WI Kynda class cruisers

destiple

Banned
I notice that the kynda class cruisers were operational till the end of 1990

what was the purpose of keeping an old ship like that operational till then ? when all equivalent enemy ships were armed with Harpoons which was superior to shaddock in all except range ?

The only purposes I could think of was

1-Kynda would be used as "single shot " ships will launch all their 8 missiles way outside the range of Harpoon and then hopefully try to run like hell for homeport or would soak up Harpoons intended for more modern ships

2-They could be used in ASUW role against those surface ships NOT armed with Harpoon or other ASM, so they cannot return fire

3-They will use their legacy shaddocks in a land attack role ?

4-They were reserves that carried Nuke armed Shaddocks which could in a salvo wipe out a flotilla of ships if successful or perish trying to do so

If soviet union is in a naval war in the 1980s , how would you use these ships ?

any thoughts ? ideas ?
 

SsgtC

Banned
Basically what Alanith said. The USSR never threw anything out. Hell, they kept freaking T-34s in reserve up into the eighties! When the USSR collapsed, the military was finally able to rationalize its equipment. Which is part of why you saw so many systems retired at once.
 
I don't think its just the USSR......

Charles F. Adams DDG-2 10 September 1960 - 1 August 1990 (or Farragut class)

Ships can be made to last 30 years especially with Soviet cheap conscript crews and numbers simply matter in large wars.
 

destiple

Banned
Basically what Alanith said. The USSR never threw anything out. Hell, they kept freaking T-34s in reserve up into the eighties! When the USSR collapsed, the military was finally able to rationalize its equipment. Which is part of why you saw so many systems retired at once.
BUT they were not simply in reserve but part of active fleet

they must have seen them useful in some way
 

cpip

Gone Fishin'
1-Kynda would be used as "single shot " ships will launch all their 8 missiles way outside the range of Harpoon and then hopefully try to run like hell for homeport or would soak up Harpoons intended for more modern ships

I expect that's no small part of it. Every missile spent on them -- either SAMs intercepting the Shaddocks or SSMs trying to kill the Kyndas -- is one less that can be spent on other threats.
 
I notice that the kynda class cruisers were operational till the end of 1990

what was the purpose of keeping an old ship like that operational till then ? when all equivalent enemy ships were armed with Harpoons which was superior to shaddock in all except range ?

The only purposes I could think of was

1-Kynda would be used as "single shot " ships will launch all their 8 missiles way outside the range of Harpoon and then hopefully try to run like hell for homeport or would soak up Harpoons intended for more modern ships

2-They could be used in ASUW role against those surface ships NOT armed with Harpoon or other ASM, so they cannot return fire

3-They will use their legacy shaddocks in a land attack role ?

4-They were reserves that carried Nuke armed Shaddocks which could in a salvo wipe out a flotilla of ships if successful or perish trying to do so

If soviet union is in a naval war in the 1980s , how would you use these ships ?

any thoughts ? ideas ?
The ships in 1990 were 28, 26, 26 and 25 years old. That's not particularly old by the standards of warships, US usually uses a 35 year lifespan for surface combatants like that

One thing to recall is not everything involves high intensity combat, the Kydnas could be used for peacetime scut work to free up more capable ships and save wear and tear on them. The also had a certain flag capability, so could lead small groups of other smaller ships, freeing up a more modern ship for other tasks

In a naval war in the 1980's? Use as command ships for small rear area ASW patrols
 

destiple

Banned
The ships in 1990 were 28, 26, 26 and 25 years old. That's not particularly old by the standards of warships, US usually uses a 35 year lifespan for surface combatants like that

One thing to recall is not everything involves high intensity combat, the Kydnas could be used for peacetime scut work to free up more capable ships and save wear and tear on them. The also had a certain flag capability, so could lead small groups of other smaller ships, freeing up a more modern ship for other tasks

In a naval war in the 1980's? Use as command ships for small rear area ASW patrols
good points about age and scut work

they were very weak in ASW unlike Kresta II, the guess the big question would be how obsolete the SSN-3b/c was in the 80s ? maybe in ships with weaker AAW defences they were not too terrible ?
E.g a standard DD or FF in 80s has 2 illuminators to guide sea sparrow missiles , so at most it can target 2 missiles at a time.However if a Kynda can launch all 8 of its missiles at a single target or a couple of targets atleast one or two of these missiles may find target.Given its a huge missile even one hit on a 5000-7000 ton warship may be lethal.
Obviously in ships equipped with Standard SAM these missiles would be just target practice.

Once they have launched their salvo of missiles they may just retire home port or stay close togather to a ship like Udaloy or Kara which can provide AAW /ASW support.Remember most soviet SAG would not venture too far from coast to begin with as they probably would like to remain under the umbrella of shore based fighter cover/ and with SSN support.
So I see most soviet rocket cruisers as essentially well protected floating and movable missile batteries and little else, but I dont use that disparagingly because if soviet navy stick to their sea denial role these ships can be very hard to kill esp when protected by shore based fighters
 
Last edited:
good points about age and scut work

they were very weak in ASW unlike Kresta II, the guess the big question would be how obsolete the SSN-3b/c was in the 80s ? maybe in ships with weaker AAW defences they were not too terrible ?
E.g a standard DD or FF in 80s has 2 illuminators to guide sea sparrow missiles , so at most it can target 2 missiles at a time.However if a Kynda can launch all 8 of its missiles at a single target or a couple of targets atleast one or two of these missiles may find target.Given its a huge missile even one hit on a 5000-7000 ton warship may be lethal.
Obviously in ships equipped with Standard SAM these missiles would be just target practice.

Once they have launched their salvo of missiles they may just retire home port or stay close togather to a ship like Udaloy or Kara which can provide AAW /ASW support
Weak in ASW they may be, but they have space to fit an admiral and his staff who can coordinate other ships that are not as weak in ASW, would not do the ASW themselves. Figure would head a small group of Petya, Mirka, Krivak class frigates, Pauk corvettes

Again use as rear area, where having a weak missile armament is not an issue. Would not be used offensively in anti ship role
 

destiple

Banned
Weak in ASW they may be, but they have space to fit an admiral and his staff who can coordinate other ships that are not as weak in ASW, would not do the ASW themselves. Figure would head a small group of Petya, Mirka, Krivak class frigates, Pauk corvettes

Again use as rear area, where having a weak missile armament is not an issue. Would not be used offensively in anti ship role
Wouldnt a Kara be better suited to a role like this ?

Kyndas could be used offensively against a less sophisticated opponent like older ships of Turkish, Egyptian navies and Japanease navy ( esp since 20+FF/DD of JSF navy did not have Harpoon in the 80s
 
Wouldnt a Kara be better suited to a role like this ?

Kyndas could be used offensively against a less sophisticated opponent like older ships of Turkish, Egyptian navies and Japanease navy ( esp since 20+FF/DD of JSF navy did not have Harpoon in the 80s
Yes, but they would be doing first line ASW work, escorting Kirovs/Kievs/Kuznetsov, leading frontline ASW groups of more modern assets. On Second thought Kydna would probably be paired with a Kara/Kresta II as an escort for ASW groups, just in case some surface ship got through

The issue is that to use offensively, would need aircover, which would be better suited to sinking ships, or a modern AAW escort, which were busy with more important matters. Trying to be used against Turkish Navy could only really occur if they chose to come out to play, Egypt is a nonfactor until Turkey is dealt with, and trying to attack the JSDF means going through the forward deployed Carrier battle group of the USN
 

GarethC

Donor
Close escort for the Ivan Rogovs carrying Soviet Naval Infantry around the North Cape to fjord-hop down Norway.

Norwegian air bases will be closed by non-persistent nerve agents or captured by airmobile infantry for Frontal Aviation to forward-base CAP.

The Shaddock is overkill for the little missile boats of the Norwegian Navy but could prove invaluable if the odd USN or RN DD is around.
 

destiple

Banned
Yes, but they would be doing first line ASW work, escorting Kirovs/Kievs/Kuznetsov, leading frontline ASW groups of more modern assets. On Second thought Kydna would probably be paired with a Kara/Kresta II as an escort for ASW groups, just in case some surface ship got through

The issue is that to use offensively, would need aircover, which would be better suited to sinking ships, or a modern AAW escort, which were busy with more important matters. Trying to be used against Turkish Navy could only really occur if they chose to come out to play, Egypt is a nonfactor until Turkey is dealt with, and trying to attack the JSDF means going through the forward deployed Carrier battle group of the USN
I like your idea of pairing with kresta II/Kara

The other points you raised are valid in a WW3 like scenario where soviets are fighting a multitude of navies ( NATO and their allies esp) I was thinking more in terms of USSR vs a single nation.

And yes I think all soviet surface operations are only possible with land based aircover if they are going against USN otherwise they will be just suicidal
 

destiple

Banned
Close escort for the Ivan Rogovs carrying Soviet Naval Infantry around the North Cape to fjord-hop down Norway.

Norwegian air bases will be closed by non-persistent nerve agents or captured by airmobile infantry for Frontal Aviation to forward-base CAP.

The Shaddock is overkill for the little missile boats of the Norwegian Navy but could prove invaluable if the odd USN or RN DD is around.
I don't think the shaddocks can target the small agile missile boats , they can probably be better used against DD and larger frigates
 
I like your idea of pairing with kresta II/Kara

The other points you raised are valid in a WW3 like scenario where soviets are fighting a multitude of navies ( NATO and their allies esp) I was thinking more in terms of USSR vs a single nation.

And yes I think all soviet surface operations are only possible with land based aircover if they are going against USN otherwise they will be just suicidal
Against a single nation? Aside from the US, any other single nation would not require the USSRs whole force, so rear area security
 

destiple

Banned
^ do not forget Japan , in 80s their fleet was big enough to challenge and defeat the pacific fleet easily.And many of the modern SSGN, SSN and rocket cruisers were in the northern fleet days away from the pacific

Plus in the Black sea , soviet surface forces were very limited with mostly coastal ASUW surface ships like nanuchka and tarantuls
 
^ do not forget Japan , in 80s their fleet was big enough to challenge and defeat the pacific fleet easily.And many of the modern SSGN, SSN and rocket cruisers were in the northern fleet days away from the pacific

Plus in the Black sea , soviet surface forces were very limited with mostly coastal ASUW surface ships like nanuchka and tarantuls
And this assumes a war would be short enough that the Northern and Baltic fleets can't redeploy. Plus you know if the Japanese leave their land based air umbrella meat for any Backfires flown in with only 6 DDG for air defense

USSR pretty easily dominates Black Sea via land based air, plus Turkey is NATO since 1952, so instant Article V and war with all of NATO, everyone else on Black Sea is Warsaw Pact
 

destiple

Banned
And this assumes a war would be short enough that the Northern and Baltic fleets can't redeploy. Plus you know if the Japanese leave their land based air umbrella meat for any Backfires flown in with only 6 DDG for air defense

USSR pretty easily dominates Black Sea via land based air, plus Turkey is NATO since 1952, so instant Article V and war with all of NATO, everyone else on Black Sea is Warsaw Pact
How long do you think it will take for e.g Baltic fleet to deploy to Pacific ?

yes backfires and even the Badger Gs are a big threat esp since they can easily be short ranged fighters escorted if they are just hitting targets around Jap Isles, but the Japanese airforce also has F-15s so it would be a balanced fight

why do you say only 6 DDG for air defence ?
 
Top