JavaScript is disabled
Our website requires JavaScript to function properly. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser settings before proceeding.
Messages
9,121
Reactions
16,646
1024px-Project_1164_Moskva_2012_G2.jpg
ovawsrp9a6u81-jpg.jpg
 
I notice that the missile launch tubes are missing on that side, and there are burn marks on the hull where each one was located. That indicates to me that the missiles burned/exploded in their tubes. I also notice that a lot of the superstructure seems to be missing. Probably the exploding missiles contributed to that.
 
I notice that the missile launch tubes are missing on that side, and there are burn marks on the hull where each one was located. That indicates to me that the missiles burned/exploded in their tubes. I also notice that a lot of the superstructure seems to be missing. Probably the exploding missiles contributed to that.
The launch tubes are there, they are mostly obscured by the smoke, but you can see the outlines of them.
Might have to enlarge the photo a bit.

Those "sea skimmer" type missiles reportedly run 8 ft +/- to 12 ft +/- above the water in their final phase.
They home in "amidships".....center mass.
Neptune, Exocet, Harpoon.....they are deadly.

HMS Sheffield (1983) and USS Stark (1987) were both hit by Exocet missiles.
 
Last Edited:
I was thinking that the launch tubes extended further back.

The burn marks must be from fire/smoke exiting the hull, in which case, there was a truly bad fire burning in the hull.

It also looks like the deployed the crane, perhaps it was used to spray water on the fire.

With the warheads and all that propellent, that ship was a potential fire bomb. Perhaps surface missile-armed ships are "expendable" now that anti-ship missile technology has advanced. Talk about a ship with a "glass jaw!"
 
Sure looks to me that there is a lot of damage just above and probably below the water line in that pic. Missile impact would be right there (just above water line when ship in normal position). Missile impact may be largely underwater because it's listing to its side but even so there is a lot of apparent damage down low in the pic. Contrast to the "before" picture of its side right there.
E590E4C6-00D0-46E7-B8B7-00DF300C84C6.jpeg
42BE7709-9B03-4B4C-A69A-40B0548B7571.jpeg
 
Last Edited:
Sure looks to me that there is a lot of damage just above and probably below the water line in that pic. Missile impact would be right there (just above water line when ship in normal position). Missile impact may be largely underwater because it's listing to its side but even so there is a lot of apparent damage down low in the pic. Contrast to the "before" picture of its side right there.
View attachment 1180073
View attachment 1180083
You don't want to be anywhere near amidships if there are any sea skimmer missiles around.
I have some sympathy for the conscripts that perished.
Look at those sooted up portholes. Must have been hell for those caught below decks.

Maybe if enough Russian mothers cry for their lost sons Putin will stop this.
 
Last Edited:
Brief article on the Moskva written in January. Apparently she took a missile on 2008 and was repaired. Sounds like the author knows what he is talking about.

 

Upcoming Events

Teen Rifle 1 Class
Springfield, OR
Kids Firearm Safety 2 Class
Springfield, OR
Arms Collectors of Southwest Washington (ACSWW) gun show
Battle Ground, WA

New Resource Reviews

New Classified Ads

Back Top