Advances in fire control, the accuracy and agency of weapon systems, have been the most significant advances in the past century on warfare to date.

I’d like to introduce you to the M10 Wolverine, the M18 Hellcat, the M3 half-track fitted with AT gun, etc… or hell, just a regular old jeep-towed AT gun.

There have been fast, highly mobile tank destroyers and likewise fast, mobile AT guns since WWII. The fact that our current batch uses missiles instead of projectiles doesn’t really change much, IMHO. Tell me how a couple dudes in a Hilux and an ATGM somehow present a different threat than a similar number of guys in an M18 with a 76 (and later 90). You could even argue that since the M18 was armored, it was even harder to kill than the unarmored Hilux.

Jeeps with recoilless rifle teams, or even just Bazookas… things that killed Nazi tanks in 1945.

We have ways of dealing with these things. We’ve been doing it since 80 odd years ago. This isn’t revolutionary. The fact that Russia seems to be struggling with that the way that they are, speaks more to poor tactics than it does to the obsolescence of the tank.

Sorry it explains nothing. Only they do not know how radar even works for a WW2 era ship to not even talk of a 80 era…

First thing: There are 2 long range air search radars in Slava class.

Then there are directors: 1 director for SA-N-6 VLS long range anti aircraft missiles. In each side a director for each of OSA short range anti aircraft missile launchers, and 3 more directors for each pair of 30mm gatling guns — and another director for the 130mm gun but that is not anti aircraft main mission. The search radars in Slava can track certainly more than a hundred of targets each of which the most dangerous would be handed over to the director radars of the weapons systems.

There is no such thing of a drone “draw attention”, that is ridiculous, this ship can destroy several anti aircraft targets at same time.

Since the pictures show that the SA-N-4 OSA are still inside their bins not deployed, the missile directors still facing stern, it seems the ship was not alerted and not properly in war fighting mode.

Part of the story of the Moskva attack includes the Ukrainians using a Bayraktar TB2 drone (Harpoon V stats found in The Naval SITREP #56) to “distract” the crew. Personally, I am unsure as to the chances that the Ukraine Navy would operate a TB2 at range (the datalink is rated in Harpoon V as 150 km range), at night, and in bad weather but it’s possible? Some allege the TB2 pulled off Moskva’s radars so they didn’t “see”the attack coming on on the other side. Note that the air search radars used aboard Moskva provide 360 degree coverage. A more plausible explanation to me is that the crew became fixated and focused on a potential TB2 threat and in turn failed (at night and in sea clutter) to see inbound sea-skimming missiles.

A low impact on the hull is not surprising since most of the anti-ship missiles are “sea skimmers”. Even if floatation isn’t directly impaired, damage to the core engineering spaces is more disabling than blowing the Captain’s cabin or the radio room.

The Moskva reportedly had 6X 30 mm close-in defense guns, so something was going on if one or both missiles survived to hit the ship.

That does not make any sense.

https://www.reddit.com/r/WarshipPorn/comments/u5xxkx/picture_allegedly_showing_a_damaged_moskva_on/

We have to be very cautious in a world in which “Our Leaders” cannot open their mouths without lying and in which the Ukrainians are benefitting from an amazing propaganda campaign. Russia says the problem was a magazine explosion. Others have suggested the Moskva hit one of those Ukrainian mines which broke free in a storm and have been drifting around the Black Sea.

The fact that the ship later capsized implies a hull breach below the water line, which would be more consistent with the mine hypothesis or a magazine explosion. But with the Fog of War hanging over a Sea of Propaganda, we may never know the whole story.