Project 1164 Atlant: Slava Class cruiser

Missile cruiser "Moskva" out to sea for the first time in three years





https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3665491.html

Apparently they've completed engine/system repairs.
Still no ETA for upgrade.

Rodion_Romanovic wrote:Anyway .... built ship.

Rif-M would use the same launchers but new computers and radars. 9m96 could be then quad pack in 1 tube so redut doesn't improve the ship at all.

Oniks were tested from angled launchers. They could put 8 or 10 missiles for every set of angled launcher. They would still need new computers however.

F*ck, I was just thinking about numbers of missiles it could get if modernized with oniks and 9m96.

64 cells for 4x9m96 each would mean 256 missiles.

This Nanushka can have 6 (2x3) missiles on the side so a slava could get easily 10 (2x5) instead of the dual bazalt launcher. So 10 missile for every 2 bazalt which means 10x8 so 80 oniks.

That's like 7 or 8 Gorshkovs. They should really modernize them too.

A true monster if the do so. Carrier killer for sure. And with the Oscars modernized for 72 oniks that would be 152 oniks for the two ships. Add a yasen in the task group and two groshkov that brings total numbers at 222 oniks and something like 320 9m96 for only 5 ships.

I'm not even taking in count that they will have 7 yasen and 2 kirov more and much more gorshkovs.

Modernization should be less than 1 billion so definitly worth it.

Yeah they should have modernized them... 20 years ago when they still could have gotten some service life out of them

But they were to busy being besties with the same gang that has been trying to exterminate them so they didn't need military (not getting considered for NATO should have been dead giveaway)

Plus they kept thinking how they will be getting fleets of new ships so why bother with upgrades?

Now it's too late, these ships are rapidly approaching expiration date, time to move on

in such case, won't they also need to istall a poliment radar?

Improved radars would be as useful if not more so than new missiles... you spend more time looking than you do firing and the better your view the better...

The Poliment radars pretty much would do the same thing as the S-300 and S-400 radars because they basically use the same missiles, so any upgrade to enable the use of S-400 missiles would be all you need to be able to use Redut launched missiles.

Anyway, changing from rif to rif m would make sense, i do not know what would it cost to change from the rotary launchers to the redut cells. Maybe it is not worth, as they could simply include (relatively) new missiles in the old launchers.

The redut missile tubes are fixed and all ready to fire at once and can each take one of at least four different missile types each so all four missile types, if loaded, are ready to use without delay. In the old Rif system there is one hatch for each cluster of about 6-8 missile tubes, so to fire all the missiles in the cluster it fires like a revolver and there are as many revolvers as there are missile hatches. The redut system is much simpler... fixed launch tubes with missiles all ready to fire without needing to be rotated into position... simpler and probably cheaper with less maintainence and they don't require below deck access so the area can be sealed off.

Furthermore, what can they do with the short range osa missiles? Upgrade them or replace with something else?

Personally I would go with the naval TOR system (klintok) in an upgraded model based on the new TOR system with twice the missiles and more accurate faster longer ranged missiles... They are still cheap command guided missiles, but able to hit very difficult targets including mortar shells and artillery shells as well as various types of missiles.

And for the 16 angled launchers for P 1000 is valid the same.discussion. cutting the ship to put UKSK vls is probably not practical, also because probably there is no available space below the deck where the angled launchers are mounted. It is not as easy as in.the udaloys, where they can replace one of the two deck guns and ammunition depo with a couple of UKSK launchers. Maybe substituting them with new angled launchers for onyx and calibr, if.they exist, could be a solution. I mean, a new ship design with 12000 tons displacement could host at least 64 UKSK plus same number of Redut cells, but there is a limit of what they can do with an already built ship.

There is a specialised angled version of the UKSK launcher than can have 8 tubes per launcher... so 8 x 8 would mean 64 missiles could be carried including Onyx and land attack Kalibr and of course the anti sub 91ER1 missiles too... and later Zircon.

Rif-M would use the same launchers but new computers and radars. 9m96 could be then quad pack in 1 tube so redut doesn't improve the ship at all.

Rif-M is mechanised and uses rotary launchers with a fixed launch hatch like a revolver. It could probably use newer smaller calibre missiles, but one of the advantages of the new active radar homing missiles is that you can launch a lot of missiles at a lot of targets very quickly... the Rif system is not known for an amazing rate of fire. A fixed tube redut launcher on the other hand is faster and more flexible and lighter and simpler with very few moving parts and no need for deck access to the missiles.

With just the two Kirov class ships that could possibly get a refit and however many Slavas there wont be that many of these mechanised SAM launchers in operation... it makes sense to replace the old with the new... the same for the Shtil launch system, replacing the fixed single arm missile launcher with 24 reload missiles with a 32 cell fixed SAM launcher made a lot of sense, and I would expect the same for the Redut/Rif.

They would still need new computers however.

You say that like it is a bad thing... keeping old electronics means enormous operational problems because maintaining old computers is a pain in the ass... especially when you are standing in front of an old 1980s computer the size of a small room yet you know the cellphone in your back pocket probably has better processing power and much more memory than this old piece of junk.

Upgrading computers means better capabilities in less space using less power and able to be maintained and supported much more easily and cheaply... and if it is Russian electronics it is more money to them so they can be more competitive in the modern international world... if they get lots of sales to the military replacing old obsolete equipment they get work and funds to improve further and with the value of the ruble it should allow them to sell their products and fiercely competitive prices... even China is talking about moving production of some things to Russia because the value of the ruble makes it cheaper than doing it in China or the west.

Now it's too late, these ships are rapidly approaching expiration date, time to move on

Large ships like this, if properly maintained can last half a century or more... and they are for Russia, not the Imperial American Navy, so they don't need to be super arsenal ships able to wipe out continents at a time... the idea is to modernise these ships so they can test new large sensors that might go on new ships and also extend their modularity of the new weapons systems to old ships so they can operate together in large groups without worrying about needing weapons that no other Russian vessel uses like Granit or Vulkan.

F*ck, I was just thinking about numbers of missiles it could get if modernized with oniks and 9m96.

And with the new fuel that would be mach 5 Onyx with a range of 800km+...

Modernization should be less than 1 billion so definitly worth it.

It would give them ships they can use now on a global basis that are not too shabby, and ease the pressure on brand new designs which will take longer but in the end will be much better too.

Rif-M is mechanised and uses rotary launchers with a fixed launch hatch like a revolver. It could probably use newer smaller calibre missiles, but one of the advantages of the new active radar homing missiles is that you can launch a lot of missiles at a lot of targets very quickly... the Rif system is not known for an amazing rate of fire. A fixed tube redut launcher on the other hand is faster and more flexible and lighter and simpler with very few moving parts and no need for deck access to the missiles.

You're wrong on this one. If they put 4 9m96 instead of 1 big missile they will have 4 ready to launch missiles for each rotary launcher. So 32 ready to fire missiles. And if 1 is empty they use the others while the first one rotates and bring 4 new ready to fire missiles.

That's enough without the need to change the launcher which would add cost.

You say that like it is a bad thing

No but that means they will need new wires to connect the radars with the computers and with launchers so they will need to cut through the entire ship.

On the slava class they had 8 launch hatches with 8 rotary missiles per launch hatch... so with four different types of missile carried that means two ready to launch tubes with each type of missile so it is not 32 ready to fire missiles... much of the time they will have at least two and probably four of those ready to launch tubes with a single 250km or 400km range full sized missile... but it all depends how they load them... do they have one rotary hatch launch system with long range missiles and one with medium range and perhaps four with the intermediate range and two with very short range missiles?

They can only have 8 launchers ready to fire at any one time, which might be 32 missiles, but could just as easily be 8.

With redut... all missiles carried are ready to fire and it is the new technology all their new ships will be using too.... even if it was very expensive it would be nothing compared with cost of a full load of Active Radar Homing SAMs no matter what the mix they choose, but when it comes to protecting your ship and the ships around you the key is always the cheapest option right?

That's enough without the need to change the launcher which would add cost.

Do they want the increasing cost of upgrading an old mechanical launch system at a time when all new ships will be getting the new launcher?

No but that means they will need new wires to connect the radars with the computers and with launchers so they will need to cut through the entire ship.

Most of the old wiring and piping will probably need to be replaced anyway... and fibre optic cable will transform communications and data transfer rates on board the ship anyway... If anything the new cabling is probably swapping enormous bundles of 8 baud capacity copper to gigabit capacity fibre smaller than your little finger in width... and the performance improvements alone will make it worth it.

GarryB wrote:
Large ships like this, if properly maintained can last half a century or more... and they are for Russia, not the Imperial American Navy, so they don't need to be super arsenal ships able to wipe out continents at a time... the idea is to modernise these ships so they can test new large sensors that might go on new ships and also extend their modularity of the new weapons systems to old ships so they can operate together in large groups without worrying about needing weapons that no other Russian vessel uses like Granit or Vulkan.

It would give them ships they can use now on a global basis that are not too shabby, and ease the pressure on brand new designs which will take longer but in the end will be much better too.

Agree, as a ship the Slavas can last for many years to come, but i also agree with Papadragon, let me explain.
Its an outdated model and its very difficult and time consuming and expensive to make it any kind "modern". That would mean replacing all electronics, all wiring along with major hull redesign to get ride of the Vulcans and get USKS instead. Probably engines will also be prone to replacement.

No better to keep them "not too shabby" and have ships they can use until replaced with newer ones. I see many years for them too serve as the next step in badly needed ships are DD´s och super Gorshkovs.
An new cruiser design... is very long way of.
But i love the Slavas, beautiful and bristling with weapons

They have said they are not going to be building large ships for a while yet... 2023 seems to be a number I remember for their destroyer/cruiser designs at the earliest.

The question you have to ask yourself... if they have some old obsolete cruisers already they have a global capability... they can send them around the world for any sort of visit or diplomatic mission. The original Slava class was partially multi mission because it has a range of weapons for a range of roles mainly to protect itself and other vessels it was operating with from air threats, from ship threats and from sub threats, but its main armament is optimised for the anti ship... specifically the anti carrier role.

If you get rid of them you become a green water navy, so the only say you will have internationally will be words with nothing to back them up.

You have spent a lot of time and money developing new modular systems... electronics, sensors, weapons... the purpose is to make your new ships standardised and modular. It means that a cruiser with Granits (kirov) or Vulkans (Slava) with a carrier with Granits (Kuznetsov) operating with anti ship destroyers with Moskits (Sovremmeny) and anti sub destroyers with Metel (Udaloys) of the 1980s could all be fitted with one missile launcher design called a UKSK that can carry the equivalent missiles in any combination and actually much more efficiently because many of those old missiles were huge.... Granits are 7.5 tons, yet their performance is not as good as a 1990s era Onyx and with new propellent the difference is even greater.

The point is that right now you don't have any 7 thousand ton Gorshkov variants or 20 thousand ton Lider class destroyers let alone any other type of cruiser available, but what they do have are Slava and Kirov class vessels.

Ripping out the old missiles makes sense because for the obvious reason... they are likely no longer in production any more. The only new missiles being made fit the UKSK launchers so retaining the old launchers makes no sense at all.

More to the point replacing the old single missile type launcher and replacing it with a much smaller much higher capacity vertical launch system makes the ships rather more capable than they ever were... who would bother buying a brand new state of the art home computer and smart TV and stick with the old wiring?

What would be the point of a new 8K TV with a 48 Baud dial up connection?

You could probably make it work, but you wont be getting the full functionality out of the hardware you are using.

More importantly a lot of the new sensors and systems that will be going into the brand new ships they are planning can be put on older upgraded ships and properly tested so when the new ships hit the water it will be with tested capable systems that the navy will now be familiar with operating.

Sure it costs a little more to replace all the wiring and all the systems, but you get a much better product at the end and that is what matters.

I mean sailing a Slava class ship to Venezuela and having it embarrass itself because while the new Redut can shoot down Harpoons as easy as pie, with a 16 Baud connection from the SAM fire control system to the command centre it couldn't get the information it needed in time to stop the missile so the ship is sunk.. but it is OK because thousands of rubles were saved keeping that shit old cabling in place because that is the important thing.

What would be even more annoying is that saving money doesn't do anything... if the Slava upgrade cost the price of two Gorshkov Frigates... it doesn't mean if you don't upgrade the Slava you magically get given two Gorshkov frigates instead... if you don't spend the money on the Slava upgrade frigates don't magically appear in its place. They might decide to build two extra gorshkov frigates because now the upgrade is not going ahead, but the actual result will be the loss of a cruiser that you could have used for 20 years quite easily, with the promise of two extra frigates in 15 years time when the planned ones have been made and the two extra have been added on the end... so they are no use at all to the Russian navy now.

The main problem with the old Russian navy was that everything was custom designed for a role... the only way to get a multifunction vessel was to make it big enough to have sonar and radar and SAMs and torpedoes and large missiles.

With the new Russian Navy even Corvettes have multi role capability with UKSK launchers they can attack land based targets, ships, and subs... which makes them comparable to cruisers of the Soviet Navy.

By putting the new modules on the old ships you make them easier to operate with other ships in the fleet... how many Russian naval ports have a supply of Vulkan or Granit missiles... they will all have Onyx and Calibrs now.

As shown with Shtil, by replacing the Arm launcher and the mechanisms under deck that spin around and move missiles from the magazine to the launch arm with fixed vertical launch tubes they increased the missile capacity from 24 to 32, and they removed the arm launcher and a lot of robotic mechanisms that handled the missile tubes... one missile ready to launch improved to 32 missiles ready to launch... Klintok and Rif/Rif-M could also benefit from such changes too and also eliminating unnecessary and complicated missile handling systems into a simple fixed tube launch.

The only potential issue would be cold launch vertical launch systems, but most of their new missiles were developed from the start for such a launch method anyway.

Regarding the difficulty of fitting UKSK launchers to older vessels with external angled launchers... they knew about the problem and have already solved it... they even offer the solution for export for the ships they have already exported that use angled large missiles... missile corvettes, destroyers like the Sovremmenys and Udaloys etc etc.

Fitting new weapon launch systems like UKSK and Redut means they can be rather competitive and useful again for a good few decades while the new cruisers are fully developed and produced.

The system upgrades like radar and other sensors like EO systems and various EW systems can all be upgraded to test new designs so when new cruisers are being planned they will be fitting them with mature tested systems rather than leaps into the unknown... new sensors will also make them rather more useful than they are now too...

This is not about these old ships being nice to keep forever... this is about making them useful ships for now and the near future while the proper replacements are ready... making them more like new ships with new modular bits of equipment (weapons and sensors and electronics) just makes them easier to use, much more effective and capable, and also a useful testbed for new systems that otherwise would be sitting on workbenches or parts on a model sitting under glass that will be operational in 10 years time funding permitted.

No, it wont be cheap... navies never are... armatas are not cheap, PAK FA are not cheap PAK DA wont be cheap either... it is not about being cheap... it is about value for money... and the ability to send a surface group anywhere in the world to back up their word with some force is what matters to little countries deciding whether to just continue to be Americas bitch or Americas whipping boy. A proper blue sea going navy will improve Russias international trade prospects and bring in contracts they would never get with a brown or green water navy that can't protect their sea lines of communication.

They don't need an enormous fleet, but right now they need to best use what they have... and it is reflected in their Army too... they are working on Armata which is rather closer to service than any new cruiser planned... yet they upgrade their T-72s to keep them useful... not every job needs a super tank and on the receiving end a 125mm shell will hurt whether it comes from an Armata or a T-72. Of course it is more likely to get a hit with an Armata and sometimes a T-72 is not quite good enough so why not have both?

You don't equip all your soldiers with sniper rifles, just like you don't equip them all with pistols to save money... different weapons are best for different jobs and by upgrading existing cold war large vessels with new weapon launchers you make them vastly more useful and flexible than they ever were, while bringing them up to the standard of existing new types... the people working loading or maintaining UKSK launchers on corvettes and frigates will now be familiar with the UKSK launchers on the upgraded cruisers...

Sorry for the wall of words...

What I am trying to say is not that the current viable Slava and Kirov class vessels should be made into super duper arsenal ships... what I am saying is that they have them and their size gives them a global reach capacity their their other newer ships don't have or can't have on their own.

A Gorshkov frigate could sail around the world but would be more useful if it had a Kirov or Slava with them... together they would be vastly more useful than either on their own.

The value of the old cruisers is their size gives them the endurance and capacity for very long trips.

Replacing all the old obsolete stuff on them makes them easier to operate, more effective, more powerful, and cheaper and easier to maintain.

It also means testing new big radar arrays and systems that will only fit on a cruiser sized vessel that would otherwise go untested.

The new purpose designed Cruisers might have ten times the fire power of an upgraded Slava... and that is fine... purpose designed new cruisers are not currently an option, while an upgraded Slava is.

More importantly it will be work for the companies that are making the new systems like UKSK launchers and for each Kirov class that will be ten launch systems per vessel, and for the Slava it will be 8 systems... which will be good work for them for the next few years while the final Cruiser designs are being finalised.

They have already visited Venezuela with a Kirov class vessel... it wont need to be a super cruiser to come back, but replacing its SSM and SAM equipment would make it rather more formidable without having to build a new cruiser... sounds like a bargain.

Ships should be designed from the outset to allow upgrades of everything because a big ship will likely go through dozens of upgrades throughout its life anyway.

Perhaps that should be a consideration for the new ships... modular wiring/cabling/piping...

The point is that right now you don't have any 7 thousand ton Gorshkov variants or 20 thousand ton Lider class destroyers let alone any other type of cruiser available, but what they do have are Slava and Kirov class vessels.

Yet they decided to scrap the 2 Kirovs- & suspect the main reason is that some can make more $ scrapping them & building smaller ships, instead of refitting/upgrading the still useful old CGNs. It is planned to allocate 400 million rubles ($6,27 million) for the recycled of the first, the second – 350 million rubles ($5,49 million).
https://fighterjetsworld.com/naval/russia-dismantling-two-kirov-class-nuclear-powered-battle-cruisers-to-save-money/12949/
https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htsurf/20190520.aspx

They could just keep them in mothballs for later refits & reactivation with minimal maintenance; if they r scrapped, the VMF will regret loosing them. Or they could be offered to India/China with at least some upgrading done in Russia.

GarryB wrote:Sorry for the wall of words...

What I am trying to say is not that the current viable Slava and Kirov class vessels should be made into super duper arsenal ships... what I am saying is that they have them and their size gives them a global reach capacity their their other newer ships don't have or can't have on their own.

A Gorshkov frigate could sail around the world but would be more useful if it had a Kirov or Slava with them... together they would be vastly more useful than either on their own.

The value of the old cruisers is their size gives them the endurance and capacity for very long trips.

Replacing all the old obsolete stuff on them makes them easier to operate, more effective, more powerful, and cheaper and easier to maintain.

It also means testing new big radar arrays and systems that will only fit on a cruiser sized vessel that would otherwise go untested.

The new purpose designed Cruisers might have ten times the fire power of an upgraded Slava... and that is fine... purpose designed new cruisers are not currently an option, while an upgraded Slava is.

More importantly it will be work for the companies that are making the new systems like UKSK launchers and for each Kirov class that will be ten launch systems per vessel, and for the Slava it will be 8 systems... which will be good work for them for the next few years while the final Cruiser designs are being finalised.

They have already visited Venezuela with a Kirov class vessel... it wont need to be a super cruiser to come back, but replacing its SSM and SAM equipment would make it rather more formidable without having to build a new cruiser... sounds like a bargain.

Ships should be designed from the outset to allow upgrades of everything because a big ship will likely go through dozens of upgrades throughout its life anyway.

Perhaps that should be a consideration for the new ships... modular wiring/cabling/piping...

Yes the Slavas are useful ships, and we have to remember that even if its not modern or 1st line anymore its 2nd line and thats good enough for many parts of the world. For many countries its a very powerful ship which they cannot hope to have any succes in dealing with.
And yes, how expensive is it to upgrade them compared to a Gorshkov, and will they build a Gorshkov or lay the money on some other project?
In dealing with 1st enemies, such as US, China and possible France, UK the ship hasnt got the combat value of newer ones, but for showing the flag and operations in 3rd world its perfectly fine. And a conflict with 1st line enemies in very unlikely to happen anytime soon, if ever.

The two old Orland ships are probable unsalvageble, the cost and maintenance of them simply to big, and their reactors too dangerous.

If they could modernize the slavas with USKS and s-400 instead of Vulcans and s-300 for a reasonable cost, go ahead. But it also depend of the shape of hull, engines and much more. However the Slavas are going to serve for many years to come, as 2nd line ships and showing the flag.

A freshly spruced up Marshal Ustinov

Nice pic of Varyag, good ppl for scale presumably from naval day

Ustinov is on another trip to the Med http://charly015.blogspot.com/2019/08/el-crucero-lanzamisiles-ustinov-sale.html
Replete with the usual howling as it passed entirely legally & unthreateningly through the channel https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-latest-activity/news/2019/august/16/190816-hms-medway-watches-russian-cruiser-through-channel
Didn't even manage to post any potato photos this time

Yet they decided to scrap the 2 Kirovs- & suspect the main reason is that some can make more $ scrapping them & building smaller ships, instead of refitting/upgrading the still useful old CGNs.

Well they don't need four upgraded Kirovs and 8 upgraded Slavas... they do need to be sensible.

If two of the Kirovs are too far gone and cannot easily be upgraded... especially if there are problems with important stuff you want to keep like the nuclear propulsion system then scrap them of course... this is not a sentimental plea to save everything for nostalgias sake... the final upgraded product is a tool for a job... it needs to do the job.

The upgrades are more for commonality with existing and new types... standardisation is useful in a range of ways from training to maintenance to support... if they keep the old Rif launchers then they need to keep spare parts for the missile handling mechanism... they need to maintain that mechanism and when it breaks down they need to be able to fix it. With a UKSK launcher their might be something wrong with the hatch mechanism but that is about all... everything else would be electronically monitored... with warnings if something is not right.

Equally new radars can be fitted and can be tested and used operationally... improving performance and potentially finding problems and allowing them to find solutions with them long before the new large ships enter service with them... by then they will be mature systems.

They could just keep them in mothballs for later refits & reactivation with minimal maintenance; if they r scrapped, the VMF will regret loosing them. Or they could be offered to India/China with at least some upgrading done in Russia.

If they decided to scrap them then there must be issues... fundamental issues that make them not viable for upgrades, otherwise it is cheaper to keep them in mothballs so to speak.

Removing them will free up space and clear potential rosters in the future... ie if they were in mothballs then you would need to keep in mind that their might be a need in the future to take up roster space at a shipyard to upgrade them... with them scrapped there is no need to plan for that, and the space they are taking up can be allocated to something else.

If they could modernize the slavas with USKS and s-400 instead of Vulcans and s-300 for a reasonable cost, go ahead. But it also depend of the shape of hull, engines and much more. However the Slavas are going to serve for many years to come, as 2nd line ships and showing the flag.

They have angled launchers for UKSK, so the issue with the angled launch tubes is not a huge problem, and of course the Rif can be replaced with Redut, and Klintock can be replaced with improved TOR as well... probably much more efficiently as the new fixed tube launchers take up less space than the old automated launchers of both Rif and Klintock.

There is no need to try to make the Slavas or the Kirovs super ships, but in all honesty with the new missiles they are changing to they will actually be more formidably armed than most current ships from anywhere else already... even with a simple swap from old to new weapons.

Likely upgraded electronics will reduce requirements for manning levels too... the Kirovs and Slavas contained a lot of computer hardware... from the 70s and 80s... so we are talking about building sized computers with the processing power of a modern laptop... so there should be enormous leaps and bounds in terms of freeing up space... reduced energy consumption... automation and reduced maintenance, as well as a serious increase in performance.

Well deserved rest for the NF CG Marshal Ustinov:
Since July 3, 2019 she has been performing a long voyage. On July 3, left Severomorsk to participate in the Main Naval Parade in St. Petersburg. She's taken part in the training of the Russian Navy “Ocean Shield-2019” and on August 22, entered the waters of the Mediterranean Sea. There, she visited ports in Algeria, Egypt, Turkey, Greece and Cyprus. Marshal Ustinov afterwards transited Gibraltar again and sailed into the Atlantic. On its way to South Africa, she payed a port visit to Equatorial Guinea.[10] This was only a third time after the Cold war that a Russian cruiser entered the South Atlantic, the first two being Pyotr Veliky in 2008/9[11] and Moskva in 2015.[12] Between 25 and 30 November she participated in joint naval drills with South Africa and China.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_cruiser_Marshal_Ustinov

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/7216393

from ur post: "..RFS 055 ‘Marshal Ustinov’, Slava Class guided missile cruisers in the harbor of Sevastopol on 29th December 2019".
It's in the main naval base on Black Sea now.

I assume you mean that she is spending Christmas alongside in either Cape Town or Simonstown rather than being at sea. It would be interesting if she made her way home via the Black Sea. Three Slavas together!

The third which is the Varyag is in the Pacific.

Ustinov is from the north and is right now in the black sea with the Moskva which homeport is Secastopolin the Black Sea.

But actually there is the 4th non finished Slava class, Ukraina, rusting in Ukraine. Too bad they never bought it.