushkas etc etc.

In the end, unless hard irrefutable evidence of the missile attack emerges, this one will be shrouded in mystery for some time. The Russians will be reluctant to admit their hubris, incompetence, repetitive patrolling, poor damage control and probably a lot more (maintenance, bad drills, cumbersome C2 etc). The Ukrainians have a good story and they will stick to it.

A lot of countries will start looking at the Neptune missiles which will eventually help with Ukraine's defence industry, and Russia needs a new ship.... This is a win for Ukraine however it happened.

B

[Gunner98]

Here is a photo that is reported as being of the Moskva on 15 April

Moskva burning.jpg (46.93 KiB) Viewed 1556 times

[schweggy]

I've run a few simulations with various parameters... weather, crew proficiency levels, radars on/off, etc. Some successful in sinking the Moskva, some not. I does however occur to me that the Ukrainians "may" have had help in where to fire their ASM's. It would negate some of the issues I had. For example, the Bayrakart drones don't seem to have very good sensors in bad weather... as was the case. A nice plot from a modern platform could help.

[amatteucci]

The fact that the FC radar for the S-300F is in its standby position and the Osa-M launchers are retracted in their wells isn't evidence that the Moskva wasn't even aware of being under attack? Moreover, this should also prove that the ship defenses weren't actually "distracted" by a drone.

Assuming that, indeed, a missile attack took place (the internal explosion or drifting mine hypothesis are too far fetched IMHO), I wonder if the inability of the cruiser SAMs, not only to shot down the incoming threats, but to do anything at all, is due to human incompetence or technical failure.

[thewood1]

"The fact that the FC radar for the S-300F is in its standby position and the Osa-M launchers are retracted in their wells isn't evidence that the Moskva wasn't even aware of being under attack?"

I was thinking the same thing. But they might reset to standby position on power failure. Just conjecture. It also looks like all the S-300 vertical tube hatches are closed. It a little hard to tell.

[1nutworld]

I played around with a scenario attempting to sink the Moskva.
Since the Database doesn't have the current iteration of the Neptune, I had to substitute Harpoons, that is kinda what the Russian version was based on originally, and then copied by then ally, Ukraine.

Don't hit me with a bunch of "no it wasn't" BS, ok? I just wanted to see what it would take to have a SSM hit and attempt to sink the Moskva.

For my recreations - I had to disable the long-range POP GROUP, TOP DOME and RUM TUB radars as well as the AK-630M's and the SA-N-6 GRUMBLE launchers other wise the Harpoon version would get shot down before striking the cruiser.

Did a few runs of keeping various sensors and defense systems operational before they would get through the defenses to strike the ship.

For what it's worth, ultimately, It took disabling all of that for 2 missiles to strike the cruiser enough to achieve over 65% damage, which then became progressive and got to 75%-ish before the Moskva sank.

[nanni]

There are a few things that need to be pointed out.
1. In all the videos and photos of the stricken Moskva, there is no hint of rough seas or stormy weather. Russian claims to that effect are suspect.
2. She was steaming off the enemy coast in time of war. Was the the ship in GQ? Were the watertight doors all battened down? Warships are, or should be, very highly compartmentalized through watertight compartments connected through doors that must be shut in presence of danger.
3. The ship was also well equipped with radars and ESM. Was anybody manning the consoles or the CIC?
4. Finally, what about damage control? It plainly was ineffective. Why? No GQ or more deep-seated shortcomings? Remember the USS Samuel B. Roberts, a frigate, struck by an Iraqi Exocet in the Persian Gulf in 1987? She survived and was half the size of the Moskva.

In my opinion, CMO algorithms, particularly of Russian assets, have to be reviewed to better reflect actual performance, not theoretical performance deduced only from tables of technical characteristics. For example, also, the vaunted Spetznaz screwed up in trying to capture the airfield near Kyiv on the first couple days of the war.
More in general, this algorithm review must be done game-wide.

[thewood1]

"I had to substitute Harpoons, that is kinda what the Russian version was based on originally, and then copied by then ally, Ukraine."

Why would you substitute Harpoons when the Bal system is already in the db? Its what the Neptun was based on with only a few modifications. It was stated several times in this thread.

[thewood1]

There are a few things that need to be pointed out.
1. In all the videos and photos of the stricken Moskva, there is no hint of rough seas or stormy weather. Russian claims to that effect are suspect.
2. She was steaming off the enemy coast in time of war. Was the the ship in GQ? Were the watertight doors all battened down? Warships are, or should be, very highly compartmentalized through watertight compartments connected through doors that must be shut in presence of danger.
3. The ship was also well equipped with radars and ESM. Was anybody manning the consoles or the CIC?
4. Finally, what about damage control? It plainly was ineffective. Why? No GQ or more deep-seated shortcomings? Remember the USS Samuel B. Roberts, a frigate, struck by an Iraqi Exocet in the Persian Gulf in 1987? She survived and was half the size of the Moskva.

In my opinion, CMO algorithms, particularly of Russian assets, have to be reviewed to better reflect actual performance, not theoretical performance deduced only from tables of technical characteristics. For example, also, the vaunted Spetznaz screwed up in trying to capture the airfield near Kyiv on the first couple days of the war.
More in general, this algorithm review must be done game-wide.

[BDukes]

In my opinion, CMO algorithms, particularly of Russian assets, have to be reviewed to better reflect actual performance, not theoretical performance deduced only from tables of technical characteristics. For example, also, the vaunted Spetznaz screwed up in trying to capture the airfield near Kyiv on the first couple days of the war.
More in general, this algorithm review must be done game-wide.

Pretty sure you can change the damage control proficiency by changing the proficiency of the unit (OOB dialog in editor). Have you set it to the lowest setting and tested?

Mike

[Filitch]

For example, also, the vaunted Spetznaz screwed up in trying to capture the airfield near Kyiv on the first couple days of the war.

It is offtopic, but Russian forces really captured and held Gostomel up to the retire order was received a month after capture.

[BDukes]

For example, also, the vaunted Spetznaz screwed up in trying to capture the airfield near Kyiv on the first couple days of the war.

It is offtopic, but Russian forces really captured and held Gostomel up to the retire order was received a month after capture.

Seen the reposted Russian VDV death notices from Ru news and dates on Twitter? They kind of tell the tale.

Mike

[Filitch]

For example, also, the vaunted Spetznaz screwed up in trying to capture the airfield near Kyiv on the first couple days of the war.

It is offtopic, but Russian forces really captured and held Gostomel up to the retire order was received a month after capture.

Seen the reposted Russian VDV death notices from Ru news and dates on Twitter? They kind of tell the tale.

Mike

With all due respect, but you will tell me news from my country? I can read a lot of sources as a native user and talks with peoples tet-a-tete. And you basing your conclusions on doubted messages in twitter.
Not to mention, that deaths' (this is a war, a men die) don't cancel holding of airfield. There are enough photo and video evidences.

[BDukes]

It is offtopic, but Russian forces really captured and held Gostomel up to the retire order was received a month after capture.

Seen the reposted Russian VDV death notices from Ru news and dates on Twitter? They kind of tell the tale.

Mike

With all due respect, but you will tell me news from my country? I can read a lot of sources as a native user and talks with peoples tet-a-tete. And you basing your conclusions on doubted messages in twitter.
Not to mention, that deaths' (this is a war, a men die) don't cancel holding of airfield. There are enough photo and video evidences.

Sure. Unless you're saying that your news is only for Russians I look at everybody's news because I have access to it. Do you? If not, why is that?

Stay the f out of that war if you can. It is grinding your armed forces down the nub. You don't need to die there for some dudes need to show a legacy. This is like a WW1-level miscalculation. I'm saying it because I care what happens to Russians too.

Mike

[elxaime]

A "chain of negligence" hypothesis from a former Turkish naval officer:

https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... a-cruiser/

I had seen reports elsewhere that another possible factor in the sinking may have been that Moskva had not completed scheduled updates to its fire control systems. It was scheduled for a number of updates over 2014-2017 or so, but the need to triage available funds and to deploy off Syria meant updates to fire control were left on the to-do list. On funding levels, given allegations of pilfering impacts on Russian military readiness (for example equipment kept in storage - AFVs missing engines, stripped for rare metals), if corruption is rampant in a system, and in this case impacted naval procurement and repair, it can contribute to such outcomes. I have only seen speculation on this point, however.

[Filitch]

Sure. Unless you're saying that your news is only for Russians I look at everybody's news because I have access to it. Do you? If not, why is that?

You won't believe it but I read worldwide news too. Moreover I can analyze and read analytics on this news and information.

Stay the f out of that war if you can. It is grinding your armed forces down the nub. You don't need to die there for some dudes need to show a legacy. This is like a WW1-level miscalculation. I'm saying it because I care what happens to Russians too.

Mike

Thanks for your worry, I sure Russian Army will grind Ukrainian first. Probably it is not obvious from Western point of view, really it is hard war. But „The enemy shall be defeated. Victory will be ours.“