Title: What Happened to Russia’s Kirov Aircraft-Carrier Killer?

The Kirov-class battle cruiser Admiral Nakhimov, a massive nuclear-powered vessel originally envisioned as a formidable asset for the Soviet Navy, has become emblematic of the challenges facing Russia’s naval ambitions. Docked since 1997 for extensive renovations, the Nakhimov has undergone a staggering $5 billion worth of upgrades over the past three decades, yet questions remain about its future operational capabilities.

Designed during the Cold War, the Kirov-class cruisers were intended to establish the USSR as a dominant naval power, capable of rivaling NATO forces. While five ships were initially planned, only four were completed, and two of those were decommissioned in the 1990s due to a lack of funding following the Soviet Union’s collapse. Today, only the Admiral Nakhimov and its sister ship, Peter the Great, remain operational, with Peter the Great being the only fully mission-capable vessel.

The Admiral Nakhimov has been the subject of extensive upgrades since it was last operational in the late 1990s. These include enhancements to its missile systems, with plans to equip it with 80 new cruise missiles, notably the hypersonic 3M22 Tsirkon, which can reach speeds of Mach 9 and has a range of approximately 1,000 kilometers. This modernization aims to transform the ship into a critical asset capable of firing 174 missiles, designed primarily for anti-aircraft and anti-surface warfare.

Despite its impressive specifications, the Nakhimov’s long-standing maintenance issues raise concerns about its reliability. The ship has experienced significant delays in its refurbishment, with budget constraints and changing military priorities hindering progress. According to Russian media, the dual nuclear reactors are expected to be operational by February 2025, with sea trials anticipated later that year. However, doubts linger about whether the vessel will be ready to fulfill its intended strategic roles.

The Kirov-class ships reflect a broader philosophical divide between Russian and U.S. naval strategies. While the U.S. Navy focuses on power projection and carrier battle groups, the Russian Navy has historically emphasized sea denial, aiming to make naval operations perilous for adversaries within its territorial waters. The Nakhimov, in particular, was built to intimidate and assert naval dominance, serving as a floating monument to Russia’s military capabilities.

As geopolitical tensions rise, particularly in the Arctic region—with its vast resources and strategic shipping routes—the deployment of the Admiral Nakhimov could take on greater significance. Its operational theater may extend to the Arctic, the Pacific, or even the Mediterranean, where Russia seeks to assert its influence amidst NATO’s expansion.

However, the financial burden of maintaining such a colossal vessel raises questions about its cost-effectiveness. The Nakhimov, with its dual nuclear reactors, offers nearly unlimited operational range, but the upkeep of its complex systems is expensive. As Russia navigates its naval strategy, the question remains: Is the investment in the Admiral Nakhimov worth the strategic advantages it may offer?

As the world watches, the fate of the Admiral Nakhimov will not only impact Russia’s naval capabilities but also shape the balance of power in key maritime regions for years to come.