Ukraine's military said it destroyed the Rostov-on-Don attack submarine in a missiles attack on Friday.

Ukraine’s military says it attacked and destroyed a Russian submarine while it was anchored at a port in the occupied Crimean peninsula.

The Rostov-on-Don, a kilo-class attack submarine launched in 2014, sank after it was struck in a missile attack on the port city of Sevastopol on Friday, Ukraine’s general staff said in a statement.

It was reportedly one of four submarines operated by Russia’s Black Sea fleet capable of launching Kalibr cruise missiles. The Russian defence ministry has not commented.

Officials in Kyiv said the attack also destroyed four S-400 air defence systems protecting the peninsula, which Russia illegally annexed in 2014.

  • Valmond@lemmy.worldEnglish
    681·
    4 months ago

    If this is true then its so magnificent, a second submarine sunk by a country without a navy…

    • N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      18·
      4 months ago

      The Ukrainian underwater biome restoration project is way ahead of schedule. So nice of the Russians to donate so much equipment.

  • MinorLaceration@lemmy.worldEnglish
    20·
    4 months ago

    “And Russia’s internal security service, the FSB, recently said it foiled a Ukrainian plot to destroy its last remaining aircraft carrier, the Admiral Kuznetsov. The ship, launched in 1985, has been undergoing repairs since 2018.”

    I hope Ukraine can still make this happen. That would a be huge win, even if the carrier is never functional and isn’t in the black sea. Imagine if Russia no longer even had a carrier. That’d be one way to put them in their place.

    • ZapBeebz_@lemmy.worldEnglish
      24·
      4 months ago

      All Ukraine has to do is nothing. The Kuznetsov has about a 75% chance of sinking every time it puts to sea

    • Ulfhethnar@lemmy.worldEnglish
      111·
      4 months ago

      My understanding is that Russias maintenance cost on that carrier is so much higher than its capabilities that Russia is trying to bait Ukraine into expending resources attacking it.

      • GBU_28@lemm.eeEnglish
        41·
        4 months ago

        So hit the docks and maintenance facilities it’s at, not it itself

    • humbletightband@lemmy.dbzer0.comEnglish
      9·
      4 months ago

      I have a friend who actually was serving on this aircraft carrier. It’s hell and the crew was dis moraled due to lack of basic needs like towels and working bathrooms.

      Sunking Admiral Kuznetsov would look like destroying mental asylum for depressed patients

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.worldEnglish
        41·
        4 months ago

        I’ve heard it’s a bit like a labyrinth where nobody even has up-to-date schematics of the passages on the ship, and a lot of spaces are just sealed and conserved. And it stinks everywhere.

    • wewbullEnglish
      19·
      4 months ago

      You already have. It’s the one that was previously hit by storm shadow in dry dock. They did some repairs, refloated it, and then the Ukrainians hit it again.

    • Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.worldEnglish
      46·
      4 months ago

      …wait, what? Its hard to tell from context.

      Are you saying you’re glad that at least russia still has it’s nuclear sub?

      Or are you saying you’re glad that russia wasn’t attempting to use a nuclear sub?

      • einkorn@feddit.orgEnglish
        40·
        4 months ago

        I guess they mean that they are happy it wasn’t a nuclear-powered sub because of the environmental damages the release of radioactive material might cause.

      • GBU_28@lemm.eeEnglish
        20·
        4 months ago

        Wat. Seems a much more reasonable read is that they are grateful a Russian nuclear sub isn’t contaminating the entire area right now

      • frankgrimeszz@lemmy.worldEnglish
        126·
        4 months ago

        What the other guy said. I don’t support Russia, but nuclear fallout is bad for everybody. Underwater nuclear explosion would be more contained than in the air, but I don’t wanna see radioactive fish with three eyes.

        • MartianSands@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
          203·
          4 months ago

          Destroying a nuclear sub, or a nuclear weapon, doesn’t lead to a nuclear explosion. It takes considerable care to cause a nuclear explosion, and smashing a reactor or warhead just leaves you with a pile of radioactive scrap.

          Not saying that isn’t a problem, but it’s way less of a problem than a nuclear explosion