Notable Point ยท 7:24-12:09

Slow construction exposes the backup role

A construction-timeline comparison asks why smaller gas-turbine Slavas took about as long as far larger nuclear Kirovs.

Notes

Moskva took six years from laying down to commissioning, about as long as Kirov. That timetable is striking because Kirov was much larger, used nuclear propulsion, and presented a more complicated construction problem. Slava relied on gas turbines and familiar weapons, yet the program moved like a low-priority fallback rather than an urgent centerpiece of surface-fleet planning. After Sergei Gorshkov's position changed, the backup cruiser program was curtailed while nuclear battlecruiser construction continued.