Editing Cruiser (section)

==Late 20th century==
[[File:Kirov-class battlecruiser.jpg|thumb|Russian Navy battlecruiser of the {{sclass|Kirov|battlecruiser|4}}, {{ship|Soviet cruiser|Frunze||2}}]]

The rise of air power during World War II dramatically changed the nature of naval combat. Even the fastest cruisers could not maneuver quickly enough to evade aerial attack, and aircraft now had torpedoes, allowing moderate-range standoff capabilities. This change led to the end of independent operations by single ships or very small task groups, and for the second half of the 20th century naval operations were based on very large fleets believed able to fend off all but the largest air attacks, though this was not tested by any war in that period. The US Navy became centered around [[carrier strike group|carrier groups]], with cruisers and battleships primarily providing anti-aircraft defense and shore bombardment. Until the [[Harpoon missile]] entered service in the late 1970s, the US Navy was almost entirely dependent on carrier-based aircraft and [[submarines]] for conventionally attacking enemy warships. Lacking aircraft carriers, the Soviet Navy depended on anti-ship cruise missiles; in the 1950s these were primarily delivered from [[Long Range Aviation|heavy land-based bombers]]. Soviet [[submarine-launched cruise missile]]s at the time were primarily for land attack; but by 1964 anti-ship missiles were deployed in quantity on cruisers, destroyers, and submarines.<ref name=ConwaysASCM>Gardiner and Chumbley, pp. 350–354</ref>

===US cruiser development===
The US Navy was aware of the potential missile threat as soon as World War II ended, and had considerable related experience due to Japanese ''kamikaze'' attacks in that war. The initial response was to upgrade the light AA armament of new cruisers from 40&nbsp;mm and 20&nbsp;mm weapons to twin [[3"/50 caliber gun|3-inch (76 mm)/50 caliber gun mounts]].<ref>Friedman cruisers, pp. 361–362</ref> For the longer term, it was thought that gun systems would be inadequate to deal with the missile threat, and by the mid-1950s three naval SAM systems were developed: [[Talos missile|Talos]] (long range), [[Terrier missile|Terrier]] (medium range), and [[Tartar missile|Tartar]] (short range).<ref name=FriedCruMis1>Friedman cruisers, pp. 378–382</ref> Talos and Terrier were nuclear-capable and this allowed their use in anti-ship or shore bombardment roles in the event of nuclear war.<ref>Friedman destroyers, p. 301</ref> [[Chief of Naval Operations]] Admiral [[Arleigh Burke]] is credited with speeding the development of these systems.<ref>Friedman destroyers, pp. 293–294</ref>

Terrier was initially deployed on two [[Boston-class cruiser|converted ''Baltimore''-class cruisers]] (CAG), with conversions completed in 1955–56.<ref name=FriedCruMis1/> Further conversions of six ''Cleveland''-class cruisers (CLG) ({{sclass|Galveston|cruiser|5}} and {{sclass|Providence|cruiser|5}} classes), redesign of the {{sclass|Farragut|destroyer (1958)|4}} as guided-missile "frigates" (DLG),<ref>Friedman destroyers, pp. 297–298</ref> and development of the {{sclass|Charles F. Adams|destroyer|0}} DDGs<ref>Bauer and Roberts, p. 211</ref> resulted in the completion of numerous additional guided-missile ships deploying all three systems in 1959–1962. Also completed during this period was the nuclear-powered {{USS|Long Beach|CGN-9|6}}, with two Terrier and one Talos launchers, plus an [[ASROC]] anti-submarine launcher the World War II conversions lacked.<ref name=RegisterCG1>Bauer and Roberts, pp. 153–155</ref> The converted World War II cruisers up to this point retained one or two main battery turrets for shore bombardment. However, in 1962–1964 three additional ''Baltimore'' and {{sclass|Oregon City|cruiser|0}} cruisers were more extensively converted as the {{sclass|Albany|cruiser|4}}. These had two Talos and two Tartar launchers plus ASROC and two 5-inch (127&nbsp;mm) guns for self-defense, and were primarily built to get greater numbers of Talos launchers deployed.<ref name=RegisterCG1/> Of all these types, only the ''Farragut'' DLGs were selected as the design basis for further production, although their {{sclass|Leahy|cruiser|0}} successors were significantly larger (5,670 tons standard versus 4,150 tons standard) due to a second Terrier launcher and greater endurance.<ref name=RegisterDLG1>Bauer and Roberts, pp. 213–217</ref><ref>Friedman destroyers, pp. 300–304</ref> An economical crew size compared with World War II conversions was probably a factor, as the ''Leahy''s required a crew of only 377 versus 1,200 for the ''Cleveland''-class conversions.<ref>Bauer and Roberts, pp. 154, 214</ref> Through 1980, the ten ''Farragut''s were joined by four additional classes and two one-off ships for a total of 36 guided-missile frigates, eight of them nuclear-powered (DLGN). In 1975 the ''Farragut''s were reclassified as guided-missile destroyers (DDG) due to their small size, and the remaining DLG/DLGN ships became guided-missile cruisers (CG/CGN).<ref name=RegisterDLG1/> The World War II conversions were gradually retired between 1970 and 1980; the Talos missile was withdrawn in 1980 as a cost-saving measure and the ''Albany''s were decommissioned. ''Long Beach'' had her Talos launcher removed in a refit shortly thereafter; the deck space was used for Harpoon missiles.<ref>Friedman cruisers, p. 398, 422</ref> Around this time the Terrier ships were upgraded with the [[RIM-67 Standard]] ER missile.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, p. 552</ref> The guided-missile frigates and cruisers served in the Cold War and the Vietnam War; off Vietnam they performed shore bombardment and shot down enemy aircraft or, as Positive Identification Radar Advisory Zone ([[PIRAZ]]) ships, [[radar picket|guided fighters]] to intercept enemy aircraft.<ref>Friedman cruisers, pp. 398–400, 412</ref> By 1995 the former guided-missile frigates were replaced by the {{sclass|Ticonderoga|cruiser|1}}s and {{sclass|Arleigh Burke|destroyer|1}}s.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, pp. 580–585</ref>

The U.S. Navy's guided-missile cruisers were built upon destroyer-style hulls (some called "destroyer leaders" or "frigates" prior to the 1975 reclassification). As the U.S. Navy's strike role was centered around aircraft carriers, cruisers were primarily designed to provide air defense while often adding anti-submarine capabilities.<ref>{{Cite journal |year=1984 |title=A fully illustrated guide to Modern Cruisers |journal=War Machine |location=London |publisher=Orbis Publishing |volume=3 |issue=30}}</ref> These U.S. cruisers that were built in the 1960s and 1970s were larger, often nuclear-powered for extended endurance in escorting nuclear-powered fleet carriers, and carried longer-range surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) than early ''Charles F. Adams'' guided-missile destroyers that were tasked with the short-range air defense role. The U.S. cruiser was a major contrast to their contemporaries, Soviet "rocket cruisers" that were armed with large numbers of anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCMs) as part of the combat doctrine of saturation attack,<ref name=":0">Gardiner and Chumbley (1995)</ref> though in the early 1980s the U.S. Navy retrofitted some of these existing cruisers to carry a small number of Harpoon anti-ship missiles and [[Tomahawk (missile family)|Tomahawk cruise missile]]s.<ref name=":1">Gardiner and Chumbley, pp. 581–585</ref>

The line between U.S. Navy cruisers and destroyers blurred with the {{sclass|Spruance|destroyer|4}}. While originally designed for anti-submarine warfare, a ''Spruance'' destroyer was comparable in size to existing U.S. cruisers, while having the advantage of an enclosed hangar (with space for up to two medium-lift helicopters) which was a considerable improvement over the basic aviation facilities of earlier cruisers. The ''Spruance'' hull design was used as the basis for two classes; the {{sclass|Kidd|destroyer|4}} which had comparable anti-air capabilities to cruisers at the time, and then the DDG-47-class destroyers which were redesignated as the ''Ticonderoga''-class guided-missile cruisers to emphasize the additional capability provided by the ships' [[Aegis combat system]]s, and their flag facilities suitable for an admiral and his staff. In addition, 24 members of the ''Spruance'' class were upgraded with the vertical launch system (VLS) for Tomahawk cruise missiles due to its modular hull design, along with the similarly VLS-equipped ''Ticonderoga'' class, these ships had anti-surface strike capabilities beyond the 1960s–1970s cruisers that received Tomahawk armored-box launchers as part of the [[New Threat Upgrade]]. Like the ''Ticonderoga'' ships with VLS, the ''Arleigh Burke'' and {{sclass|Zumwalt|destroyer|4}}, despite being classified as destroyers, actually have much heavier anti-surface armament than previous U.S. ships classified as cruisers.{{citation_needed|date=August 2019}}
[[File:Garibaldi_Taranto_10_giugno_68.jpg|thumb|Italian cruiser ''[[Italian cruiser Giuseppe Garibaldi (1936)|Giuseppe Garibaldi]]'']]
Following the American example, three smaller light cruisers of other [[NATO]] countries were rearmed with anti-aircraft missiles installed in place of their aft armament: the Dutch ''De Zeven Provinciën'', the Italian ''[[Italian cruiser Giuseppe Garibaldi (1936)|Giuseppe Garibaldi]]'', and the French ''[[French cruiser Colbert (C611)|Colbert]]''.<ref name=":16">Gardiner and Chumbley, pp. 109, 199, 272</ref> Only the French ship, rebuilt last in 1972, also received [[Exocet]] anti-ship missile launchers and domestically produced [[Masurca]] anti-aircraft missiles.<ref name=":16" /> The others received American Terrier missiles, with ''Garibaldi'' uniquely among surface ships also being armed with Polaris strategic missile launchers, although these were never actually carried.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, p. 199</ref> In the [[Soviet Navy]], only one cruiser, ''Dzerzhinsky'', of [[Sverdlov-class cruiser|Project 68bis]], was similarly rearmed with anti-aircraft missiles.<ref name=":17">Biereżnoj, pp. 2–3</ref> The M-2 missiles used on it, adapted from the land-based [[S-75 Dvina|S-75]], proved ineffective as a naval system, and further conversions were abandoned.<ref name=":18">Asanin, pp. 6–7</ref> Another cruiser of this project, ''Admiral Nakhimov'', was used for testing anti-ship missiles but never entered service in this role.<ref name=":18" /> The British considered converting older cruisers to guided-missile cruisers with the [[Seaslug (missile)|Seaslug]] system but ultimately did not proceed.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, p. 504</ref> Several other classical cruisers from various countries were rearmed with short-range anti-aircraft systems requiring fewer modifications, such as [[Seacat (missile)|Seacat]] or [[OSA-M|Osa-M]], but since these were intended only for self-defense, they are not considered guided-missile cruisers (e.g., the Soviet ''Zhdanov'' and ''Admiral Senyavin'' of Project 68U).<ref name=":17" /> The Peruvian light cruiser ''Almirante Grau'' (formerly the Dutch ''De Ruyter'') was rearmed with eight [[Otomat]] anti-ship missiles at the end of the 20th century, but these did not constitute its primary armament.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Pacholski |first=Łukasz |year=2017 |title=Koniec epoki krążowników artyleryjskich |journal=Morze |language=pl |volume=III |issue=25 |page=26 |issn=2543-5469}}</ref>

====US Navy "cruiser gap"====
{{main|United States Navy 1975 ship reclassification}}

Prior to the introduction of the ''Ticonderoga''s, the US Navy used odd naming conventions that left its fleet seemingly without many cruisers, although a number of their ships were cruisers in all but name. From the 1950s to the 1970s, US Navy cruisers were large vessels equipped with heavy, specialized missiles (mostly surface-to-air, but for several years including the [[Regulus missile|Regulus]] [[nuclear weapon|nuclear]] cruise missile) for wide-ranging combat against land-based and sea-based targets. Naming conventions changed, and some guided-missile cruisers were classified as frigates or destroyers during certain periods or at the construction stage.<ref name=":0" /> All save one—USS ''Long Beach''—were converted from World War II cruisers of the ''Oregon City'', ''Baltimore'' and ''Cleveland'' classes. ''Long Beach'' was also the last cruiser built with a World War II-era cruiser style hull (characterized by a long lean hull);<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/historic-navy-cruiser-uss-long-beach-to-be-auctioned-as-scrap-metal-by-government-liquidation-starting-tuesday-july-10-159701705.html|title=Historic Navy Cruiser, USS Long Beach, To Be Auctioned As Scrap Metal By Government Liquidation Starting Tuesday, July 10|date=12 June 2012|publisher=PR Newswire|access-date=26 January 2016}}</ref><ref name="auctioned2012">{{cite news|last=Censer|first=Marjorie|title=Historic nuclear cruiser headed to scrap heap|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/capitalbusiness/navy-auctions-uss-long-beach-historic-nuclear-cruiser-off-for-scrap/2012/09/18/7dd244b8-dccf-11e1-9974-5c975ae4810f_story.html|access-date=18 September 2012|newspaper=The Washington Post|date=18 September 2012}}</ref> later new-build cruisers were actually converted frigates (DLG/CG {{USS|Bainbridge|DLGN-25|6}}, {{USS|Truxtun|DLGN-35|6}}, and the ''Leahy'', {{sclass|Belknap|cruiser|5}}, {{sclass|California|cruiser|5}}, and {{sclass|Virginia|cruiser|5}} classes) or uprated destroyers (the DDG/CG ''Ticonderoga'' class was built on a ''Spruance''-class destroyer hull).<ref name=":1" />

Literature sometimes considers ships as cruisers even if they are not officially classified as such, primarily larger representatives of the Soviet large anti-submarine ship class, which had no equivalent in global classification.<ref name=":8">Gardiner and Chumbley, pp. 380–382</ref> Ultimately, after the [[United States Navy 1975 ship reclassification|1975 classification reform]] in the US, larger ships were called cruisers, slightly smaller and weaker fleet escorts were called destroyers, and smaller ships for ocean escort and anti-submarine warfare were called frigates.<ref name=":9">Gardiner and Chumbley, pp. 551–555, 580</ref> However, the size and qualitative differences between them and destroyers were vague and arbitrary.<ref name=":9" /> With the development of destroyers, this distinction has blurred even further (for example, the American [[Arleigh Burke-class destroyer|''Arleigh Burke''-class destroyers]], complementing the ''Ticonderoga''-class cruisers as the core of US Navy air defense, have displacements up to 9,700 tons and nearly equal combat capabilities, carrying the Aegis system and similar missiles, albeit in smaller numbers; similarly for Japanese destroyers).<ref name=":10">Lipiecki, p. 8</ref><ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, p. 592</ref><ref name=":27">{{Cite journal |last=Lipiecki |first=Sławomir |year=2019 |title=Japońska tarcza. Niszczyciele rakietowe typu Maya |journal=Morze, Statki i Okręty |language=pl |volume=7-8 |pages=17–18}}</ref>

Frigates under this scheme were almost as large as the cruisers and optimized for [[anti-aircraft]] warfare, although they were capable anti-surface warfare combatants as well. In the late 1960s, the US government perceived a "cruiser gap"—at the time, the US Navy possessed six ships designated as cruisers, compared to 19 for the Soviet Union, even though the USN had 21 ships designated as frigates with equal or superior capabilities to the Soviet cruisers at the time.  Because of this, in 1975 the Navy performed a massive redesignation of its forces:<ref name=":9" />
* CVA/CVAN (Attack Aircraft Carrier/Nuclear-powered Attack Aircraft Carrier) were redesignated CV/CVN (although {{USS|Midway|CV-41|6}} and {{USS |Coral Sea|CV-43|6}} never embarked anti-submarine squadrons).
* DLG/DLGN (Frigates/Nuclear-powered Frigates) of the ''Leahy'', ''Belknap'', and ''California'' classes along with USS ''Bainbridge'' and USS ''Truxtun'' were redesignated CG/CGN (Guided-Missile Cruiser/Nuclear-powered Guided-Missile Cruiser).
* ''Farragut''-class guided-missile frigates (DLG), being smaller and less capable than the others, were redesignated to DDGs ({{USS|Coontz|DDG-40|6}} was the first ship of this class to be re-numbered; because of this the class is sometimes called the ''Coontz'' class);
* DE/DEG (Ocean Escort/Guided-Missile Ocean Escort) were redesignated to FF/FFG (Guided-Missile Frigates), bringing the US "Frigate" designation into line with the rest of the world.

Also, a series of Patrol Frigates of the {{sclass|Oliver Hazard Perry|frigate|4}}, originally designated PFG, were redesignated into the FFG line. The cruiser-destroyer-frigate realignment and the deletion of the Ocean Escort type brought the US Navy's ship designations into line with the rest of the world's, eliminating confusion with foreign navies. In 1980, the Navy's then-building DDG-47-class destroyers were redesignated as cruisers (''Ticonderoga'' guided-missile cruisers) to emphasize the additional capability provided by the ships' Aegis combat systems, and their flag facilities suitable for an admiral and his staff.{{citation_needed|date=August 2019}}

===Soviet cruiser development===
In the Soviet Navy, cruisers formed the basis of combat groups. In the immediate post-war era it built a fleet of gun-armed [[Sverdlov-class cruiser|light cruisers]], but replaced these beginning in the early 1960s with large ships called "[[rocket cruiser]]s", carrying large numbers of anti-ship cruise missiles (ASCMs) and anti-aircraft missiles. The Soviet combat doctrine of saturation attack meant that their cruisers (as well as destroyers and even missile boats) mounted multiple missiles in large container/launch tube housings and carried far more ASCMs than their NATO counterparts,<ref name=":252">Asanin, pp. 17–19</ref> while NATO combatants instead used individually smaller and lighter missiles (while appearing under-armed when compared to Soviet ships).<ref name=":1" />

In 1962–1965 the four {{sclass2|Kynda|cruiser|1}}s entered service; these had launchers for eight long-range [[SS-N-3 Shaddock]] ASCMs with a full set of reloads; these had a range of up to {{convert|450|km}} with mid-course guidance.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, p. 380</ref> The four more modest {{sclass2|Kresta I|cruiser|1}}s, with launchers for four SS-N-3 ASCMs and no reloads, entered service in 1967–69.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, p. 381</ref> In 1969–79 Soviet cruiser numbers more than tripled with ten {{sclass2|Kresta II|cruiser|1}}s and seven {{sclass2|Kara|cruiser|1}}s entering service. These had launchers for eight large-diameter missiles whose purpose was initially unclear to NATO. This was the [[SS-N-14 Silex]], an over/under rocket-delivered heavyweight torpedo primarily for the anti-submarine role, but capable of anti-surface action with a range of up to {{convert|90|km}}. Soviet doctrine had shifted; powerful anti-submarine vessels (these were designated "Large Anti-Submarine Ships", but were listed as cruisers in most references) were needed to destroy NATO submarines to allow Soviet [[ballistic missile submarine]]s to get within range of the United States in the event of nuclear war. By this time [[Long Range Aviation]] and the Soviet submarine force could deploy numerous ASCMs. Doctrine later shifted back to overwhelming carrier group defenses with ASCMs, with the ''Slava'' and ''Kirov'' classes.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, pp. 345, 381–382</ref>

After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the [[Russian cruiser Moskva|Russian cruiser ''Moskva'']] of Project 1164 became the flagship of the [[Black Sea Fleet]] and in 2022 participated in the [[Russian invasion of Ukraine|invasion of Ukraine]], shelling and blockading the coast, but was subsequently sunk by anti-ship missiles.<ref name=":28">{{Cite web |date=2022-04-15 |title=What is the significance of the Moskva sinking? |url=https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/4/15/explainer-what-is-the-significance-of-the-moskva-sinking |access-date=2024-05-21 |website=aljazeera.com}}</ref>

===Current cruisers===
[[File:PLANS Nanchang (DDG-101) 20210319.jpg|thumb|China's latest [[Type 055 destroyer]] has been classified by the United States Department of Defense as a cruiser because of its large size and armament.]]
The end of the [[Cold War]] and the subsequent reduction of military rivalry led to significant reductions in naval forces. This reduction was more pronounced in the Soviet Navy, which was mostly taken over by Russia. Faced with severe financial difficulties, Russia was forced to decommission most of its ships in the 1990s or send them for extended overhauls. The most recent Soviet/Russian rocket cruisers, the four {{sclass|Kirov|battlecruiser|2}}<nowiki/>s, were built in the 1970s and 1980s. One of the ''Kirov'' class is in refit, and 2 are being scrapped, with the {{ship|Russian battlecruiser|Pyotr Velikiy||2}} in active service. Russia also operates two {{sclass|Slava|cruiser|2}}<nowiki/>s and one [[Kuznetsov-class aircraft carrier|''Admiral Kuznetsov''-class carrier]] which is officially designated as a cruiser, specifically a "[[Aircraft cruiser|heavy aviation cruiser]]" ({{langx|ru|тяжелый авианесущий крейсер}}) due to her complement of 12 [[P-700 Granit]] supersonic AShMs. In 2022, the cruiser ''[[Russian cruiser Moskva|Moskva]]'' of Project 1164 sank after being hit by a Ukrainian missile.<ref name=":28" />

Currently, the ''Kirov''-class heavy missile cruisers are used for command purposes, as ''Pyotr Velikiy'' is the [[flagship]] of the [[Northern Fleet]]. However, their air defense capabilities are still powerful, as shown by the array of [[point defense]] missiles they carry, from 44 [[9K33 Osa#Variants|OSA-MA]] missiles to 196 [[Tor missile system#3K95 Kinzhal (naval variant)|9K311 Tor]] missiles. For longer range targets, the [[S-300 (missile)|S-300]] is used. For closer range targets, [[AK-630]] or [[Kashtan]] CIWSs are used. Aside from that, ''Kirov''s have 20 [[P-700 Granit]] missiles for anti-ship warfare. For target acquisition beyond the [[radar horizon]], three [[helicopter]]s can be used. Besides a vast array of armament, ''Kirov''-class cruisers are also outfitted with many sensors and communications equipment, allowing them to lead the fleet.{{citation_needed|date=August 2019}}

The United States Navy has centered on the aircraft carrier since World War II. The ''Ticonderoga''-class cruisers, built in the 1980s, were originally designed and designated as a class of destroyer, intended to provide a very powerful air-defense in these carrier-centered fleets.{{citation_needed|date=August 2019}} As of 2020, the US Navy still had 22 of its newest ''Ticonderoga''-class cruisers in service.<ref name=":10" /> These ships were continuously upgraded, enhancing their value and versatility. Some were equipped with [[United States national missile defense|ballistic missile defense]] capabilities ([[Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System|Aegis BMD]] system).<ref name=":10" /> However, no new cruisers of this class were being built. In the 21st century, there were design efforts for futuristic large cruisers provisionally designated as [[CG(X)]], but the program was canceled in 2010 due to budget constraints.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Larter |first=David |date=2020-06-26 |title=Congress aims to strip funding for the US Navy's next-gen large surface combatant |url=https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/06/25/congress-aims-to-strip-funding-for-the-us-navys-next-generation-large-surface-combatant/ |access-date=2024-05-21 |website=Defense News |language=en}}</ref>

Formally, only the aforementioned ships are classified as cruisers globally. The latest American futuristic large destroyers of the ''[[Zumwalt-class destroyer|Zumwalt]]'' class, despite their displacement of approximately 16,000 tons and armament with two large-caliber (155&nbsp;mm) guns traditionally associated with cruisers, are classified as destroyers.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Lipiecki |first=Sławomir |year=2016 |title=Niszczyciele typu Zumwalt. Okręty ery kosmicznej. Część 1 |journal=Morze, Statki i Okręty |language=pl |volume=XXI |issue=176 |pages=18–19}}</ref> Literature often emphasizes that these ships are essentially large cruisers.<ref>Lipiecki, pp. 38–39</ref> Similarly, Japanese large missile destroyers of the ''[[Kongō-class destroyer|Kongō]]'' class, with a displacement of 9,485 tons and equipped with the Aegis system (derived from the ''Arleigh Burke''-class destroyers), are sometimes referred to as cruisers.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Schiele |first=Marcin |year=2000 |title=Japońskie fregaty rakietowe typu Murasame |journal=Morza, Statki i Okręty |language=pl |location=Warsaw |publisher=Magnum X |volume=V |issue=20 |page=12}}</ref> Their improved versions, the ''Atago'' and ''Maya'' classes, exceed 10,000 tons.<ref name=":27" /> Japan, for political reasons, does not use the term "cruiser" or even "destroyer", formally classifying these ships as missile escorts with hull numbers prefixed by DDG, corresponding to guided-missile destroyers.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Wieliczko |first=Leszek |year=2017 |title=Flota Wschodzącego Słońca |journal=Morze, Statki i Okręty |language=pl |volume=XXI |issue=181 |page=37 |issn=1426-529X}}</ref> These Japanese destroyers also provide ballistic missile defense.<ref>Lipiecki, p. 34</ref>

Outside the US and Soviet navies, new cruisers were rare following World War II. Most navies use guided-missile destroyers for fleet air defense, and destroyers and frigates for cruise missiles. The need to operate in task forces has led most navies to change to fleets designed around ships dedicated to a single role, anti-submarine or anti-aircraft typically, and the large "generalist" ship has disappeared from most forces. The [[United States Navy]] and the [[Russian Navy]] are the only remaining navies which operate active duty ships formally classed as cruisers. Italy used {{ship|Italian cruiser|Vittorio Veneto|550|2}} until 2003 (decommissioned in 2006) and the aircraft cruiser {{ship|Italian aircraft carrier|Giuseppe Garibaldi|551|2}} until 2024; France operated a single helicopter cruiser until May 2010, {{ship|French cruiser|Jeanne d'Arc|R97|2}}, for training purposes only. While Type 055 of the Chinese Navy is classified as a cruiser by the U.S. Department of Defense, the Chinese consider it a guided-missile destroyer.<ref>{{Cite web|title=2017 China Military Power Report|url=https://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/2017_China_Military_Power_Report.PDF|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170828190843/https://www.defense.gov/Portals/1/Documents/pubs/2017_China_Military_Power_Report.PDF|url-status=dead|archive-date=August 28, 2017|website=dod.defense.gov}}</ref>
[[File:Bow view of USS Spruance (DD-963) and USS Ticonderoga (CG-47) at Naval Station Norfolk on 8 October 1983 (6397938).jpg|thumb|[[Ticonderoga-class cruiser|''Ticonderoga''-class]] cruiser's design was based on that of [[Spruance-class destroyer|''Spruance''-class]] [[destroyer]].]]
In the years since the launch of {{USS|Ticonderoga|CG-47|2}} in 1981, the class has received a number of upgrades that have dramatically improved its members' capabilities for anti-submarine and land attack (using the Tomahawk missile). Like their Soviet counterparts, the modern ''Ticonderoga''s can also be used as the basis for an entire battle group. Their cruiser designation was almost certainly deserved when first built, as their sensors and combat management systems enable them to act as flagships for a surface warship flotilla if no carrier is present, but newer ships rated as destroyers and also equipped with Aegis approach them very closely in capability, and once more blur the line between the two classes.{{citation_needed|date=August 2019}}

===Aircraft cruisers===
[[File:Carrier Baku.jpg|thumb|Soviet Navy's [[Soviet aircraft carrier Baku|''Admiral Gorshkov'']], Sold to [[Indian Navy|India]] as [[INS Vikramaditya|INS ''Vikramaditya'']].]]
{{main|Aircraft cruiser}}

From time to time, some navies have experimented with aircraft-carrying cruisers. One example is the Swedish {{ship|HSwMS|Gotland|1933|2}}. Another was the Japanese [[Japanese cruiser Mogami (1934)|''Mogami'']], which was converted to carry a large floatplane group in 1942. Another variant is the ''helicopter cruiser''. The further development of helicopter cruisers led to the creation of ships formally classified only as cruisers but significantly larger and effectively [[light aircraft carrier]]s. In the Soviet Union, a series of unusual hybrid ships of [[Kiev-class aircraft carrier|Project 1143]] (''Kiev'' class) were built in the late 1970s and early 1980s. Initially classified as anti-submarine cruisers, they were ultimately designated as "heavy [[aircraft cruiser]]s". These ships combined the architecture of cruisers and aircraft carriers and were armed with long-range anti-ship and anti-aircraft missiles along with a deck for [[V/STOL|vertical take-off and landing]] aircraft.<ref name=":23">Biereżnoj, pp. 8–10</ref> Their full displacement of approximately 43,000 tons is typical for aircraft carriers.<ref name=":23" /> By hosting several helicopters, their primary mission was also anti-submarine warfare.<ref name=":23" /> The last example in service was the Soviet Navy's {{sclass|Kiev|aircraft carrier|4}}, whose last unit {{ship|Soviet aircraft carrier|Admiral Gorshkov||2}} was converted to a pure aircraft carrier and sold to [[India]] as {{ship|INS|Vikramaditya}}. The Russian Navy's {{ship|Russian aircraft carrier|Admiral Kuznetsov||2}} is nominally designated as an aviation cruiser but otherwise resembles a standard medium aircraft carrier, albeit with a [[surface-to-surface missile]] battery. The Royal Navy's aircraft-carrying {{sclass|Invincible|aircraft carrier|4}} and the Italian Navy's aircraft-carrying {{ship|Italian aircraft carrier|Giuseppe Garibaldi|551|2}} vessels were originally designated 'through-deck cruisers', but were since designated as small aircraft carriers<ref>{{Cite web |title=Portaeromobili (LHA) Classe Garibaldi |url=https://www.marina.difesa.it/noi-siamo-la-marina/mezzi/forze-navali/Pagine/Garibaldi.aspx |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201112025717/https://www.marina.difesa.it/noi-siamo-la-marina/mezzi/forze-navali/Pagine/Garibaldi.aspx |archive-date=2020-11-12 |access-date=2020-11-01 |website=Marina Militare |language=it}}</ref> (although the 'C' in the pennant for ''Giuseppe Garibaldi'' indicated it retained some status as an aircraft-carrying cruiser). It was armed with missiles, but these were short-range self-defense missiles (anti-aircraft Aspide and anti-ship Otomat) and did not match the significance of its aviation capabilities.<ref>Gardiner and Chumbley, p. 204</ref> Similarly, the [[Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force]]'s {{sclass|Hyūga|helicopter destroyer|0}} "helicopter destroyers" are really more along the lines of helicopter cruisers in function and aircraft complement, but due to the [[Treaty of San Francisco]], must be designated as destroyers.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/meet-helicopter-cruiser-half-aircraft-carrier-45482 |work=National Interest |accessdate=14 June 2023 |title=Meet the Helicopter-Cruiser: The Half Aircraft Carrier |date=23 February 2019 |author=David Axe }}</ref>{{Failed verification|date=March 2025|reason=Cited article nowhere states that Japan under the Treaty is allowed destroyers but forbidden cruisers.}}

One cruiser alternative studied in the late 1980s by the United States was variously entitled a Mission Essential Unit (MEU) or CG V/STOL. In a return to the thoughts of the independent operations cruiser-carriers of the 1930s and the Soviet ''Kiev'' class, the ship was to be fitted with a hangar, elevators, and a flight deck. The mission systems were [[Aegis Combat System|Aegis]], SQS-53 sonar, 12 [[SV-22]] ASW aircraft and 200 [[Mark 41 Vertical Launching System|VLS]] cells. The resulting ship would have had a waterline length of 700 feet, a waterline beam of 97 feet, and a displacement of about 25,000 tons. Other features included an integrated electric drive and advanced computer systems, both stand-alone and networked. It was part of the U.S. Navy's "Revolution at Sea" effort. The project was curtailed by the sudden end of the Cold War and its aftermath, otherwise the first of class would have been likely ordered in the early 1990s.{{citation needed|date=November 2014}}

=== Strike cruisers ===
[[File:Cruiser_Kynda.jpg|thumb|Cruiser ''Grozny'' of [[Kynda-class cruiser|Project 58]]]]
[[File:Kirov-class_battlecruiser.jpg|thumb|Heavy nuclear cruiser ''Frunze'' of [[Kirov-class battlecruiser|Project 11442]] – visible vertical missile launchers]]
An alternative development path for guided-missile cruisers was represented by ships armed with heavy long-range anti-ship missiles, primarily developed in the Soviet Union with a focus on combating aircraft carriers.<ref name=":252">Asanin, pp. 17–19</ref> Starting in 1962, four ships of [[Kynda-class cruiser|Project 58]] (NATO designation: ''Kynda'') entered service. They were armed with eight [[P-6/P-35|P-35]] missile launchers with a range of 250&nbsp;km and a twin launcher for [[M-1 Volna]] anti-aircraft missiles.<ref>Asanin, pp. 32–35</ref> With a moderate full displacement of 5,350 tons, they were initially intended to be classified as destroyers but ultimately entered service as guided-missile cruisers.<ref>Biereżnoj, p. 6</ref> During this period, designs for larger cruisers, such as Project 64 and the nuclear-powered Project 63 (with 24 anti-ship missiles), were also developed. However, their construction was abandoned due to high costs and vulnerability to air attacks due to the shortcomings of available anti-aircraft missiles.<ref name=":252"/>

The next built type was four ships of [[Kresta I-class cruiser|Project 1134]] (NATO designation: ''Kresta I'') with a displacement of 7,500 tons, equipped with four P-35 anti-ship missile launchers and two Volna anti-aircraft missile launchers.<ref name=":82">Gardiner & Chumbley, pp. 380–382</ref> These were transitional types with lesser strike capabilities and were initially classified as large anti-submarine ships but were reclassified as guided-missile cruisers in 1977.<ref>Biereżnoj, pp. 13–14</ref>

In the 1980s, before the dissolution of the Soviet Union, only three guided-missile cruisers of the new generation [[Slava-class cruiser|Project 1164]] (''Slava'' class) with a full displacement of 11,300 tons were completed out of a longer planned series. They carried 16 Bazalt anti-ship missile launchers and eight vertical launchers for long-range Fort anti-aircraft missiles.<ref name=":24">Biereżnoj, pp. 7–8</ref> The pinnacle of development for cruisers designed to engage surface ships, while also protecting fleet formations from aircraft and submarines, was the four large nuclear-powered cruisers of [[Kirov-class battlecruiser|Project 1144]] (''Kirov'' class) from the 1980s. These were officially classified as "heavy nuclear guided-missile cruisers".<ref name=":24" /> With a full displacement of up to 25,000 tons, they were armed with 20 [[P-700 Granit|Granit]] heavy anti-ship missile launchers, 12 vertical launchers for long-range Fort anti-aircraft missiles, and short-range missiles.<ref name=":4">Rochowicz, pp. 26–27</ref> For anti-submarine warfare, they were equipped with rocket-torpedo launchers and three helicopters, and their crew numbered up to 744 people.<ref name=":4" /> In English-language literature, they are sometimes referred to as "[[battlecruiser]]s", although this designation lacks official justification.<ref name=":82" />

The ship ''[[Romanian frigate Mărășești|Muntenia]]'', with a displacement of 5,790 tons, was constructed and built in [[Romania]] in the 1980s. It was initially somewhat ambitiously designated as a light helicopter cruiser but was reclassified as a destroyer in 1990, along with a name change.<ref>{{Cite web |title=ISTORIC Distrugătorul Mărăşeşti. Asul de treflă al Marinei Regale Române |url=https://www.navy.ro/despre/organizare/istoricF111.php |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181111043710/http://www.navy.ro/despre/organizare/istoricF111.php |archive-date=2018-11-11 |website=Forțele Navale Române |language=Romanian}}</ref> The ship and its classification reflected the ambitions of dictator [[Nicolae Ceaușescu]] amid limited industrial capabilities. It carried eight Soviet [[P-15 Termit|P-20M]] medium-range anti-ship missiles but lacked anti-aircraft missile armament and was equipped with two light helicopters without means for long-range anti-submarine warfare.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Grotnik |first=Tomasz |year=2007 |title=Mărăşeşti. Stara fregata w nowej roli |journal=Nowa Technika Wojskowa |language=pl |publisher=Magnum-X |volume=10 |pages=77–82}}</ref>