Cold War Soviet Cruisers (1947-90)

Overview: From conventional to missile warfare

In February 1946 the “Red fleet” was renamed the Soviet Navy (Советский Военно-Морской Флот, romanized as Sovyetsky Voyenno-Morskoy Flot), and Stalin, the absolute master of USSR, milited for a conventional fleet able to rival the new likely adversary in the West, the combined might of the USN and Royal Navy. Stalin got its way through the post-war conventional fleet, revolving around the Stalingrad class battlecruisers (started but cancelled after Stalin’s death), the Chapayev and Sverdlov conventional light cruisers, the Skoriy class destroyers or the “Whiskey” class diesel electric fast submarines of the Kola class ASW frigates to name the most prominent programs. However admiral Kuznetsov took command of the Soviet Navy, trusted by Kruchtchev to find a more realistic policy for USSR at that time. Priority was given to give the air force its first jets and long-range bombers, the atomic bomb, and reinforce the army with a brand new generation of tanks.

The Navy was a bit left over, as the politburo concluded only a navy that could guarantee territorial waters, disrupt supply lines of the enemy, and ensure naval presence to the developing world were preferrable to a very large conventional navy. This was partially explained by the presence of comfortable natural resources on the territory of the Soviet Union, covering the Eurasian landmass. No large commercial fleet was seeked and later countering seaborne nuclear missiles became another objective, eating the budget for more conventional ship.

Admiral Nikolay Gerasimovich Kuznetsov (1904-1974) quite critical of Stalin’s rule, preferred to develop technology to require some balance, notably through missiles, and a more defensive policy through good submarines, MTBs and missile FACs. The policy of pursuing the development of a strong conventional force, with mass-produced cruisers (Sverdlov), the new Stalingrad class battlecruisers, and Skoriy class destroyers was immediately suspended after the death of Stalin, shifting towards missile ships as soon as possible.

The first of these, the “Kynda class” were crude missile platforms designed to attack the USN task force, with nuclear warhead fitted SSNs if needed. Following this, the policy evolved to embrace two new types, the Kresta I and Kresta II dedicated to ASW/AS and SAM warfare, before the ASW Kara class, before a return in the late 1970s to anti-ship vessels such as the Slava class, made to replace the 1960s Kyndas, and ships that were really out of the box. The latter were the Moskva class helicopter cruisers, Kirov class “battlecruisers”, Kiev class cruiser-carriers hybrids.

1 heavy aircraft carrier cruiser
> 1 Kuznetsov-class aircraft carrier
5 Helicopter cruisers
> 3 Kiev-class aircraft carrier
> 2 Moskva-class helicopter carrier
3 battlecruisers
> 4 Kirov-class battlecruiser
28 missile cruisers
> 3 Slava-class cruiser
> 7 Kara-class cruiser
> 4 Kresta I-class cruiser
> 10 Kresta II-class cruiser
> 4 Kynda-class cruiser
24 Conventional Cruisers
> 4 Chapaev-class cruisers
> 20 Sverdlov-class cruisers

cold war doctrine of Soviet missile cruisers

First off, we have to start with the Soviet Typology about their own cold war cruiser lineage, but the denomination below was established in 1949.

KRL

Legkiy kreiser or «лёгкий крейсер» in cyrillic (КРЛ)
These are light cruisers. Basically the whole lineage of WW1 to late WW2 conventional cruisers. It started with the 1912 Svetlana class, and went through the Admiral Nakhimov class, interwar Kirov class (armed with trple turrets and 180 mm guns), and its sub-class Maxim Gorky, very active in WW2. This also included the Chapayev class (answering the wartime large light cruiser type similar to the USN Cleveland class) and the massive post-cold war Sverdlov class.

The development of conventional cruisers stopped after Stalin’s death in 1953 as the Soviet Navy, under the leadership of Admiral Kuznetsov, took a U-turn towards innovative and somehwat disruptive path to compensate for its numerical inferiority towards the USN. A sensible move, as the USSR of that time did not have the capacity to generate a fleet equivalent to the record-breaking US Navy armada, by a long shot.

It should be added that another type called Vspomogatel’nyi kreiser or «Вспомогательный крейсер» (ВКР) were Auxiliary cruisers, 17 liners requisitioned and armed between 1918 and 1922 for the civil war ‘Red’ navy, and a single ship in 1941, Mikoyan (1935), an ex-ice-breaker.

TKR

Tyazhelyi kreiser or «тяжёлый крейсер» in Cyrillic (ТКР)
The heavy cruiser type was developed shortly before the war. In addition to the German heavy cruiser Lützow, gifted at the occasion of the Germano-Soviet pact as Petropavlovsk, she was never completed but fought at Leningrad.
A single class was started in 1939: The Kronstadt class (see in 3D). Both were laid down but BU on slip after the war or blewed up to avoid catpure.
After the war ended, Stalin urged the need for a modernized version of the concept. This development led to the Stalingrad class (Project 82).
The first of the three, Moskva and Arkhangelsk were laid down in 1952, but BU on slip after 1953, as Stalin was not there any more and priority has changed. So this TKR type shoes were never filled.

RKR

Raketnyi kreiser or «ракетный крейсер» in cyrillic (РКР).
The missile cruiser type. This was the main deal of course once Stalin had passed out, as development of missile took quite a boost in the 1950s.
In this guise, there were three classes that were classed as such, performing a generic and specialized antiship function:
-The Kynda, Kresta I and Slava classes.

Chervona Ukraina (Black sea fleet Ukrainian flagship) en route for the Pacific via the Suez canal in the 1990s.

PKR

Protivolodochnyi kreiser or in Cyrillic «противолодочный крейсер» (ПКР).
The ASW missile cruiser type. Three types could be assimilated: The Kresta II, Kara and Moskva.
However only the latter was classed officially as “Kreiser” (cruisers) in Soviet service.
Indeed, the Kresta II (10 ships) and Kara class (7 ships) were more of a standard/ASW oriented weapons platform called large ASW frigates in Soviet service, whereas NATO registered them as ASW cruisers (also classed that way in Conways book, and Janes). However the two Moskva were rather large, long range, heavily armed “sub-killers”, enough to be assimilated as cruisers despite their ASW role devoted usually to frigates in Soviet service.
The Moskva class were a class of their own in a sense, close in concept to the Japanese helicopter destroyers, the French Jeanne d’Arc or the Italian Veneto.

TARKR

Tyazhelyi atomnyi raketnyi kreiser or in cyrillic «тяжёлый атомный ракетный крейсер» (ТАРКР).
These were the original Heavy nuclear guided missile cruisers, later reclassed as Heavy Guided Missile Cruisers (TRKR) in 1997 in Russian era.
They were a class of their own, of course we are talking about the fabled, legendary Kirov class, second of the name.
More on these further down. The class comprised the 1977-89 Kirov (later Admiral Ushakov) Frunze (later Admiral Lazarev, Kalinin (later Admiral Nakhimov) and Yuri Andropov Renamed later Petr Velikiy. The post cold war era was not tender to these behemoths.

TAKR

Tyazhelyi avianesushchii kreiser or in cyrillic «тяжёлый авианесущий крейсер» (ТАКР)
The Heavy aircraft-carrying cruisers were the most distinctive Soviet large warships of this era. They were unline anything else in any other fleet.
The type was represented by two classes: The famous four Kiev class (Kiev, Minsk and Novorossiysk) and the Kuznetsov class (Tbilissi, Riga). The latter two were much closer to true aicraft carriers, but they retained a substantial hitting power, larger than contemporary supercarriers, hence their denomination of “cruisers”. They were caught by the fall of the USSR and had diverging fates. The 1970s Kiev however were pure hybrids.

Kirov, Kiev and Moskva classes: Soviet immoderation

As shown by this nomenclature, the Soviet cruiser lineage, at the top of the Soviet Navy, devoid of proper aircraft carriers, denotes a clear difference of doctrine compared to the USN. The latter based its naval supremacy on the task force, which doctrine and strategy was elaborated during WW2 and perfected with its new pivot, the super-carrier. This organization rearranged all other vessels, whether they were missile cruisers or destroyers as “fleet escorts”. This even included massive ships like the nuclear-powered USS Long Beach, the closest equivalent to the Soviet Kirov class that was ever built, although much lighter in terms of armament.

Each task fore was a self-supporting ensemble, able to strike and defend itself on many layers, the farthest being cruise missile and long range interceptors (such as the Vigilante). All-around protection by provided by USN cruisers, AA protection by destroyers, and ASW protection by frigates. This was precisely to disrupt the task force that the Soviet Navy invested much brain power, muscle, money and ingenuity, making it still an attractive subject for historians and amateurs alike (as your servant, which is in constant awe with this subject).

We can see that in all three classes listed above, but it went straight to the Kynda class. These cruisers were advertised as “aircraft carrier killers”. The reality did not lived up the expectation, as their missile reload system was pathetically slow, and the missile themselves quite primitive in essence. But they carried quite a heavy payload, or even a tactical nuclear charge which could have cause havoc if not intercepted. The “carrier-killer” was revived in the late 1980s with the Slava class, which were scheduled to replace them and were much more modern. They carried all their missiles without reloads, and like the first, were strategically spread between each of the four fleets of the Soviet Union. The Kresta class in comparison were much more rounded cruisers, good for any purpose and likely to escort the first.

As for the Udaloy and Sovremenny class, they were (wrongly now) classes as cruisers. But for all authors and in Russian nomenclature thay are registered as destroyers. The confusion came from their early NATO classification, but they logically succeeded to earlier class of destroyers and were quite numerous, as no “missile destroyers” were known to be developed in parallel.

Udaloy class: The 13 Udaloy were as large as the Kara or Kresta types, and versatile ships designed by the Severnoye Design Bureau. However the 21 Project 956 destroyer (Sovremenny) had a specialization as AA ships whereas the 13 Project 1155 (Udaloy) were more large anti-submarine ship. Both were nevertheless a response to the American Spruance class destroyers.

Of the most outlandish trio of this picture was of course, the Moskva class. The first were perhaps innovative of these, ans the earliest. Completed in 1967 they can be compared to the Italian Veneto, the French Jeanne d’Arc and Japanese helicopter destroyer, but Soviet-style: They were far more larger at 14,000 tonnes, 32 meters wide, with a pear-shaped look. The large rear helipad deck, large capacity with fourteen Ka-25 ‘Hormone’ helicopters and powerful armament in a staged superstructure which ended in a mack cut abruptly over the deck 2/3 of their length was quite unique indeed. The range of their helicopters combined with their potentially nuclear depth charges made them superb sub-hunters indeed, that can assume if needed amphibious assault support missions. They were developed at first to “clear the path” of Soviet SSBN from Poliarny, the northern fleet, and had nothing to do with the USN Task forces, but were an auxiliary of Soviet deterrence.

For the Kirov class built later in the 1970s, the objective was simply to upgrade the Moskva design at first, but Project 1143 Krechyet (gyrfalcon) evolved to include an air group. There were proponents in the Navy for an equivalent of the Kitty Hawk super carriers, and the project was started full-deck carrier proposal, Proyekt Orel. The Soviet authorities decided to compromise, and the more cost-effective “heavy aviation cruiser” was developed instead.
The end result was remarkable. The Kiev class carried much more firepower than any super-carrier, and above more escorts in general, as should be a missile cruiser. Each carried indeed 80 to 200 surface-to-air missiles to create an umbrella for its own flying assets to operate, and for the closer bubble, 2 dual-purpose guns, 8 close-in weapons systems and even 10 classic torpedo tubes. Each also carried more helicopters than the Moskva, 16 in all, with the exclusivity of carrying 12 × Yak-38 aircraft. The main problem here, which made them a less attractive proposition, if these planes were at the level of their probable inspiration, the Hawker Harrier. But they weren’t.

Instead, it was hard even for the very secretive Soviet ministry of defence to hide the fact these planes were utter failures. Their complex VTOL capability was barely powerful enough to alow them to fly, moreover to carry any offensive payload, making them pretty useless and a weapon system, not mentioning their abysmal agility and reliability records. In a parralel universe if the Soviet authorities have managed to get their hands on a Harrier and reverse-engineer it, the Kiev potential would have been demultiplied, and the whole proposition cost-effective indeed. Three were built, one for each fleet but the northern one (where the Moskva first operated).

For the next entry in the batch and certainly the most famous, the Kirov class, the Soviet tested a new concept born from intelligence reports over Western advanced ECM and jamming capabilities. It was assumed that in a decade, they would advance so far as to defeat any Soviet missile system in use. Another path was chosen, perhaps inspired by Lenin’s famous quote that “quantity was a quality in itself”. The idea was indeed to orchestrate a saturation fire. This type of ships was clearly created to defeat an American task force, not by striking its flagship, the carrier, but destroying the escort vessels, unable to counter such as massive attack from dozens of vectors at once, in several waves.

When she was first revealed to NATO in 1981, via satellite and some intelligence data, calling her BALCOM I (Baltic Combatant I), the Kirov came as a nasty surprise. Project 1144 Orlan (sea eagle) became overnight the largest and heaviest surface combatant warships ever built and imposed NATO to review its nomenclature, by default giving them the somewhat old school “battlecruiser” type name.

There has been countless “what-if scenarios” of a confrontation between such ship and any of the USN warship in service and the response was always the same, the Kirov came on top each time. For other, more anachronistic scenarios pitting these ships against WW2 battleships, the picture was no longer clearer as the latter could bring a formidable armour to resist missile impacts. But in the 1980s, the Reagan years, as the cold war suddenly became way colder, these four apocalypse riders shifted the balance in case of an head-on conflict. In fact five were planned initially, but only the first three would be ready before the fall of USSR, the last (launched 1989) being completed much later.

They imposed NATO naval staff to react. It was too late to design and built a USN equivalent, as it would have required years of R&D. It was suggested to rearm, modernize and built sister-ship of the already existing Long Beach, but in their present state they were still inadequate. In 1980, Ronald Reagan, Republican candidate and former actor as soon as he was elected, promised to build up the U.S. military as a response increasing military power in the east. Reagan’s 600-ship Navy policy was to included soon a counter to the Kirov class. After many discussions, the most surprising course of action (but logical in a sense), was to reactivate the four Iowa-class ships. Beyond the astonishing announcement the task of modernizing these 50-years old relics fell to the Navy’s best minds.

The Navy several proposals were considered, notably to convert her as an hybrid, getting rid of her aft 16-inch turret (Martin Marietta proposal) for 12 AV-8B Harrier STOVL, while Charles Myers, a Pentagon consultant, proposed a massive missile vertical launch system instead plus an enlarge helicopter flight deck. Naval Institute’s Proceedings review proposed a canted flight deck for F/A-18 Hornet fighters. All these were dropped in 1984 while it was chosen a simpler a quicker approach: Modern electronics, modern CIWS for close defense and a battery of harpoon cruise missiles. This however still represented an $1.7 billion spending and the process, which started in 1981 was completed in 1988. The cost was the equivalent of four Perry class ASW frigates.

USN Response to the Kirov: Task Group Alpha with the addition of USS Midway underway in 1987.

This reactivation came with tactical changes, as these battleships became the centerpieces of their own battle group (“Battleship Battle Group” or “Surface Action Group”). Each comprised a Ticonderoga-class cruiser, one Kidd/Arleigh Burke missile destroyer, a Spruance-class, three O.H. Perry-class frigates, support ship and fleet oiler. This task force was essentially the same as a carrier force, with the capital ship swapped instead. These new task forces were tailored specifically to deal with the Kirov class.

If the latter was to eliminate part of, or the entire escort, the Iowa still could close in and deliver a deadly punch with its 40 km+ one ton HEAP shells, guided by relay radars and satellites for a much better precision. Against a volley of 16-in shells, the Kirov was as good as a bunch of palette wood. The only passive protection it had was 76 mm of armor plating around the reactor compartment, and light splinter protection…

Soon after, the Soviet Union collapsed and the Kirov class cruisers were pretty much defeated by their lack of maintenance. Nowadays, only Pyotr Velikiy (Peter the Great) remained in service. The two older are in spare parts reserve, to be scrapped in 2021 while Admiral Nakhimov is undergoing a very long refit. On the other side of the pond however, the four Iowa were finally decommissioned and turned into museum ships. There were plans to replace their firepower by the new Zumwalt class destroyers, but this never happened. The Russian cruiser remains unmatched.

The DDG(X) Zumwalt class should have been the response to the Peter the Great class (ex-Kirov) after the deactivation of the Iowa class. However, the projected electric artillery never was operational and the whole program cancelled by the Congress. No artillery is available to deal with the Russian cruisers, but Trump affirmed the option to reactivate the four veterans was still a valid proposition. USS Iowa, Missouri and New Jersey are now anchored museum ships, while USS Wisconsin has been deactivated and stricken but preserved in 2006. All four are maintained by the USN so to be ready for a reactivation process, just in case.

The last entry on this trio is the most recoignisable for us, and logical step for the Soviet Navy: A fully fledged aircraft carrier class. Both Project 1143.5 Orel (which ended as the Kuznetsov-class “heavy aircraft-carrying cruiser” and Project 1143.7 (Ulyanovsk-class), much larger, would not be completed before the fall of USSR. By all means, and despite their denomination, both were indeed aicraft carrier in overall appearance, but with a massive island, electronics suite, and armament: 12 P-700 Granit (SS-N-19 Shipwreck) anti-ship missiles, 192 3K95 Kinzhal (SA-N-9 Gauntlet) SAMs and for close-in defense, 8 Kashtan CIWS mounts, 6 AK-630 AA guns, and one UDAV-1 ASW rocket launcher. All these could have found their way on a missile cruiser. To this the Orel project carried a supplement of up to 32 aircraft, and the naval staff did not repeated the Kiev error and navalized proven, very capable combat jets: The Mig-29 and Sukhoi Su-33.
They were a STOBAR configuration logical evolution of the Kiev design, their “hybrid” nature being more subtle as shown above. They are not seen here as they changed class to aicraft carrier in the new Russian Navy, where they belong. See also the Project 1153 OREL.

Missile Cruisers in Russia: Any Future ?

In 2015 was showcased a model of Project 23560 destroyer, at the ‘ARMY-2015’ military technical forum. Better known now as the “Lider class”, the prestige project went through revisions and near-cancellations. By all means, the vessel had all-around capabilities making her closer to the Soviet-era cruisers than a modern destroyer. Designed by Severnoye Design Bureau, and the Krylov State Research Center, the project has evolved into a destroyer, large ASW ship and guided missile cruiser all meshed into one package, and allegedly better armed than the Kirov class.

It should be said the general appearance of the ship was equally impressive -as her mensurations- 19,000 tons, 230 m x 20 m x 6.6 m, about 200 missiles and powered by a nuclear reactor and capable of 32 knots. It is indeed nowadays the only modern inheritance of the soviet era missile cruisers, and a clear statement of a return to the prestige of the Soviet fleet. No order was made yet, but planned for 2023. Future will tell.

Nomenclature of Soviet cruisers

These large ships succeeded the heavy cruisers of the Maxim Gorky class (1938). They were different from the two late units of this class, released in 1943 and largely improved. The Chapayev are much larger, with the addition of 5000 more tons. They were in fact the first heavy cruisers designed completely out from the old Italian influences started with the two Kirov of 1935.

They sacrificed nominal firepower (150 mm guns instead of 180 mm), to integrate an additional turret, carrying three more guns, to go for a twelve guns battery, as for the American ships of the Cleveland class. However, in category, they rank undoubtedly in the “heavy” class, and even near the top of it.

They were well served by a powerful AAA, according to wartime lessons, were further modified along the way to reach more firepower. Secondary armament consisted of eight traditional twin mounts giving way ultimately to four twin turrets, 130 mm caliber, reaching the Soviet fleet standards of 1960.

There will actually be 8 ships in this program, whose design dated back to 1936. But the first four ships launched during the war, the Chapayev, Zhelezniakov and Frunze in 1940, and the Kuibyshev in 1941 were never completed. With the advance of the Wehrmacht, two were captured and later modified, while the others experienced various fortunes.

The Chapayev was completed in 1949, like Zhelezniakov, and Chkalov, and Frunze and Kuibyshev in 1950. The Ordzhonikidze and the last ship of the class ordered but was never completed. These ships carried two seaplanes originally (replaced by radars after the war) and were tailored and equipped to lay more than 200 mines.

Chapayev class cruisers were in service in 1960. However the dates were they were stricken from the fleet list is unknown: Chapayev is believed to have been retired 1961, as Frunze or 1962, and the Kuibyshev. Chkalov and Zhelezniakov were however maintained in service until 1990 as training ships. With the decomposition of the Soviet Union, no doubt they were mothballed and left to rot. None was preserved.

Komsomolets

SPECIFICATIONS

Displacement: 11,300t, 15,000t FL
Dimensions: 201 x 19.70 x 6.40m
Propulsion: 2 turbines , 6 boilers, 130 000 hp = 34 Knots
Crew: 840
Armour: 50 – 80 mm (3.8 in), CT 152 mm (6 in).
Armament: 18 x 150 (6 in) (4×3), 8 x 2 AA 100 mm (4.6 in), 24 x 37 mm, 6 533 mm TTs (21 in) (2×3).

The Sverdlov class cruisers were the last soviet conventional cruisers. They succeeded the Chapayev launched at the beginning of the Second World War.

This massive class wanted by Stalin was to answer the armada of American cruisers of the Cleveland and Baltimore classes. A total of 50 ships were planned to give the USSR a definitive supremacy. But this unrealistic figure was quickly reduced to 24, and then 20, which were actually started between 1949 and 1955 at the shipyards of the Baltic, admiralty yards, Nikolayev and Severodvinsk. This was completed by amazing plans for the Stalingrad class battlecruisers.

The death of Stalin
The death of Stalin had these plans completely scrapped. The idea of a classic battle fleet at the insistence of the Kremlin’s master, which had the same appeal perhaps to Hitler in terms of delusional grandeur, was no longer the priority of the day.

Instead, Khrushchev, well advised by the new head of the Soviet admiralty, had less ambitious plans, but more practical and a realistic, pragmatic approach for innovative solutions to deal with the US Navy supremacy, rather than trying to cope in numbers on the same level. This became the first steps for a new policy which endured until the 1980s.

Of this total of twenty, two of these cruisers never even reach the launching stage, being cancelled and broken up along the way, and four more were never completed and remained anchored in the Neva estuary in Leningrad until 1961. Only 14 cruisers were finally completed between 1952 and 1955.

Sverdlov class design
The Sverdlovs were much like the Chapayevs, but had greater autonomy thanks to larger hull dimensions allowing the installation of generous oil tanks. They also had a better overall protection, with a double hull on 75% of her length, and 23 watertight compartments.

These cruisers inaugurated new radars and fire control systems, plus new 100 mm mounts for their secondary batteries, copied from the German dreaded 88mm Flak battery, also used on the Skoriy class destroyers. The 152 mm (6 in) main turrets were improved versions of the Chapayev ones. The final, revised design was adopted in May 1947. In 1960, these ships were already outdated in the face of missile warfare.
Career and fate of the Sverdlov class
Some of these ships were then converted (as the Americans had done) into missile cruisers. Thus, Admiral Nakhimov was rebuilt barely two years after entering active service as an anti-ship missile cruiser, equipped with AS-1 missiles, then SS-N-1 “Scrubber” missile, using a replacement launcher at the same time. She also kept half the turrets. This conversion proved a disappointing one, and the ships was eventually used as a target and then scrapped in 1961.

Dzerzhinski was equipped instead of three turrets and a SA-2 “Guideline” SAM was installed. It was a navalized version of the land launcher. This time the conversion proved a success and she had a long active career, being retired in 1989.

Zhdanov and Senyavin served as command ships, being completely rebuilt in 1970-72 in this role. They received a lattice mast supporting very powerful Vee Cone antennas, satellite relay, the whole rear part being converted into a flight deck for three ASW helicopters, complete with a with hangar, and a retractable missile launcher SA-N-4 “pop-up” plus antimissile superfast 30mm guns.

Revolutsiya, Ushakov and Suvorov received a new enlarged footbridge and more modern electronic equipments in 1977-79, yielding their 3 7mm guns and Egg Cup firing control systems for four 30 mm missile-controlled guns by NATO “Drum Tilt” system.

The Sverdlov class comprised the Sverdlov, Zhdanov, Admiral Ushakov, Admiral Senyavin, Alexandr Suvorov, Dmitri Pozharski, Ordzhonikidze, Alexandr Nevsky, Admiral Lazarev, Dzerzhinsky, Admiral Nakhimov, Mikhail Kutuzov, Oktyabrskaya Revolutsiya, and Murmansk. They were equitably divided among the four fleets.

Orzhonikidze was sold to Indonesians in 1962 as KRI Irian. She Sold for scrap to Taiwan in 1972. Nakhimov was written off in 1961, the others in 1987-89. There were still three of these cruisers in service in 1990: Suvorov, Senyavin, and Murmansk. They were retired in 1990-92, with no budget and no use to support them.

Sverdlov

Specifications

Displacement: 13,600t, 16,640 FL
Dimensions: 210 x 22 x 6,9 m
Propulsion: 4 shafts, 4 turbines, 4 HP boilers, 110,000 hp; 32,5 knots.
Crew: 390
Armour: 50 – 80 mm (3.8 in), CT 120 mm (4.7 in).
Electronics: Radars: Sea Gull, Knife Rest A, Slim net, Top Bow, Egg Cup, hull passive sonar.
Weaponry: 12 x 152 mm (4×3) (6 in), 12 x 100 mm (6×2) AA, 32 x 37 mm (16×2) AA, 10 x 533 mm TTs (2×5) (21 in).

The four Kynda class units were the first Soviet missile cruisers. They were from the outset (1956) designed to respond to American aircraft carriers by another more modern means than that hitherto maintained by Stalin, a line fleet. In addition, they inaugurated a system of launching a “volley” of 8 long-range cruise missiles (250 nautical miles) SS-N-3 “Shaddock”, with recharging of 8 other vectors stored in containers just behind, in the superstructure. However, these reloading operations were long and delicate, also requiring acceptable sea conditions.

These SS-N-3 vectors, capable of implementing a tactical or conventional nuclear warhead, but were dependent on guidance en route and final by Tupolev Tu-95 “Bear-D”. This armament was supplemented by a SA-N-1 “Goa” missile launcher at short and medium range, with a reduced stock (16 vectors) and a very relative effectiveness. This panoply was completed by two AA guns and four rapid fire anti-missiles. The ASW defense consisted of two triple benches of acoustic torpedo tube launchers, and 2 rocket launchers of the RBU 6000 type with 12 vectors each, and vertical reloading. Each rocket had a HE load of 75 kg. automatically adjustable and exploding by magnetic proximity, the coordinate calculations were entirely managed by an electronic console taking its information from the hull sonar. This ASW defense was complemented by a Kamov Ka-25 “Hormone” helicopter, with a stern decking sport, but no hangar, which was a major problem on mission.

Finally, the propulsion was done by a new system (like the contemporary Kashins) of turbines powered by four overcompression boilers. Due to the reduced hull size, this propellant was able to give them a speed of 34 knots. Despite these reduced dimensions, the four Kyndas, started in Zhdanov in 1960-61 and completed in 1962-65 were classified as missile cruisers (RKR). Class: Grozny, Admiral Fokin, Admiral Golovko, Varyag. The Varyag was used in the Baltic, the Golovko in the Black Sea, and the other two in the Pacific. In 1990, all four were active: They were retired from service in 1990, 1991, and 1993.

Kynda class

Specifications

Displacement: 4400t, 5600t FL
Dimensions: 141.7 x 16.8 x 5.30m
Propulsion: 2 shaft turbines, 4 HP boilers, 100,000 hp. 34 knots.
Crew: 390
Electronics: 2 Don-2, 2 Head-net A / C, 2 Scoop Pair, Peel group, Owl Screech, 2 Plinth net, sonar Herkules, 3 CME Bell, 4 Top hat.
Armament: 2×4 SSN-3 (16), 1×2 SAN-1 (16), 4 x 76 mm (2×2), 2×3 533 mm TTs, 2 RBU 6000 ASWRL (24).

The missile cruisers of the Kresta I class (Project 1134) were four originally anti-ship buildings (built 1964-69), intended to succeed the Kynda. They were reclassified early as ASM cruisers, while retaining their planned anti-ship missiles. In any case, they were better able to survive than the Kynda thanks to their secondary armament of self-defense more than doubled. The planned missiles, of the SSN-12 type were still at the stage of developments in 1964, also it was the old SSN-3 which replaced them in series. in addition, the Kresta I were the first Soviet ships to have a helicopter hangar – for a single Ka-25 “Hormone”.

A Kresta I class building in the White Sea in March 1970. Class: Admiral Zozulya, Vitze-Admiral Drozd, Vladivostock, Sevastopol. They were serving in the Black Sea, the Drozd being equipped with four Gatling anti-ballistic missile guns behind the SSN-3 ramps, Zozulya being similarly modified in 1990. In 1990, all four were active: but that was their withdrawal. of service, for Drozd and Sevastopol and 1991 for Vladivostock. The oldest, the Drozd, remained in active service until 1996. But his general condition was so bad that he never went to sea again and was stricken from the lists.

Kresta I general appearance

Specifications

Displacement: 6000t, 7500t FL
Dimensions: 155 x 17 x 5,50m
Propulsion: 2 shafts DGC turbines, 4 heaters, 100,000 hp. and 34 knots max.
Crew: 380
Electronics: 2 Don Kay Radars, Big Net, Don-2, Head-Net C, 2 Plinth Net, 2 Peel Group, 2 Muff Cob, 2 Bass Tilt. Sonar Herkules, 8 CME Side Globes, 4 Bell.
Armament: 2×2 LM SSN3, 2×2 LM. SAN1 (44), 4 57mm (2×2) guns, 10 TLT 533mm (2×5), 2 ASM RBU 6000 LR, 2 RBU 1000, 1 ASM Kamov Ka-25 Hormone helix.

The Kresta II class missile cruisers (Project 1134A, or Berkut A) were like the Kresta I anti-ship cruisers re-evaluated as ASW cruisers when the design was still ongoing. Their armament, to differentiate themselves from the first Kresta I, consisted in 8 new SSN-9 short-range anti-ship missiles. But what was planned was not realized due to lack of technical maturity, and they were replaced by 8 SSN-14 “Flint” ASW systems (with optional tactical nuclear warhead of 10 Kt).

They also had a new bow sonar. Finally, their anti-aircraft missile ramps were the modern SA-N-3 “Goblet”, capable of receiving a tactical nuclear warhead (27 Kt) to disrupt high altitude bomber formations. In addition, four Gatling-type Antimissile rapid-fire guns were adopted from the start. They had a better 3D radar, the new Top Sail (NATO code), more effective than the Kresta I Head Net-C/Big Net suit.

Their hull was narrower, longer, shallower, less heavy from 1000 tonnes. On the other hand, their general configuration was hardly different and the Kresta I and II are often assimilated as a single class. They were made to operate with a “leader” Kresta I unit, possessing long-range SSN-3 “Styx” nuclear warhead vectors.

Class: Kronstadt, Admiral Isakov, Admiral Nakhimov, Admiral Makaorov, Admiral Voroshilov, Admiral Oktyabryskiy, Admiral Isashenko, Admiral Timoshenko, Vasily Chapayev, Admiral Yumashev. They were distributed in Baltic (2), Arctic (5), and Pacific (3). In 1990, all ten were active: They were removed from service in 1991, 1992, and 1993.

Kresta II general appearance

Specifications

Displacement: 5600t, 6556t FL
Dimensions: 159 x 16.8 x 5.32m
Propulsion: 2 shaft 2 DGC turbines, 4 heaters, 91,000 hp. and 32 nodes max.
Crew: 343
Electronics: Speed ​​Cameras 2 Don Kay, Don-2, Head-Net C, Top Sail, 2 Head Lights, 2 Peel Group, 2 Muff Cob, 2 Bass Tilt. Sonar Bul Nose, 8 CME Side Globes, 7 Bell Series.
Armament: 2×4 LM SSN14, 2×2 LM SAN3 (48), 4 x 57mm (2×2), 10 TLT 533mm (2×5), 2 LR ASM RBU 6000 (144), 2 RBU 1000 (60), 1 ASM Kamov Ka helicopter -25 Hormone.

The Kara class missile cruisers were seven rather versatile ships (1969-76), destined to succeed the Kresta I and Kresta II. They had a tactical anti-ship capability with SSN-14 conventional or nuclear missiles, good short range anti-aircraft capability with their two SAN-3 and 4 (72 and 40 vector) missile launchers, their 4 rocket launchers RBU 6000 and 4000 (144 and 60 vectors) and their torpedo tubes. Gas turbines combined with diesel engines were quieter and less vibration-intensive than the Kresta. The last of these ships, Vladivostock (formerly Tallin), built like the others at Nikolayev, was operational in 1980. Class: Nikolayev, Ochakov, Kerch, Azov, Petropavlovsk, Tashkent, Vladivostock. They served in the Black Sea, cruising in the Mediterranean, but two, Petropavlovsk and Tashkent, were sent to the Pacific fleet as early as 1979. The Nikolayev and Tashkent were removed from the lists and kept in reserve in 1992. The others were in service in 1997.

Illustrator’s rendition of the Kara class

Specifications

Displacement: 6700-7630t, 8565t FL
Dimensions: 173.5 x 18.50 x 5,32m
Propulsion: 2 propellers, 4 DGC turbines, 120,000 hp. and 32 nodes max.
Crew: 380
Electronics: Radars 2 Don Kay, 1 Don 2, 1 Top Sail, Head-net C, 2 Head Light, 2 Pop Group, 2 Owl Screech, 2 Bass Tilt. Blue Nose Sonar, Mare Tail, 8 CME Side Globes, 2/4 Rum Tub.
Armament: 2×4 miss. SSN14, 2×2 miss. SAN3, 2×2 miss. SAN4, 4 x 76mm (2×2) guns, 4 AM 30mm Gatling guns, 10 TLT 533mm (2×5), 2 ASM RBU 6000 LR, 2 RBU 1000, 1 ASM Kamov Ka-25 Hormone helicopter.

pic
The Moskva and Leningrad were the first aircraft carriers produced by the Soviet Union. They were perfect hybrids, combining the firepower of a front cruiser and a rear flight deck, a configuration that was quite common at the time, since the Italians did the same for their Doria, and later their Veneto, or the Japanese with their Haruna.

They were specialized ASM warships specifically dedicated to the destruction of American and British SSBNs. So they had to be able to implement big ASM patrol and fight helicopters, having a better range of action like Mil-Mi14 “Haze”. Their pay ranged from 20 to 12 helicopters, two of which had to be on patrol flight for maximum efficiency.

Admiral Gorshkov initialed the specification in 1959, but the latter insisted on the hull as narrow as possible (for speed), the office replying that it would pose insoluble problems of stability, capital for this type of buildings (Gorshkov proposed for a moment the reconversion of one of the hulls of mass cruisers of the Sverdlov class). The cahier des charges was definitively adopted in 1960, opting for a large, large building, very heavily armed for its own defense, notably ASM.

But the studies continued and it was the 23rd project which was definitively adopted in 1961. This last allowed the ship to operate 14 rotating wings, of which a majority of Kamov Ka-25 and Mi-14, by a sea of ​​force 6- 7. They were housed in a shed located between the two chimneys, and the large lower shed, accessing it by two elevators. There were four spots.

Dod Leningrad

In the meantime, NATO’s SSBN’s Polaris missile range had doubled, forcing Krushchev to review the Soviet ASM defense: The radius of action of the ship and its on-board aircraft was to increase. Twenty-six other modifications were made to the plans before the Moskva was sailed at Nikolayev in December 1962. It was launched in January 1965, completed in December 1967, the tests having officially begun in August 1967.

The Leningrad replaced it in the darse January 15, 1965, was launched in July 1968 and completed in 1969. They inaugurated the gas turbines adopted later, but experienced a number of technical problems more or less serious (until the fire of the Moskva in 1973). They could sustain 24 knots for 3 hours, but were at high risk of attempting spikes at 30 knots (which were only reached at trials).

In addition, their hull was finally quite thin, thanks to the “Y” shape of their sections, which allowed them a good hydrodynamics, but the stability in the heavy weather was to be reviewed. As a result, their torpedo tubes were removed in 1974-75.

They were both based in the Northern Fleet, but they also “cruised” in the other fleets. Relatively imitated because of their fleet, their defects were taken into account for the new Kiev in 1968. They served until 1990. In 1991, the Leningrad was withdrawn from service and removed from the lists, the Moskva remaining active in 1995.

Author’s illustration of the Moskva

Specifications

Displacement: 11,200t, 17,500t FL
Dimensions: 189 x 23 x 8.5 m
Propulsion: 2 propellers, 2 VHP turbines, 4 HP heaters, 100,000 hp. and 31 nodes max.
Crew: 850
Electronics: Top Sail Radars, 2 Head Light, Head Net-C, 2 Muff Cob, 2 Don-2, 1 Moose Jaw Sonar, 1 SPV Mare Tail, 8 CME Side Globes, 8 Bell, 2×2 Lance Lures.
Weaponry: 2×2 miss. SAN3 (44), 4 (2×2) 57 mm, 1×2 miss. SUW-N1 (12 miss.), 2 LR RBU 6000, 10 TLT 533 mm, 12-14 Helicopters.

With the 4 Kiev, the Soviet Navy entered in chief admiral Groshkov’s symbolic pet project, destined specificically to project power from the numerous firndly bases and facilities around the world at that time, the ability to be present on all seas, and willing rival to the overwhelming US Navy superiority by using unconventional responses. The Kiev, Minsk, Novorossiysk and Admiral Gorshkov, launched in 1972, 75, 78 and 1982, were completed in 1975, 78, 82 and 1987. They were defined at first as “guardians” of the Delta-type SSBNs, departing on mission from Northern (Arctic) Fleet bases, guaranteeing the destruction of NATO ASW assets in case of conflict.

They, like the Moskva, had to operate a number of ASW helicopters, and also to use interceptors and their own powerful weaponry to destroy allied long range patrol planes (Breguet Atlantic, Lockheed P3 Orion, Bae Nimrod). Capabilities of ASW warfare were impressive, but AA and antiship armament was not sacrificed either and still were quite impressive, on the level of a powerful missile cruiser. The Kiev were already gearing for saturation fire tactic and leaning towards the Kirov class battlecruiser concept.

Unlike American aircraft carriers, these Soviet ships are not pure cruisers, nor are they authentic aircraft carriers, but hybrids. Aircraft required a particular flight deck, which is differentiated from the Moskva by being lateral, the superstructure spreading along its length. This was a typical configuration for hybrid ships, which were very rare. The Kiev emerged as quite unique piece of hardware, unline anything in the world.

The entire hull forward section, was that of a missile cruiser, with a complete panoply to meet all needs: Long-range antiship missiles, medium and short range SAMs, ASW torpedo tubes, AA/DP guns, and 3 ASW rocket launchers, plus a carrying capacity for 31 aircrafts, including 12 Yak-38 VSTOL jets and 18/19 Kamov “Hormone” ASW helicopters. The latter could deploy light anti-ship missiles and tactical nuclear ASW depht charges. The Yak 38 was the Soviet replica of the Harrier but is considered a mediocre attempt at best and was discarded perhaps even before the fall of the USSR.

These impressive ships were indeed handicapped the use of these poor quality jets. They would have been capable of intercepting approaching patrol planes just in the range of SAMs, wheres they would have been intended as providing a much longer range cover. The Yak-38 “Forger” (NATO code), were in the opinion of all the experts, and the Soviets themselves (the pilots among others), pale copies of the British Harrier, devoid of surface radar, slow, unwieldy, with a very limited carrying capacity, low range, and nozzles systems difficult to control: There were probably scored of accidents never officially revealed, but the “Forger” quickly gained a reputation of a flying coffin, in stark contrast to the Harrier. It was rushed to production and did not enjoyed the development time of the British Harrier, an amazing success story of British Aerospace industry during the cold war.

In 1991, the two Kiev-class ships remaining in service were to be scrapped. By then, two were sold to China to serve as “museums” while a third was scrapped and a fourth sold to India, becoming the INS Vikramaditya. Rreplacements for the Yak-38, the Yak-141 “Freehand”, supersonic and with better characteristics was undergoing tests when the Soviet Union started a wave of massive budgetary cuts. The Yak 141 was never operational and sank into oblivion.

The 4 Kiev were still in service in 1992, but both of the Pacific Fleet have been stranded since their respective propeller accidents in 1994 due to lack of funds for repairs, and both of the Northern Fleet suffered a small fate. enviable: In order to keep the Gorshkov in service, the Kiev was cannialized, and then docked and disarmed.

The Gorshkov was the only one active for some time, but she was often docksided due to the lack of funds for her maintenance. She was moored in Kiev, and by the late 1990s her general state was closer to that of a wreck. The Russian navy has given priority to the Tbilisi. The Kiev and Minsk were sold to China to serve as “museums” in 1995-96. One was converted into a muxury hotel, while the Minsk was relocated in Nantong awaiting reuse at planned theme park.

Novorossiysk was scrapped at Pohang in 1998 and Admiral Gorshkov was sold to India in 2004, becoming the INS Vikramaditya. This ship was comprehensively rebuilt in Severodvinsk along the lines of the Russian aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov, and entered into service in 2013 as flagship of the Indian Navy.

INS Vikramaditya during trials in 2013. She completed her impressive transformation from an hybrid missile cruiser to full-blown aircraft carrier.

Kiev class Specifications

Displacement: 36 000t, 42 000t FL
Dimensions: 275 x 32,7(47,2 PE) x 8,2m
Propulsion: 4 propellers, 4 turbines VHP, 140 000 cv. et 32 knots max.
Electronics: Radars 2 Palm Front, Top Sail, Top steer, 2 Head Light, 2 Pop group, 2 Owl Screech, 2 bass Tilt, 1 Trap Door.
1 prow passive sonar, 1 SPV, 8 CME Side Globes, 12 Bell, 4 Rum Tub, 2×2 flare launchers.
Armament: 4×2 SSN14 (24), 2×2 SAN3 72), 2×2 SAN4 (40), 4 x 76 mm (2×2), 8 x30 mm Gatling, 10 x 533 mm TTs (2×5), 1×2 LR SUW1, 2 RBU 6000 (2×12)
On board aviation: 12 Yak-38 jets, 19 ASW Kamov Ka-25B/C “Hormone” helicopters.
Crew: 380

Battlecruiser Frunze

The Kirovs are like the Kiev another originality of the Soviet navy during this era, perhaps one of the most recoignisable trademark offered to the world. Unmatched missile cruisers, by ay standard, these four units were the most powerful surface units ever built in the 1980s. They were tailored to obviously oppose an air strike force from an aircraft carrier, and the carrier themselves and their escort by using saturation fire. Unlike the battleships of old, missile cruisers have no active protection, except for subdivision below the waterline. Lucky hits in the electronics could be fatal, although the Soviets always planned manual and optical bakcups for just such as case.

Compared to the Iowa-class moderized and reintroduced in service, their delicate electronic equipment would succumb to even medium-caliber impacts. But the protection of a Kirov is above all active: Long-range cruise missiles and 2-3 successive layers of protection on long and medium range, close range missiles, ECM and powerful short-range jamming systems were all geared towards protecting the ship and its own task force, as a capital ship.

The Kirov had all the current panoply of a missile cruiser, but on a gargantuan scale. NATO, on the fait accompli, had to note the existence of these ships for which the term “cruiser” seemed inappropriate: Immediately, experts agreed that the title of “battlecruiser”, a category that was thought extinct since the Battle of Jutland, was a good match.

Indeed, commonalities were obvious: Endowed with a very large firepower, worthy of a ship of the line but in a missing category, these ships only rely on the range and variety of their arsenal to deal with all threats. Many experts have emphasized its de facto “invulnerable” nature and pointed she was a clear naval superiority vessel.

When the second vessel, Frunze, was accepted into service in 1984, the US navy under the Reagan administration, had given up the prospect of building equivalent ships, although the USN dreamed of it. Rather he found a rather surprising compromise solution: The return into service of the four veterans of the second world war of the Iowa class. These battleships were completely rebuilt and modernized, armed with cruise missiles and state-of-the-art equipment to deal with modern threats.

This choice may seem surprising, but was considered very rational: Updated, the Iowa combined the capabilities of a modern missile cruiser and conventional big-gun armament, were fast, and contrary to all ships of the time, had a level of armor which was though nearly invulnerable to conventional missiles. In any case a nine hard-cased shell volley did not not feared any interferences, lures and antimissile vectors, or even fragmentation shots. In short, the Kirov class, ultimately four units (Kalinin in 1988 and Yuri Andropov by 1990), found their most serious antagonists.

Kalinin 1991

The Kirovs, in addition to their impressive missiles range, most of them in silos forward, used a mixed propulsion, Nuclear and steam combined, with two nuclear reactors, a solution that the US Navy had studied a time and rejected because of its complexity. On a single reactor, the Kirovs already reached 24 knots, and 30 by combining this with high pressure turbines. The idea of ​​nuclear-powered cruisers dated back to 1968 in USSR.

The design of the Kirov was finally approved in 1971, and the first was started in 1974, followed by the other three, in the same basin of the Baltic shipyards in Leningrad. The team led by Admiral Gorshkov settled on a ship design named “Orlan”, dispacing 8,000 tons at the most. But new studies amidst requirements eventually led to a new and more realistic standard of 20,000 tons.

The Kirov were conceived, thanks in particular to their non-standard dimensions, like command ships for the fleet, with ad hoc equipments. One of them was to be assigned to the Baltic, another to the Northern Fleet, and the other two for the Black Sea fleet and the last to the Pacific Fleet.

Piotr Velikiy

Although not armored, these ships had a protective armored layer of 100 mm above the reactors, and 35 to 75 mm plates elsewhere. They differed between each other regarding their electronic equipment, and superstructure details, due to rapid development of electronics and building span. A fifth unit, Dzerzhinsky, was planned for 1995 and started in 1989, but the order was canceled and she was disassembled in situ. More advanced but mothballed on the 1990s she would have been laikely purchased by China. Currently these four ships are still on the lists of the Russian Navy. They are undeniably the flagship.

With the fall of the USSR, these ships were renamed Admiral Ushakov, Lazarev, Nakhimov, and Petr Velikiy (Peter the Great). But their situation was hardly brilliant: The first two were temporarily removed from service for lack of fuel and maintenance. Nakhimov suffered from a reactor accident in the Mediterranean in 1990, her turbines failed and later repairs dragged for years due to the state of the Russian economy. Eventually all but Peter the Great (admiral ship of the northern fleet) were retired from service: Admiral Ouchakov in 2001, Admiral Lazarev and Admiral Nakhimov in 1999.

Author’s Illustration of the Kirov class

Admiral Ushakov-heavy atomic “Eagle”.
by The_Ping Pro
on Sketchfab

Kirov class Specifications

Displacement: 24 000t, 28 000t
Dimensions: 248 x 28 x 7,5m
Propulsion: 2 propellers, 2 turbines NVC, 150 000 cv. et 32-34 Noeuds max.
Crew: 800
Electronics: Radars 2 Palm Front, Top Sail, Top steer, 2 Head Light, 2 Top Dome, 2 Pop group, 2 Eye bowl, 4 bass Tilt, 1 Punch bowl. 2 Sonars Horse Tail et Horse Jaw (SPV), 8 CME Side Globes, 10 Bell, 4 Rum Tub, 2×2 Lance leurres.
Armament: 20x SSN19, 1×2 SSN-14 (16), 12x SAN-6 (96), 2×2 SAN-4 (40), 4x 100 mm (2×2), 8x 30 mm CIWS, 2×4 TT 533 mm, 2×6 LR RBU1000, 3 ASW Kamov Ka-32 Helix.

Russian missile cruiser Marshal Ustinov in the 2000s

The Slava-class missile cruisers (Project 1164, for early NATO Black Com-2, then Krasina) were anti-ship units that could replace the four Kynda that reached their age limit. however, from past experience, they were much larger (12,500 tons at full load against 5,600 for the former).
In addition, they all had their cruise missiles not in steerable batteries with refills, but in lateral ramps, fixed and independent. These SS-N-12 bazalt (Sandbox) were supersonic (mach 2.5) and common also to the four Kiev.

They had a nuclear head of 350 Kt or a conventional hollow charge of 1 ton.
They weighted 5, 11.70 meters long and 2.60 meters wide, with a range of 550 km. This system was complemented by two anti-aircraft ramps, medium (SA-N-6) and short-range (SA- N-4).
These were all silos behind the funnnel, 8 silos for SA-N-6 and 2 launchers with 20 missiles each for SA-N-4. The former have, like torpedoes, an alternative tactical nuclear head.

The Slava class were six ships initially planned, but following the political events in the USSR in 1990, only the first four were operational, respectively in 1982, 86, 89 and 93.
The first three were therefore in service in 1990. The other three, Admiral Lobov (started 1984, launched 1990 and planned for completion in 1993) was transferred to Ukraine and renamed Vilna Ukraina, but still lacked equipment to be operational. Ukraine then did not had any means to carry out this work.

As a result, through a joint contract to sell Sovremenny-class destroyers to the Chinese, funds arrived and Ukraina was finally completed in 2001. Rossiya and Admiral Gorshkov were not even started and were soon removed from the lists. All were built in Nikolayev, on modified Kara plans.
The original names of the first three (renamed after 1990) were Slava, Marshal Ustinov and Chervonia Ukraina. Class (renamed): Moskva, Admiral Isakov, Admiral Ustinov, Varyag, Vilna Ukrayina.

They were in service by the 1990s in the Northern Fleet (Ustinov), Black Sea (Ukrayina, Moskva), and Baltic (Lobov). The Moskva (formerly Slava) was sent for modernization to Nikolayev in 1990 and remained there until 2000, as the funds for doing so were insufficient. Of course their status will be refreshed in a future dedicated post.

Author’s illustration of the Slava

Specifications

Displacement: 10,000t, 12,500t FL
Dimensions: 187 x 20.8 x 7.5 m
Propulsion: 2 propellers, 2 DGC turbines, 125,000 hp. and 34 Nodes max.
Crew: 600
Electronics: Radar 2 Top Pair, Top Steer, 3 Palm Front, 1 Top Dome, 2 Pop Group, 1 Kite Screech, 1 Front Piece, 3 Bass Tilt. LF Sonar, 1 SPV, 8 CME Side Globes, 1 Satcom Punch Bowl.
Armament: 16 SSN12, 8 LM SAN6, 2 SAN4 (40), 2 130mm (1×2) guns, 10 TLT 533mm (2×5), 6 Gatling AM 30mm, 2 LR ASW RBU 6000 (144), 1 ASW helicopter Kamov Ka-25 Hormone-B.

Read More

R.Gardiner Conway’s all the world’s fighting ships 1922-1947 & 1947-1995
fr.naval-encyclopedia.com/guerre_froide/flotte_sovietique1990.php#cr
//www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WMRUS_Main.php
Russia to build 2 Lider-class nuclear-powered destroyers by end of 2020s TASS. 28 February 2019
“Russian Future Destroyer “Grown Up” to 19,000 Tons”. 26 February 2019
“Russian Navy Project 23560 Leader-class Nuclear-Powered Destroyers to Slip Behind Schedule”. navyrecognition 2017
“Russia Creating Cutting-Edge Universal Nuclear Battleship”. Sputnik. 23 July 2016.
Berezhnoi S. S. Trofei i reparatsii VMF SSSR. – Sakhapoligraphizdat, Yakutsk, 1994.
Kuzin V. P., Nikol’skii V. I. Voenno-Morskoi Flot SSSR 1945–1991.
Pavlov A. S. Voyennye korabli SSSR i Rossii 1945–1995.
Pavlov A. S. Voyennye korabli Rossii 2001 god. – Yakutsk, 2001.
www.navypedia.org/ships/russia/ru_cr_groznyy.htm
www.navypedia.org/ships/russia/ru_cr_admiral_zozulia.htm
www.navypedia.org/ships/russia/ru_cr_kronshtadt.htm
www.navypedia.org/ships/russia/ru_cr_nikoayev.htm
www.navypedia.org/ships/russia/ru_cr_kirov80.htm
www.navypedia.org/ships/russia/ru_cr_slava.htm
www.navypedia.org/ships/russia/ru_cr_moskva.htm