Russia and Ukraine

[Thumpalumpacus]

Golden BBs do sometimes happen, as @abaris alluded to when he mentioned Hood, but that wasn't the case here, as they had time to rig a tow -- implying at least one damage-control party being aboard. If Ukrainian claims of hitting it with two Neptunes are true, the ship took two 330-lb warheads aboard -- and it's only armored against splinters/fragments, so I don't know how likely or unlikely its later survival may have been.

The Stark took two exocets.  In that case, the first missile failed to trigger, but a fire did break out (rocket fuel)..then the second hit leaving a massive hole in the ship.  She served for another decade.  A quick summary for the peanut gallery.

I wouldn't detract from the actions of the captain and crew that then accounted for the ship being saved by suggesting that the outcome was entirely predictable - a routine operation - but it does provide a near direct counterpoint to whatever happened to the moskva.  I'd even go so far as to all it another example of lessons not learned by russian forces as observers.  As you dive into the details, history may not repeat, but it sure as hell rhymes.

There's no predicting any of it. Both the Stark and Samuel B Roberts (1988, not 1944) benefitted from the USN's emphasis on damage control, dearly-bought in the Pacific in WWII -- which the Russians could and perhaps should have studied?

But yeah, where the incoming hits, and who it kills, matters. For instance, IJN Kaga was sunk at Midway by four bombs in large part because the second bomb not only hit a hot hangar with full fuel lines, but also because it wiped out the forward damage-control party, meaning those fires spread uncontrollably. Lucky hit.