Comments by "" (@TheArklyte) on "Russia's Kirov Class Battle Cruiser | MEGA SHIP" video.

@juliehildahl2758 "another perfectly good example of Russia "appropriating" another countries technology. MG42 to MG3." MG3 is a NATO general purpose machinegun. You've said enough.
15
@jordanjohnson8757 and who had leadership in the field of subs to the point of being only nation producing cruiser submarines after WWII back when these ships were designed? Yep, to quote you "dead big ship" it won't a Kirov though:D
2
@PumpkinEater-dm1xx "Recomissioning the battleship was pointless" Against Kirov? No, it was still a morale boost since everybody knew no one will actually fight, but it was a nice show off. Against countries that can't fight back like Iraq for example? Man, those battleships were just flexing on anything in the reach of their guns nonstop. It was cheaper and faster to respond then airstirkes and cruise missiles so those guns were firing a lot.
2
@RedboRF she won't be able to win WWII without nukes though. She can decimate capital ships of Kriegamarine and IJN, but she will eventually run out of ammo. None of calibers used by Kirov were produced during WWII. She can never run out of fuel, she can outrun any WWII ship, she can operate freely in night and track enemy ships, planes and submarines tens if not hundreds of kilometers away from her. However she becomes a scout ship of Allies, she has nothing to attack with. That's her difference compared to scenario of american nuclear supercarrier ending up in WWII - planes still can be refueled and drop bombs of the era. Kirov can't attack once she's out of missiles and shells. Hence the need to use nukes to scare Axis shitless.
2
@edilbertorivera3467 reload with WHAT? Kirov's ammunition isn't produced in WWII:D You can't replenish even its cannon ammunitions, not to mention missiles. And without missiles it loses the ranged superiority. That's why an american aircraft carrier can continue operating against IJN since you only need bombs and fuel, but Kirov is left only with the role of mobile communications center.
2
@oletoustrup-andersen9105 Kirov's missiles were different from soft plastic cones of argentinian Exocet. They were specifically required to counter ANY capital ship of USN. That includes both carriers of several generations AND missile Iowa's retrofitted and put back into action when Kirov entered service. Or is Iowa too "sof skinned" on scale of WWII battleships in your opinion?:D
2
@edilbertorivera3467 if you drop modern Russian Federation into USSR, Japan would be the least of your trouble. Second Russian Civil War will be;) No, the topic was just one ship. Kirov doesn't exactly have much "backwards" compatibility with that era. It'll be able to see and hear and awfull lot around her though plus the only vessel capable of operating without any trouble in night or bad weather.
2
Funniest part? Kirov is ideal to SUPPORT those very same US supercarriers. Kirov is basically what USS Long Beach failed to be due to limited budget and undeveloped tech of the time. They will never sail together though... unless we majorly fuck up and both Russia and USA end up in WWIII against China?
2
@AnimaRandom Kirov can't protect a carrier unless we're talking about small escort ones which you don't care about too much, you'd need 2 of them per each supercarrier. With 4 currently returning and rumours of finally replacing Kuznetzov maybe they'd actually go for that formula of two groups with 1 carrier and 2 Kirovs as capital ships. You have also skipped over the part where Kirov is designed to protect the coast. So it'll engage under the cover of land based cruise missiles and planes. Meanwhile US carrier groups are purely offensive creation, a sign of peacefull nation that has no problem calling itself a superpower. Want to learn a lesson from japanese ships? Lesson one - don't skip on firefighting training on a carrier, especially when you allow the fuel to evaporate and collect on lower deck in gas form, lesson two - don't underestimate the subs, build more destroyers to counter them and build more of your own. As you can guess, this references a particular string of lost CARRIERS, not battleships that were anchored and never used:P
1
It can, but solely because Kirov can deliver tactical nukes. You DON'T want to see her win the war with the only method she can. Even if total losses would be less then the ones irl, Berlin and Vienna would be glowing ruins.
1
Have everybody forgotten about american attempts to make "arsenal ships" with hundreds of cruise missiles and a crew of 3-4 dozen at best, hmm?
1
tyron smith and how does this connect to the context of the discussion? Not to mention that DK costed just as much to produce as 45mm AT gun hence why we didn't see many of them until post-War period.
1