Much more embarrassing thar a major ship in a war zone and presumably at a reasonably high level of readiness could so easily succumb to a cigarette butt.
Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
Equation
Lieutenant General
Sorry It was i ho misunderstood and for that I wanted to give a more complete picture of that episode again sorry.
I would not be too surprised if this ship carried a legacy ammunition outfit from Soviet era that is long past it’s safe storage period. The fire may have resulted from attempt to fire over age ammunition, possibly a solid rocket boosters on one of the P-500 missiles exploded when the missile was attempted to be fired.
If the Russians were truthful about there being no casualties, that suggest the ship was at a high state of readiness and the crew were at their action stations away from the big missile tubes when the accident occurred.
It would be difficult to imagine there being no casualties if the ship was hit by 2 missiles, or if there was extensive fire fighting afterwards. I suspect the fire was amongst the cluster of P-500 missile tubes in the front, and resulted from a lunch misfire. The crew then quickly abandoned ship because the threat of other missiles cooking off. So there was no causalities. The crew may have reboarded the ship after the fire went out without setting off more missiles.
If the Russians were truthful about there being no casualties, that suggest the ship was at a high state of readiness and the crew were at their action stations away from the big missile tubes when the accident occurred.
It would be difficult to imagine there being no casualties if the ship was hit by 2 missiles, or if there was extensive fire fighting afterwards. I suspect the fire was amongst the cluster of P-500 missile tubes in the front, and resulted from a lunch misfire. The crew then quickly abandoned ship because the threat of other missiles cooking off. So there was no causalities. The crew may have reboarded the ship after the fire went out without setting off more missiles.
Equation
Lieutenant General
What if the accident or missile hit was rather near or at the fuel tanks that caused the fire catastrophe? That's why she has to be towed in the first place before finally sunk due to lost of power.
the Russians said ammunition fire and explosion. that seems too specific to just be a random lie
Moskva may have carried the newer P-1000 missiles:
In addition to the fire, there was an ammunition explosion on the ship, according to the report. A detonation of even a single 1000kg warhead would cause severe damage to the ship. In one report, the explosion preceded the fire.
My initial suspicion was a detonation within the hull. Possibly the S-300F complex.
Last edited:
Then the hit might be near waterline which either mine or very low flying missile. Tho for the stormy condition, i buy more into mine.
but anyway regardless the real cause. It will be Ukrainian side of story which will gain much wider acceptance.
but anyway regardless the real cause. It will be Ukrainian side of story which will gain much wider acceptance.
I heard claims it was possibly a detonation in AK-130 130mm artillery shell storage.
That sounds more in tune with what the official news are talking about.
Andrei Martyanov used to be an officer in the Soviet Navy so he is probably the best commentator on this you will be able to find on the West.
That sounds more in tune with what the official news are talking about.
Andrei Martyanov used to be an officer in the Soviet Navy so he is probably the best commentator on this you will be able to find on the West.