trimaran corsair f24 occasion

• New Sailboats
• Sailboats 21-30ft
• Sailboats 31-35ft
• Sailboats 36-40ft
• Sailboats Over 40ft
• Sailboats Under 21feet
• used_sailboats
• Apps and Computer Programs
• Communications
• Fishfinders
• Handheld Electronics
• Plotters MFDS Rradar
• Wind, Speed & Depth Instruments
• Anchoring Mooring
• Running Rigging
• Sails Canvas
• Standing Rigging
• Diesel Engines
• Off Grid Energy
• Cleaning Waxing
• DIY Projects
• Repair, Tools & Materials
• Spare Parts
• Tools & Gadgets
• Cabin Comfort
• Ventilation
• Footwear Apparel
• Foul Weather Gear
• Mailport & PS Advisor
• Inside Practical Sailor Blog
• Activate My Web Access
• Reset Password
• Customer Service

• Free Newsletter

Ericson 34-2 Finds Sweet Spot

How to Sell Your Boat

Cal 2-46: A Venerable Lapworth Design Brought Up to Date

Rhumb Lines: Show Highlights from Annapolis

Solar Panels: Go Rigid If You have the Space…

Leaping Into Lithium

The Importance of Sea State in Weather Planning

Do-it-yourself Electrical System Survey and Inspection

When Should We Retire Dyneema Stays and Running Rigging?

Rethinking MOB Prevention

Top-notch Wind Indicators

The Everlasting Multihull Trampoline

What Your Boat and the Baltimore Super Container Ship May Have…

Check Your Shorepower System for Hidden Dangers

DIY survey of boat solar and wind turbine systems

What’s Involved in Setting Up a Lithium Battery System?

The Scraper-only Approach to Bottom Paint Removal

Can You Recoat Dyneema?

How to Handle the Head

The Day Sailor’s First-Aid Kit

Choosing and Securing Seat Cushions

Cockpit Drains on Race Boats

Re-sealing the Seams on Waterproof Fabrics

Safer Sailing: Add Leg Loops to Your Harness

Waxing and Polishing Your Boat

Reducing Engine Room Noise

Tricks and Tips to Forming Do-it-yourself Rigging Terminals

Marine Toilet Maintenance Tips

Learning to Live with Plastic Boat Bits

• Sailboat Reviews

Corsair F-24 Boat Test

The corsair f-24 mk i cooks up a budget-friendly taste of fast..

In May 1999 Practical Sailor reviewed the then-new Corsair F-24 Mark II trimaran. Nearly 20 years later, were here to follow up with a focus on the Corsair F-24 Mark I, a boat that can represent a good value today since many newer designs have entered the market.

The late Ian Farrier (1947-2017) designed fast, trailerable trimarans for more than 40 years. A New Zealander, his first production success was the 18-foot Trailertri. His 19-foot Tramp was Boat-of-the-Year in Australia in 1981. In 1983 John Walton (of the Wal Mart family) founded Corsair to build high-performance multihulls, lured Farrier to Chula Vista, California, and the result was the very popular F-27 ( PS September 1990 ). Almost 500 have been sold since it went into production in 1985. It has since been superceded by the F-28.

In 1991, Corsair added the F-24 Sport Cruiser. This abbreviated version of the F-27, with a starting price more than 30 percent lower than the F-27, was designed to be affordable.

While she remained sharp in the performance department, her accommodations were even more spartan. We spoke with Ian Farrier several times about anchoring and cruising; it was pretty clear that his heart was in racing and he even suggested we were probably better in tune with the needs and practicalities of small multi-hull cruising than he was. Still, he designed a cabin that can handily do both, if you can accept the compromises.

The deck layout is similar to the typical 24-foot monohull, except that it is wide-18 feet-with wing trampolines on both sides. In addition to providing stability, this gives lounging space in fair weather and greatly increases safety in rough weather. Though lacking railings and lifelines-other than a pulpit and wrap-around stern rail-its hard to fall off the F-24 if jacklines and tethers are used. A single large Lewmar foredeck hatch provides ample ventilation. The cockpit will easily seat six, but three is more comfortable for vigorous sailing.

The cockpit is equipped with four Lewmar 16 winches (the jib winches are one-speed self-tailers, the reacher winches are standard two-speed), two multi-line jammers, and ten cam cleats. All essential sail controls, including halyards, are accessible from the cockpit, making for easy single-handed sailing.

The mainsail furls by winding around the boom; fast, convenient, and very gentle on the typical Mylar/carbon laminate sails. Reefing requires a quick trip to the mast to crank the boom around and attach the down haul, but that is it. The set up makes a vang impractical but few multihulls use them anyway, preferring to control the boom with the traveler.

The bow anchor locker holds two anchors and two rodes, so long as they are folding designs. Trimarans are best anchored using a bridle; the test boat uses a 20-foot Dyneema bridle that is retracted onto the wing nets when not in use.

The typical 6 horsepower outboard delivers about 5.3 knots at 1/3 throttle and about 6.5 knots wide open. The side mount provides decent performance in chop, pitching less than transom-mounted engines.

The portable fuel tank is protected from the sun and solar heating in an under-seat locker. It is wide is open for venting (but sealed from the cabin) and drains out through the open transom, safe and out of the way.

Since the emphasis was fast cruising and racing, storage and amenities are sparse. In the cabin there is storage behind the seat backs. The large rectangular top-opening lockers in the galley counter and under the seats can be fitted with hanging bags for easier access.

The head compartment has sufficient space for toilet paper and cleaning supplies. There is a large bottomless locker in the cockpit that also provides access to under cockpit areas. Lockers in the amas (outriggers) can hold light, bulky items.

There is sitting head room and ample seating for four on the starboard settee. An Origo alcohol stove and sink with rocker pump provide a minimal galley. A large cooler slides easily under the companionway. The forward V-berth is quite long, though a little pinched at the foot. The settee converts into a twin-sized bed using filler boards that slide neatly into storage slots under the companionway.

A portable head sits in a well behind a curtain, and is typically moved into the cockpit at bedtime for better privacy. Some owners rate the interior as poor, but most call it camping-out comfortable, suitable for an overnight or weekend.

Performance

Everyone wants to know how fast the little trimaran will go. To windward it points as well as most monohulls, thanks to a deep centerboard. Shell tack through less than 90 degrees if you pinch, though it’s faster if you bear off just a little. Keeping up with 40-foot cruisers is easy on any point of the sail, and you quickly chase them down on a reach.

With the wind free, expect to match true wind speed up to about 12 knots, after which you may reef or bleed power, depending on your mood. In lighter winds, pop out the reacher and you’ll get a whole new gear, easily exceeding wind speed.

In stronger winds, bear off until the true wind is on the quarter, and you’ll see 14 knots or more, although handling requires sharp attention if you haven’t reefed.

Compared to the Stiletto 27 (see PS July 2016), it is more weatherly, tacks faster, can safely handle more wind, but is slightly slower off the wind (though not as scary).

Upwind reefing begins at about 15 knots true for those who like fast sailing, but there is no reason not to reef a little earlier and enjoy more relaxed, but still spirited sailing. Maximum angle of heel is about 15 degrees.

With two reefs and the jib rolled up a little, shell take quite a lot of wind, perhaps 30 knots, without much excitement. Upwind in 20 knots is fun with the right reefs in, and that’s pretty good for a 24-foot boat. Farrier designed these conservatively, with windy conditions in mind. They are quite popular on San Francisco Bay, an area known for strong breezes.

The Mark II was touted as the new and improved version of the Mark I. By replacing the centerboard with a daggerboard, weight was reduced, and a rotating mast increased power, making the Mark II noticeably faster. The Mark I has more usable cabin space, since the centerboard case is hidden inside the settee, and the Mark I cockpit is also several feet longer, a boon to fun daysailing.

The centerboard is also a blessing in shoal water, automatically pivoting up if it smells the bottom, instead of breaking things when you find a sandbar at 15 knots. The Mark I has a kick-up rudder fitted into a cassette, keeping it under the boat, while the Mark II has a transom hung rudder. The Mark I works as a day sailor and weekender, while racers prefer the Mark II.

As with any multihull, there is always the capsize canard. Sailed poorly, any sailboat can capsize, says Farrier. My designs are not immune to this. With over 1,000 Farriers now sailing, even a low 1 percent capsize ratio would mean 10 capsizes a year. However, the capsize rate actually appears to be averaging .03 percent.

Large ocean-going monohull yachts are foundering annually, sometimes with loss of life. The basic safety difference is that the monohulls ultimate stability is resting on the bottom, while the multihulls is floating on top.

Reef appropriately and the risk is truly small. F-27s have completed successful transpacific and transatlantic crossings, and even the first circumnavigation of the North Pole under sail. Finally, the F-24 can’t sink. Built-in foam flotation, light construction, and multiple crash tanks in the amas and foam-filled akas (cross beams) make this impossible.

The F-24s main hull is fine, with a V-entry forward, U-sections mid-ships, and a relatively flat transom to damp pitching and provide lift for planing. Going to weather, most of the weight is on the amas, with fine V-sections that cut nicely through waves. Powering through short chop is not a strong suit among multihulls, but she has demonstrated considerable ability in choppy waters such as San Francisco Bay and the Chesapeake.

The heart of Farriers designs is the patented Farrier Folding System. Refined over the years, the mechanism allows the akas to fold-up, which reduces the F-24s beam from 17 feet 11 inches to 8 feet 2 inches.

We kept our F-24 in a small boat marina for a time, folding after every sail; we did this while motoring in the channel, requiring only a few minutes of light effort by one person.

While the claim of trailering to sailing in 20 minutes may be true for seasoned crews that race every weekend, allow two hours for the transition if you do this only occasionally.

Although no single step is physically difficult for a single person, there are many steps and a second pair of hands makes for safer work. The engineering has proved very reliable, and now that the patents have expired, copies abound.

Construction

Performance multihulls built to their designed displacements are hardly ever built on production lines. Corsair has been the exception to that rule. Light weight is an essential if you want a cat or trimaran to sail up to its speed potential, but you’re not likely to achieve it with normal materials and common construction techniques.

Turning out an F-24 that weighs 1,800 pounds (1,650 pounds for the Mark II) is no simple matter. It involves almost 50 separate molded parts, considerably more than same-length monohulls.

Carbon fiber and Kevlar reinforcement, vacuum-bagging, double-biased fabrics, acrylic-modified epoxy resin, and NPG gelcoat are all elements you’d expect to see in a custom shop. They all go into the F-24.

Glass/resin control, published laminate schedules, a computer-generated production protocol, universally bonded top hat joints between hull and deck, barrier coats of vinyl ester resin, isopthalic resin throughout the rest of the laminate, and bulkheads tabbed in seven places to the hull makes for a light but sturdy boat.

The akas appear to be held in place by the anchor bolts inserted when unfolding, but the sailing forces are actually carried by strong pivot arms connecting the akas to anchor points near the waterline, anchored deep within the hull, and by compression blocks where the arms meet the hull at deck level.

After 20 years we’ve had a few minor issues related to failed bedding and damage to the balsa core, but nothing affecting the main structural elements.

Conclusions

Whether you’re downsizing from a cruising cat, or upsizing from the family Hobie, the F-24 offers the sports car of youthful dreams, on a budget.

Is it worth paying three times as much as you would for a 24-foot mono-hull with more room? Not if you’re looking for cabin space and need an enclosed head. On the other hand, if fun sailing is the goal, the dollar-to-grin ratio is very high. Market demand is dependable and you will get your money back. It’s not the best beginners boat.

You can’t just sheet-and-forget, and getting the best from her requires experience and attention. But if you have a beach cat or fast dinghy background, it’s a great way to gain weekender capability without losing any of the fun. If you need a little more comfort or more speed, look at the Corsair F-27. And if money is no object there’s a world of Farrier designs to choose from.

Cruising in an F-24 is a tiny step above camping, but for the bare-bones cruiser who wants to cover some ground quickly, it fits the bill quite handily.

1. An alcohol stove and a small sink serve the micro-galley. 2. The V-berth is tight, but the convertible settee in the main cabin makes a twin-sized bed. 3. The porta-potty sits under the V-berth. It is often moved to the cockpit at night while sleeping. 4. A folding table seats one for dining.

• Fast, weatherly, and quick to tack.
• Stable. Only 15 degrees heel.
• Reefing starts at about 18 knots apparent.
• Easy to fold from 18-foot beam to
• 8-foot in about two minutes.
• Roomy cockpit. Tramps are fun in the summer.
• Eighteen-foot beam makes it hard to fall off.
• Well-built with stout rigging.
• Cramped cabin. No standing headroom and few amenities.
• Limited storage space.
• Portable head and no head compartment.
• Quick motion.
• Slow under power.

• Corsair Marine

RELATED ARTICLES MORE FROM AUTHOR

By far the most comprehensive review of the F-24 I was able to find online. Many thanks for the write-up, very informative and helpful.

Lakeside Marine & Motorsports has been awarded Best of Forsyth Boat and Marine Service as well as Used Boat Sales. Please contact us for any kind of Boat work or Purchase.

LEAVE A REPLY Cancel reply

Log in to leave a comment

Latest Videos

What’s The Best Vinyl Window Cleaner for Your Boat?

40-Footer Boat Tours – With Some Big Surprises! | Boat Tour

Electrical Do’s and Don’ts

Bahamas Travel Advisory: Cause for Concern?

• Privacy Policy
• Do Not Sell My Personal Information
• Online Account Activation
• Privacy Manager

Great choice! Your favorites are temporarily saved for this session. Sign in to save them permanently, access them on any device, and receive relevant alerts.

• Sailboat Guide

F-24 MKII is a 24 ′ 2 ″ / 7.4 m trimaran sailboat designed by Ian Farrier and built by Corsair Marine starting in 1994.

Rig and Sails

Auxilary power, accomodations, calculations.

The theoretical maximum speed that a displacement hull can move efficiently through the water is determined by it's waterline length and displacement. It may be unable to reach this speed if the boat is underpowered or heavily loaded, though it may exceed this speed given enough power. Read more.

Classic hull speed formula:

Hull Speed = 1.34 x √LWL

Max Speed/Length ratio = 8.26 ÷ Displacement/Length ratio .311 Hull Speed = Max Speed/Length ratio x √LWL

Sail Area / Displacement Ratio

A measure of the power of the sails relative to the weight of the boat. The higher the number, the higher the performance, but the harder the boat will be to handle. This ratio is a "non-dimensional" value that facilitates comparisons between boats of different types and sizes. Read more.

SA/D = SA ÷ (D ÷ 64) 2/3

• SA : Sail area in square feet, derived by adding the mainsail area to 100% of the foretriangle area (the lateral area above the deck between the mast and the forestay).
• D : Displacement in pounds.

Ballast / Displacement Ratio

A measure of the stability of a boat's hull that suggests how well a monohull will stand up to its sails. The ballast displacement ratio indicates how much of the weight of a boat is placed for maximum stability against capsizing and is an indicator of stiffness and resistance to capsize.

Ballast / Displacement * 100

Displacement / Length Ratio

A measure of the weight of the boat relative to it's length at the waterline. The higher a boat’s D/L ratio, the more easily it will carry a load and the more comfortable its motion will be. The lower a boat's ratio is, the less power it takes to drive the boat to its nominal hull speed or beyond. Read more.

D/L = (D ÷ 2240) ÷ (0.01 x LWL)³

• D: Displacement of the boat in pounds.
• LWL: Waterline length in feet

Comfort Ratio

This ratio assess how quickly and abruptly a boat’s hull reacts to waves in a significant seaway, these being the elements of a boat’s motion most likely to cause seasickness. Read more.

Comfort ratio = D ÷ (.65 x (.7 LWL + .3 LOA) x Beam 1.33 )

• D: Displacement of the boat in pounds
• LOA: Length overall in feet
• Beam: Width of boat at the widest point in feet

Capsize Screening Formula

This formula attempts to indicate whether a given boat might be too wide and light to readily right itself after being overturned in extreme conditions. Read more.

CSV = Beam ÷ ³√(D / 64)

Sprit lengthened in 1998. Opt. raised spin halyard. Mainsail area: 22.5m2/243 sq.ft. Blade jib: 11.3m2/122 sq.ft. Assym: 53m2/570 sq.ft.

Embed this page on your own website by copying and pasting this code.

Discover Related Sailboats

Corsair dash 750.

• About Sailboat Guide

©2024 Sea Time Tech, LLC

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Corsair F24 MkII

Sailboat specifications.

• Last update: 1st April 2020

Corsair F24 MkII's main features

Corsair f24 mkii's main dimensions, corsair f24 mkii's rig and sails, corsair f24 mkii's performances, corsair f24 mkii's auxiliary engine, corsair f24 mkii's accommodations and layout.

Similar sailboats that may interest you:

EVECOM presenteert / presents

EVECOM MULTIHULLS  -   Post: Fabrykswei 11  -   NL- 9216 ZH Oudega (Sm.) -  Tel. (+31) (0)512 371999  -  

KvK Noord.: 01060328

>>   Occasion presentatie / presentation  # 76162

(27- 5- 2016)

Corsair F24 MkI

The Corsair F24 MkI is the second trimaran offered by Corsair Marine after the Corsair F27 . She is a small versatile sailboat capable of excellent performance while accommodate up to 4 people in the cabin. Like the Corsair F27 she is foldable to be trailerable. The reduction in size and weight greatly facilitates the towing.

Her shallow draft and high average speed made her a very good boat for coastal cruises and the accommodations are perfect for a weekend, a bit tight for longer navigations.

She evolves in 1994 to become the Corsair F24 MkII .

Main Features:

Shipyard:           Corsair  Marine International

Model:               Corsair F24 MkI  

Sailboat type:     Cruising- racing multihull  - Trailerable trimaran  

Designer:           Ian Farrier  

Building years:  (first/last) 1991 / 1994  

Successor:         Corsair F24 MkII  

CE regulation:   C- 6  

Construction:     Sandwich foam/fiberglass/polyester  

Unsinkable:       Yes  

Trailerable:        Yes  

Appendage type: Daggerboard (main hull)  

Rudder blade:    Single transom hung rudder  

Rudder:              Single tiller  

Main dimensions  

Hull length:           24.2 ft

Waterline length:  23.6 ft

Beam over all:      17.9 ft

Draft (max./Min.):  1.0 / 4.6 ft

Light displacement: 1803 lbs

French customs tonnage: 3.63 Tx

Rig and sails

Rig type:               Fractional Sloop

Mast:                     Deck stepped mast  

Rig material:         Mast and boom in Aluminum  

Standing rigging:  1x19 strand st. st. wire  

rows of spreader:  1  

Spreader angle:    Pushing  

Spinnaker type:    Assymmetrical spinnaker on bowsprit  

Upwind sailarea:  398 ft²

Downwind sailarea: 779 ft²

Mainsail area:       247 ft²

Jib area:                151 ft²

Spinnaker area:     532 ft²

P:                            29.0 ft

E:                           10.0 ft

Performance

Upwind sailarea / displacement:       486.3 ft²/Ton

Downwind sailarea / displacement:  952.2 ft²/Ton

Auxiliary engine

Engine power:          1 x 5 hp

Fuel type:                  Gas  

Transmission type:   Outboard  

Propeller type:          Two- blade propeller  

Website : www.corsairmarine.com

Things to do in Moscow: how to visit Moscow | Unmissable, cool & unusual

• September 2, 2023

What are the best things to do in Moscow? What to do in Moscow? First, I will list the main places to visit by theme, passing by the must-sees, but also more unusual places in Moscow. Then, I will describe what to see in Moscow in one day and how to visit Moscow in 2, 3, 4, 5 or 6 days. Let’s go!

Good to know. For more information, click on the places to open the dedicated blog posts.

Main places to visit in Moscow & best things to do in Moscow

I worked in Moscow and I loved this city for its dynamism and energy. We find there from time to time to see friends, remember good memories and enjoy this giant city! Then the time has come for us to share with you our practical guide.

TOP 5 must-see places in Moscow

• Moscow Red Square
• St. Basil’s Cathedral
• Cathedral of Christ the Savior
• Bolshoi Theatre

Places of cultural, historical and religious interest in Moscow

• Novodevichy Convent and cemetery
• Tretyakov Gallery
• Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts
• Kremlin Izmaïlovo (pseudo-historic place, recently built in the image of the old, one of the best things to do in Moscow for your Instagram account 😉 )
• Park and ancient village of Kolomenskoye

Visit Moscow of the Soviet era

• Moscow State University and Sparrows Hill
• VDNKh and the Museum of Astronautics, one of the key landmarks of the Soviet era in Moscow
• GULAG Museum
• Metro stations
• The Stalinist skyscrapers, scattered all over the city

Less touristy places in Moscow

• Gorky Park and the GARAGE museum
• The old Krasny Oktyabr factory
• Zaryadye Park
• Center for Contemporary Art, WINZAVOD
• Business center, Moscow City

Main districts of Moscow to visit

• Patriarch Ponds
• Tchistye Prudy
• Kuznetsky most
• Arbat Street

However, regardless of the length of your stay, whether you are going to visit Moscow in 4 days or in 2, you need a visa. The article Obtaining a tourist visa for Russia could then be useful in any case.

What to do and see in Moscow in one day?

List of things to see and do in Moscow in one day:

• Go to Red Square
• Visit St. Basil’s Cathedral
• See Kremlin walls (but not to visit)
• Visit Cathedral of Christ the Savior
• Discover Kuznetsky most districts and see Bolshoi Theatre building
• And if you have time at the end of the day: go to the Sparrows Hill or to the Moscow City for a beautiful view

Things to do in Moscow in 2 days

If you want to visit Moscow in 2 days, there are 2 purposes: do not miss the essential places of Moscow and optimize travel.

• First day: Red Square , Saint Basil’s Cathedral , Zariadye Park, Bolshoi Theatre , Kremlin
• Day 2: Cathedral of Christ the Savior, the former Krasny Oktyabr factory on Balchug Island, Gorky Park, Moscow State University (one of the Seven Sisters buildings ) and Sparrow Hill

As 2 days os really short, be sure to choose an accommodation in the best districts where to stay in Moscow .

Walking on Red Square in Moscow: one of the unmissable things to do in Moscow

Iconic place and one of the must-see places in Moscow and even in Russia! Besides, if there was only one place to visit in Moscow in 2 days, this place would then be Red Square, without hesitation. Therefore, starting the city tour with Red Square is ideal . Several buildings are on the square, but not all of them have to be visited. Check out my blog post about Moscow’s Red Square in detail to learn more and not miss anything.

Visiting Saint-Basil’s Cathedral inside

Even more emblematic than Moscow’s Red Square! Built in the middle of the 16th century under the orders of Tsar Ivan Le Terrible, this cathedral is one of the most beautiful monuments of Orthodox art, and definitely one of the unmissable places in Moscow. Visiting Saint-Basil’s Cathedral inside is one of the most beautiful things to do in Moscow!

• Visit estimate time : 1h30
• Entry ticket : 700 RUB. Tickets can be purchased on the cathedral’s official website 45 days before the tour.
• Audio guide (recommended): 500 RUB
• Opening hours : June to August 10 am-6pm; from November to April: 11 am-5pm; May, September, October 11 am-5pm. Cathedral closed on Wednesdays. Entrance is closed 45 minutes before closing.
• Find out more in the dedicated article: Saint Basil’s Cathedral in Moscow

Take a walk in Zariadye park: one of the coolest things to do in Moscow after visiting Red Square

Zaryadie Park is just a 10-minute walk from St. Basil’s Cathedral, so it’s easy to include in your itinerary if you’re going to visit Moscow in 2 days. From its heights, you can see the red walls of the Kremlin. But, the most impressive point of view is the platform which overlooks the Moskva river. A must see! And clearly one of the coolest things to do in Moscow!

• Open 24 hours a day
• Good to know! Park Zaryadye is also a place to visit in Moscow in winter. Find out more here: What to do in Moscow in winter?

See the Bolshoi Theatre and discover the Kuznetsky Most district

The Bolshoi Theatre is the most famous Russian theater in the world. The most economical way to see a presentation at the Bolshoi Theater is to take the tickets on the theater’s official website in advance, so here is our tutorial to help you: How to buy entrance tickets to the Bolshoi? In addition, several pedestrian or one-way streets

The Bolshoi Theater is the most famous Russian theater in the world. The most economical way to see a presentation at the Bolshoi Theater is to take the tickets on the theater’s official website in advance, so here is our tutorial to help you: How to buy tickets to the Bolshoi? In addition, several pedestrian or one-way streets are located north of the theater. It is therefore very pleasant to find them to leave the main axes of the megalopolis.

Visit the Moscow Kremlin

Visit Kremlin is on top of things to do in Moscow. A place of power for centuries, the Kremlin then shows us a whole different image when viewed from the inside. If you want to visit Moscow in 2 days, the Kremlin is certainly one of the must-see places in Moscow.

• Opening hours : Daily from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m., except Thursday.
• See our blog post about visiting the Moscow Kremlin

Visit the Cathedral of Christ the Savior

This impressive Moscow Cathedral is the seat of the Russian Orthodox Church. It is a must see if you visit Moscow in 2 days and clearly one of the things to do in Moscow. The Cathedral of Christ the Savior was first built in 1883 in memory of Russia’s victory over Napoleon’s Grand Army. Then in 1931 Stalin ordered its destruction. It was then rebuilt again (identically) only in 2000.

• Where? Ulitsa Volkhonka 15. At the foot of the Kropotkinskaya metro station.
• Opening hours . Daily: 10: 00-17: 00, except Monday: 13: 00-17: 00
• Free entry (some closing restrictions, for example a short)

Good to know! In orthodox religious places, one must avoid excessively uncovered clothing. Women should cover their heads. After visiting the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, you can explore Bolotny Island and Gorky Park. This is one of the routes our guide to Moscow.

The old Krasny Oktyabr factory: one of the coolest things to do in Moscow

If you cross the Moskva River by a pedestrian bridge which is located just in front of the Cathedral of Christ the Savior, you will enjoy a beautiful view of the city and at the same time you can discover Balchug Island. Furthermore, if you want to visit Moscow in 2 days, you can include this island in your itinerary between the cathedral and Gorky park. Here is the old confectionery factory Krasny Oktyabr, which has gradually turned into a fashionable micro-district. There are then some elements of street art, cafes and restaurants and some Moscow bohemian side. At the end of the island you can see a gigantic 98-meter-high monument dedicated to the Russian reforming tsar Pierre The Great.

Good to know! You can find on this island are the trendiest nightclubs in Moscow. On weekends, there are taxi caps after midnight so there are so many people. On the other hand, if you go there in winter and during the day, the island is quite empty and less interesting to see.

Gorky Park is one of the TOP places to visit in Moscow, because it allows you to better understand the life of the locals and their rhythm. In fact, it’s a huge entertainment park. For example, in winter there is a giant ice rink and in summer – free dance or yoga lessons, sandy beaches for playing volleyball, an outdoor cinema. So, like the locals, have a Stakantchik (ice cream or cooked corn), and enjoy the atmosphere of the place: that’s one of the interesting things to do in Moscow to discover the city.

• Where? Krymsky Val 9. 20 minutes’ walk from Krasny Oktyabr, along the quays.

Sparrow Hill and Moscow State University

The Sparrow Hill, Vorobiovy Gori in Russian, is the highest point in Moscow. It is rather known to Russians, but less to travelers. A nice view on Moscow opens from the hill, and in particular on the Luzhniki Stadium. In addition, on the hill itself is the Moscow State University: an impressive skyscraper from the Soviet era.

• How to get there? By bus T7 (35 min) from Oktyaborskaya station, near Gorki Park. By metro (Vorobiovy Gorki station) + climb the hill on foot. On foot along the Moskva along the Gorky Park (1h30) + climb in funiculars.

Good to know! It is possible to cross the Moskva river by funicular. We actually tested it and it was pretty cool! That is one of our favorite things to do in Moscow!

What to do in Moscow in 3 days?

If you are going to visit Moscow in 3 days, it would be interesting to dive into the Soviet era which strongly marked the country and the city. After the Bolshevik Revolution, the capital was transferred from Saint Petersburg to Moscow, in order to mark the change of power. Moscow then became the world showcase for communist ideology. Here are the best things to do in Moscow for 3-day-trip!

VDNKh, visit Moscow of the Soviet era

VDNKh is a large exhibition center in the north of Moscow, where there are still several striking witnesses of the USSR. The most interesting are the Museum of Cosmonauts and the Statue of the Worker and the Kolkhozian , which will certainly impress you with its size!

GULAG History Museum

The explanations of the museum are very well done. We really have the feeling of going back in time. If you are going to visit Moscow in 3 days and you are interested in history and this subject in particular, I recommend this museum. Visit the GULAG History Museum is one of the most interesting things to do in Moscow.

Discover the Patriarche Pounds district

It’s a nice neighborhood in Moscow where you can come across rather affluent locals, but not necessarily very bling-bling. Take a walk in this area is really a cool thing to do in Moscow! In addition, the Ponds of Patriarch is one of the places of Bulgakov’s novel “Master and Margarita”. As this is an interesting area to see, we have included it in a walking tour of Moscow. The route ends at the Moscow Kremlin, which is very convenient, because you will be able to visit Moscow in 3 days by optimizing your trips.

What to visit in Moscow in 4 days: TOP things to do in Moscow in 4 days

If you want to visit Moscow in 3 days, you will already see a lot of things. On the other hand, if you stay one more day, you have plenty to do! The Novodevichy Convent, the Tchistie Proudy district and the Izmaylovo Kremlin are very good candidates for you, if you are going to visit Moscow in 4 days.

Visiting Novodevichy Convent in Moscow

The Novodevichy Convent is one of the most brilliant examples of Russian architecture, according to UNESCO. This beautiful complex was built in 1524 and today consists of the convent, but also of a cemetery whose status could be compared to that of Père-Lachaise in Paris. Visiting Novodevichy Convent is one of the great things to do in Moscow, if you want to go a little bit outside of the center!

Discovering Tchistye Proudy district

It’s one of the most popular areas of Moscow, with many cafes, restaurants and bars nearby. It is therefore a place to discover if you want to visit Moscow in 4 days. It is just as pleasant for a stroll as for the discovery of local life. For example, in winter the pond turns into an ice rink.

Visiting the Izmaylovo Kremlin, one of the coolest things to do in Moscow!

The Izmaylovo Kremlin is more of a tourist than a historic place. On the other hand, it is a pretty impressive place to discover, especially on weekends. Inside the Kremlin, there is a flea market where you can find a little bit of everything, but mostly good souvenirs to bring from Moscow. For example, chapka, traditional Russian scarves or matryoshka (Russian dolls). Add the Kremlin and the Izmaïlovo market to your itinerary if you are going to visit Moscow in 4 days, because it is a nice and very colorful place! Visiting the Izmailovo Kremlin is one of the things to do in Moscow, if you want to put colors in your Instagram account! 😉

In 4 days, we will have the opportunity to see several Moscow: Classic Moscow, Moscow of old Russia, Soviet Moscow and a little bit of the new Moscow. So what to visit in Moscow on the 5th day of travel?

What to visit in Moscow in 5 days?

Art lovers will be delighted to discover the Tretyakov Gallery and the Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts, while others will prefer to stroll along Arbat Street, see the buildings of Moskva-City or visit Bunker 42.

Admiring Russian art at Tretyakov Gallery

Founded in 1856 by an industrialist and great lover of art, the gallery has grown over the decades, and then bequeathed to the state. Today the collection includes more than 140,000 pieces, 15,000 of which are paintings. Visiting the Tretyakov Gallery is one of the things to do in Moscow if you want to discover Russian art!

• Where? Pereoulok Lavrouchinski 10. A 5-minute walk from Tretiakovskaya station
• Opening hours. Open from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m. until 9 p.m. Thursday and Friday. Closed on Mondays.
• Entry tickets. 500 RUB.

Visiting the Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts

The Pushkin Museum of Fine Arts presents the treasures of ancient Egypt, the paintings of Rembrandt and Cézanne, a fine collection of Impressionism.

• Where? Ulitsa Volkhonka 12
• Opening hours. Daily: 10: 00-20: 00, except Thursday: 11: 00-21: 00. Closed on Mondays. The boxes close an hour before closing.
• Entry tickets. The prices vary according to the collections from 300 to 750 RUB.

Walking on Arbat Street

All Russians know Rue Arbat. So, walking on Arbat street is one of the things to do in Moscow. However, after the years, little by little it became very touristy. This is a pedestrian street only. There are souvenir shops, restaurants and cafes there, but it is no longer the most authentic neighborhood in the city.

Seeing the buildings of Moskva-City (Moscow City)

Moskva-City is Moscow’s business center, much like Paris’s Defense district. The skyscrapers of Moskva-City are among the tallest in Europe: 373 meters high! Very nice place to see at dusk.

Good to know! You can admire a nice view of Moscow City from the docks of Tarasa Shevchenko. It’s especially beautiful in the evening with all the lights on.

Bunker 42, one of the most unusual things to do in Moscow

Bunker 42 is a secret military complex which was to be used by the Soviets in the event of a nuclear attack: a space of 7000 m² 65 meters underground!

• Where? 5 Kotelnitcheski Lane, 11.
• Prices. 2200 RUB per person
• Opening hours. Open daily from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m.
• Restaurant inside. Original, but rather a tourist trap.

What to visit in Moscow in 6 days or more?

There are still so many places to see, because Moscow is a big megalopolis and there is always something exciting to do there. For example: the ancient Kolomenskoye village or the WINZAVOD contemporary art center .

If you are interested in history and want to see Russian cities on a rather “human scale”, it would certainly be interesting for you to discover the cities of the Golden Ring . For example, it is very easy to get to Sergey Posad from Moscow (less than 2 hours in train). Visiting the Golden Ring is one of the best things to do in Moscow if you are staying more than a 5-6 days.

There are still plenty of places to see in Moscow, however I did my best to list here the best things to do in Moscow, what to see in Moscow in one day, but also in 2, 3, 4 or 5 days in Moscow!

Moscow travel tips:

• Airport transfer: how to go to Moscow?
• Where to stay in Moscow (hotels, districts)?
• Tourist voucher for Russian visa
• Christmas and New Year in Moscow
• What is the best time to visit Moscow?

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Novodevichy Convent and cemetery in Moscow: tickets, cemetery map

Hermitage museum in saint petersburg: tickets, best time to visit, you may also like.

Bolshoi Theatre Moscow: how to buy tickets for Bolshoi theatre ballet?

• July 28, 2023

Free Moscow map in English: Moscow metro map and city centre map

• December 12, 2023

Saint Basil’s Cathedral in Moscow | Tickets & things to visit inside

• March 7, 2024

Weekend in Moscow | What to do in Moscow for a long weekend?

• June 22, 2023

When is the best time to visit Moscow? | Weather, budget, events by month

• July 14, 2023

• August 26, 2023

Novotel Moscow City 4 stars Family friendly Ecocertified

88 88 photos/video

83 83 photos/video

Description

Novotel Moscow City

Hotel that makes every moment matter

The Novotel Moscow City is the only hotel in the famous Moscow City business area of the capital among the highest skyscrapers in Europe, with exciting sky decks and restaurants with panoramic views. The hotel is perfect for business and holiday. Rooms with panoramic windows, a restaurant and a bar, the InBalance welness center, 8 conference rooms, and an underground parking are at guests' disposal.

Novotel Moscow City has a good location within walking distance to the one of the largest Afimall City Shopping and Entertainment Mall, Expocenter, Moscow River Embankment and Krasnaya Presnya Park. The Hotel is also easily accessible by the public transport: several subway and public transport stations, including express to Sheremetyevo and Vnukovo International Airports.

Hospitality and high standards of one of the largest hotel operators in the world Accor in a modern business district of Russia. Novotel Moscow City is perfect for relaxation, ideal for business. Welcome!

Take advantage of the opportunity to book a buffet breakfast on the website for the price of 1,700 rubles per person! The cost of the breakfast when paid at the reception and in the MC Traders restaurant is 1,950 rubles per person.

Hotel extras

Free Wi-Fi, newspapers and maps of Moscow. 5 minutes to the Expo Center.

A minute to the Afimall shopping center with lots of shops, cafes, cinemas.

2 minutes to the highest observation deck in Europe and no-limit ice cream.

4 metro stations and Moscow Central Circle station near the hotel.

15-minutes drive to the Kremlin.

Our accommodation(s)

Page out of

Superior Room with queen-size bed

• 25 m² / 269 sq ft
• Bedding 1 x Double bed(s)
• Views: Courtyard View

From NaN RUB NaN RUB Note  *

Fees and taxes included

1 night | 1 adult

Superior Room with 2 twin beds

• Bedding 2 x Twin bed(s)
• Views: City View

Deluxe room with a double bed

Executive Room with king-size bed.

• 34 m² / 365 sq ft
• Bedding 1 x King size bed(s) and 1 x Double sofa bed(s)

Executive Deluxe Room with double bed and sofa.

• 40 m² / 430 sq ft
• Bedding 1 x King size bed(s) and 1 x Single sofa bed(s)

Deluxe with a double bed for guests with limited mobility

• Accessible room

Executive room for guests with limited mobility with King-size bed

• 33 m² / 355 sq ft

Junior suite for guests with limited mobility with a King-size bed

• 58 m² / 624 sq ft
• Bedding 1 x Double bed(s) and 1 x Double sofa bed(s)

Junior Suite Room with king-size bed and sofa

Suite Room with king-size bed and sofa

• 54 m² / 581 sq ft

City Suite with 1 King-size bed and sofa

• 75 m² / 807 sq ft

Hotel location

Presnenskaya Naberezhnaya, 2, Presnenskaya Naberezhnaya 2, Russia 123112  Moscow Russia

GPS : 55.748069, 37.53685

Contact email [email protected]

Click to copy the email address

Access and transport

Kiev railway station

Railway station

Access: 4.9 km  /  3.04 mi     15 min drive

Tourist attraction

Access: 5.6 km  /  3.48 mi     15 min drive

Historic monument

Access: 6.3 km  /  3.91 mi     15 min drive

TRETYAKOV GALLERY

Access: 7.5 km  /  4.66 mi     20 min drive

Access: 7.5 km  /  4.66 mi     18 min drive

Shuttle on call, Shuttle scheduled

Saint Basil's Cathedral

Access: 7.5 km  /  4.66 mi     15 min drive

BOLSHOI THEATER

Opera/symphony/concert hall

Access: 8.4 km  /  5.22 mi     20 min drive

"Krasnaya Presnya" park

Access: 2.1 km  /  1.3 mi     15 min walk  /  7 min drive

"Afimall City" shopping center

Shopping district

Access: 200 m  /  0.12 mi     5 min walk

Hotel services

Check-in from 03:00 PM - Check out up to 12:00 PM

• Wheelchair accessible

Fitness center

• Air conditioning
• Meeting rooms
• 100% Non Smoking Property
• Room service

MC Traders offers a wide range of delicious international cuisine and cooking classes. The guests can enjoy Early bird breakfast from 4 am; hold a meeting during a business lunch and in the evening relax next to a real fireplace in the bar.

MC TRADERS BAR

Located in the hotel lobby, the MC Traders lounge bar is the ideal place to relax. A wide range of drinks and snacks is available to suit all tastes.

4 options for you to chose from depending on your tastes. A snack at reception from 4AM. A buffet breakfast. For those in a hurry, hot drinks, orange juice and croissants served at the bar. Room service.

At our charming wellness and fitness center, you can enjoy our 2 saunas, 2 hammams (Turkish baths), relaxation rooms and massage treatments. Our mission is to make sure you can enjoy complete relaxation.

Meetings & Events

Our guest reviews

100% genuine reviews from our guests

ALL Rating  4.5/5  2,702 reviews

TripAdvisor Rating  4.5/5  1,820 reviews

Customer review rating 1.5/5

Sophie Couples - 3/24/2024 Confirmed reviews ALL

Bad service, bad cleaning, overprice

Good loacation & Cozy Environment

Customer review rating 5.0/5

Anonymous Business - 3/16/2024 Confirmed reviews ALL

It was my first time staying in this hotel. It was beyond my expectations. In general; the hotel is clean well orginized and pay attention to their guest’s satisfaction.

Dear Burak! Thank you very much for your glowing review regarding your stay at Novotel Moscow City! We are thrilled to hear that you have a great impression about your stay, as well as our hotel team! It is a pleasure for us to bring comfort and positive emotions to our Guests providing courteous, warm and welcoming service. We are glad that you highly evaluated our work! We are looking forward to welcoming you back at our hotel! Warmest regards, Irina Naumova Quality and Attitude Manager.

Wonderful Stay as always !!

TripAdvisor rating 5.0/5

andyrocks_globe 3/5/2024 TripAdvisor review

During my recent stay at Novotel Moscow City from 9th to 22nd February, I was pleasantly surprised by the warm reception I received from the duty manager Marika. Her friendly demeanor and efficient handling of check-in made me feel welcome and valued as a guest as always. I also want to extend my appreciation to the night manager Maria for her attentiveness and quick response to any requests or concerns I had during my stay. Her professionalism and dedication to ensuring a comfortable experience for guests did not go unnoticed. The F&B Manager Darina and her associate Yulia deserves special recognition for their exceptional service and attention towards the incredible experience. I am extremely glad with the fact that how she is concerned with every details to make the valued guest feel exceptional during the stay. Lastly, I would like to express my deepest gratitude towards Deputy GM Marina for her overall management of the hotel. Her leadership and commitment to guest satisfaction were evident throughout my stay, and I truly felt well taken care of under her supervision.

Dear Andy! Thank you very much for your glowing review regarding your stay at Novotel Moscow City! We are thrilled to hear that you have a great impression about your stay, as well as our hotel team! It is a pleasure for us to bring comfort and positive emotions to our Guests providing courteous, warm and welcoming service. We are glad that you highly evaluated our work! We are looking forward to welcoming you back at our hotel! Warmest regards, Irina Naumova Quality and Attitude Manager.

Fantastic place

Customer review rating 4.5/5

Anonymous Friends - 1/14/2024 Confirmed reviews ALL

Good location, near to a big mall ( 4 minutes of walk ) were everything you need is available.

Dear Saud! Thank you for your kind feedback. We are glad to know that you enjoyed your stay with us. Looking forward to welcoming you back. Sincerely, Irina Naumova Quality and Attitude Manager.

Well located

Customer review rating 4.0/5

Vitaly Y. Business - 12/9/2023 Confirmed reviews ALL

1. Process of lamp light replacement should be managed more effectively. 2. It is too noisy in the inner rooms - noise from events (bad sound isolation) 3. All other aspects are on the good level.

Dear Vitaly! Thank you for your kind feedback. We are glad to know that you enjoyed your stay with us. Looking forward to welcoming you back.

In partnership with  TripAdvisor

Web-users rating

Other web-users rate our hotel

• 852 reviews 9.4/10 Location
• 1,418 reviews 7.4/10 Room
• 1,231 reviews 8.7/10 Service
• 19 reviews 3.9/10 WiFi
• 877 reviews 9.6/10 Breakfast
• 504 reviews 7.8/10 Cleanliness
• 142 reviews 5.6/10 Amenities
• 106 reviews 9.5/10 Location
• 186 reviews 7.2/10 Room
• 167 reviews 9.1/10 Service
• 140 reviews 9.6/10 Breakfast
• 55 reviews 7.1/10 Cleanliness
• 9 reviews 5.5/10 Amenities
• 114 reviews 9.6/10 Location
• 199 reviews 5.9/10 Room
• 148 reviews 8/10 Service
• 122 reviews 9.4/10 Breakfast
• 67 reviews 7.3/10 Cleanliness
• 65 reviews 5.6/10 Comfort
• 25 reviews 5.1/10 Amenities
• 41 reviews 9.2/10 Location
• 115 reviews 6.5/10 Room
• 80 reviews 8.2/10 Service
• 50 reviews 9.8/10 Breakfast
• 38 reviews 7.8/10 Cleanliness
• 6 reviews 5.3/10 Amenities
• 35 reviews 9.5/10 Location
• 59 reviews 7/10 Room
• 52 reviews 8.7/10 Service
• 33 reviews 9.7/10 Breakfast
• 25 reviews 8/10 Cleanliness

Free: become a member

When making a booking at this hotel:

I earn Status & Rewards points

I can use my Rewards points

I benefit from advantages

I can take advantage of the Members' rate

Our other establishments nearby

ibis Moscow Kievskaya 3 stars

At 1.688 km

Novotel Moscow Kievskaya 4 stars

Aparthotel Adagio Moscow Kievskaya 4 stars

Mercure Arbat Moscow 4 stars

At 2.937 km

ibis Moscow Dynamo 3 stars

At 4.946 km

Novotel Moscow Centre 4 stars

At 5.358 km

Ibis budget Moscow Panfilovskaya 2 stars

At 6.247 km

Ibis Moscow Oktyabrskoye Pole 3 stars

Price from: 1 night for 1 person in the room category identified within the same price range, excluding additional services and breakfast. This refers to the lowest public price, including all taxes ( VAT and tourist tax included) for the accommodation concerned, found on https://all.accor.com/ site today, for a one-night stay in the next 20 days . Varies according to period and availability. The price is only guaranteed at the time of booking. All bookings (foreign) are payable in the local currency where the hotel is situated. Only the amount confirmed during the booking in the hotels local currency is guaranteed. An estimated conversion in your local currency may be given for reference but is not part of the contract. Your bank may charge you bank fees and/or exchange fees at the time of payment.

The Clinton-Yeltsin Moscow Summit, January 1994

Declassified transcripts show close cooperation on nuclear and regional security issues, rising concerns about failure of economic reform in Russia

Top Clinton advisor called Yeltsin “arguably your most important foreign counterpart”

Washington, D.C., January 25, 2024 - Declassified highest-level records from the Moscow summit 30 years ago this month detail U.S. President Bill Clinton’s strong personal support for Russian President Boris Yeltsin, their close cooperation on security issues, and deep concern about Yeltsin backtracking on economic reforms newly understood by the Clinton team as too “harsh” on the Russian people.

The documents include verbatim transcripts of Clinton’s two “one-on-one” discussions with Yeltsin, their trilateral discussion with Ukrainian President Leonid Kravchuk about removal of nuclear weapons from Ukraine, the detailed report from the U.S. Embassy Moscow on the dinner thrown by Yeltsin at his official dacha for Clinton, and the transcript of the expanded bilateral discussion between Clinton and Yeltsin on security issues.

The e-book includes an overview briefing memo for the President from national security adviser Anthony Lake, which describes Yeltsin as “arguably your most important foreign counterpart,” and the economic briefing memo to Clinton that admits that market reforms urged by the U.S. and implemented by Yeltsin failed to provide a social safety net for Russians, who reacted by voting against the reformers in the December 1993 parliamentary elections.

One highlight among the documents from January 1994 is the 12-page “eyes only” memo from Strobe Talbott to Secretary of State Warren Christopher, with Christopher’s extensive handwritten comments in the margins, including the admission that “set speeches” were “a real weakness” of his. Just a few days after being nominated to be Christopher’s deputy, a major promotion after less than one year as ambassador for the former Soviet republics, Talbott provides his boss with an almost anthropological account of Washington’s foreign policy village, with candid commentary on Russia and NATO policies (and their critics), on State Department personnel issues, and on internal tensions in the Clinton team. These included Lake’s “runs” at “knocking me out of Presidential events on Russia,” such as the upcoming Moscow one-on-ones. [1]

The new documents come from two major sources: a successful National Security Archive lawsuit against the State Department under the Freedom of Information Act and multiple declassification review requests filed at the Clinton Presidential Library. These records are highlights from the forthcoming 2,500-document declassified reference collection: U.S.-Russian Relations from the End of the Soviet Union to the Rise of Vladimir Putin , the next installment in the award-winning Digital National Security Archive series published by ProQuest.

The documents show the American team working hard to include multiple non-Yeltsin-centered events in the summit schedule. The U.S. ambassador, Thomas Pickering, hosted a reception at Spaso House for Clinton to meet oppositionists, excluding only Vladimir Zhirinovsky, leader of the extremist Liberal Democratic Party of Russia, the top vote-getter in the December legislative election. Clinton also addressed an audience of young Russians at the Ostankino television complex and met with the Patriarch of the Russian Orthodox Church, who had attempted to mediate the constitutional crisis between Yeltsin and the Supreme Soviet the previous year. [2]

Two of the documents, the Clinton-Kravchuk memcon at Kyiv’s Borispol Airport and the trilateral memcon with Clinton, Yeltsin and Kravchuk in Moscow, mark a key moment in the history of nuclear weapons in Ukraine. Traumatized by the 1986 Chernobyl explosion, the Ukrainian independence movement had pushed to remove Soviet nuclear weapons from Ukraine, and the newly independent state signed the Lisbon Protocol in May 1992 to become a non-nuclear party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (along with Belarus and Kazakhstan, which also inherited Soviet nukes). Ukraine had no capacity to service and maintain the nuclear warheads—which were reaching the end of their service lives and were thus mini-Chernobyls waiting to happen—and couldn’t afford to build a nuclear reprocessing cycle (the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences’ estimate was $3 billion), especially with the international sanctions that would have ensued. [3]

In order to remove the nukes, Ukraine needed compensation and security assurances; at the same time, some voices in the Ukrainian parliament, the Verkhovna Rada, argued for keeping the nukes. The Moscow summit documents, including the Trilateral Statement signed by the three leaders, show the first steps towards the ultimate deal. The U.S. put up $60 million to prime the pump; the Russians provided fuel assemblies blended down from warhead fissile material to fuel Ukrainian nuclear power plants; and the Ukrainians started shipping warheads to the Russians for reprocessing. Ukraine also received debt forgiveness for hundreds of millions of dollars in already supplied Russian oil and gas and security assurances that lasted until 2014 when Russia annexed Crimea. The Russian invasion of Ukraine, in 2022, popularized the notion that Ukraine should have kept its nukes, but the record shows that maintaining a nuclear arsenal wasn’t really an option for the country in 1994. [4]

The biggest worry among the Clinton team at the Moscow summit was not so much the Ukraine trilateral but the fate of economic and democratic reforms in Russia after the shock of the December elections. During the opening dinner at Yeltsin’s dacha on January 13, the Russian president referred to the leading reformer, former prime minister Yegor Gaidar, as the leader of the government party in the Duma, “clearly impl[ying] that Gaidar would be out of the government and work only in the Duma.” The next day, during the formal Kremlin dinner, Clinton’s aides heard from Gaidar that, actually, he was being fired, and others of his team were also on their way out. At the insistence of Treasury undersecretary Larry Summers, Clinton sought a final one-on-one with Yeltsin on January 15 to warn that “President Clinton’s credibility was connected to President Yeltsin’s indication that he would continue the reforms, which were linked to a specific team of people.” But, of course, that was for Yeltsin to decide. [5]

The Documents

Clinton Presidential Library

This cover memo from the national security adviser for Clinton’s briefing book on the Moscow Summit highlights the major differences from the two previous Clinton-Yeltsin meetings at Vancouver and Tokyo in 1993. The challenge “at this critical turning point,” according to Lake, will be to reaffirm “a close U.S.-Russia partnership built on a Russian commitment to democratic political and market reform.” The parliamentary elections in December—a shocking loss for the reformers—revealed that Russia was “deeply divided over the pace and direction of economic reform, the role and rights of Russia in the ‘Near Abroad,’” and how fast to “integrate with the West” at all.

Lake warns Clinton that Russian reform faces the criticism that “average Russians” are “worse off than when the USSR collapsed two years ago.” So the U.S. would have a twofold message both encouraging Yeltsin to continue privatization and macro reform and understanding the need for “greater targeted social investments,” even though the U.S. cannot design or fully fund those—“that is clearly Russia’s job.”

On the hopeful side, the Moscow trip is taking place in the middle of an intensive three-way diplomatic process with Ukraine, working out compensation from Russia for the rapidly wasting nuclear warheads left over in Ukraine from the Soviet Union—all targeted on the U.S. but reaching the end of their working lives. Lake tells Clinton that a successful resolution here “would be the crowning achievement of the summit, a victory for your nonproliferation policy” and “a strong public symbol of Russia’s willingness to work fairly with its most important neighbor.”

U.S. Department of State, National Security Archive FOIA

This 12-page “eyes only” memo to the Secretary of State is the first in a long series of candid briefing memos written by Strobe Talbott in his role as the number two official in the State Department. Written just four days after Talbott had been formally nominated to be Deputy Secretary, the memo leaves a wide margin for Christopher’s reactions, and asks if he wants more such frank missives. The Secretary scribbles “yes” on the first page and adds many more comments on other pages. Talbott displays the lively writing style developed in his previous two-decade tenure at TIME magazine, and captures Christopher’s attention with colorful details on personalities, on the administration’s critics and how to disarm them, on the internal policy conflicts, and with constructive suggestions for ways forward. While recognizing that the new deputy secretary role would involve many more responsibilities than just U.S.-Russia policy, Talbott makes sure to impress upon Christopher that Clinton himself wanted Talbott’s continuing close engagement on Russia, especially for Clinton-Yeltsin meetings such as the Moscow summit that month.

In this memo to the national security adviser on the eve of Clinton’s visit to Moscow, Talbott previews some of the most important issues the Russia side wants to raise during the summit—the future security arrangements in Europe. Talbott writes quite dismissively and negatively about a new European security initiative that Russian Foreign Minister Andrey Kozyrev presented in a German newspaper, which he called the “Partnership for United Europe.” The plan would subordinate NATO to the CSCE structures and strengthen the Russian role in building a new integrated Europe. Although the Clinton team stated publicly that a fully integrated Europe without new dividing lines was their goal, Talbott dismisses Kozyrev’s thoughts on Russian desire to “be the architect […] along with the U.S. of a completely new European security order,” saying that “it sticks in their craw that NATO appears poised to dictate the terms of the new order.”

Talbott’s early relationship with Kozyrev had been cordial and productive, but now his view of Kozyrev has changed completely. He sees the Russian foreign minister moving in a more nationalist direction partly as a result of the December elections and his own political interests. Talbott concludes that “Kozyrev has become part of the problem rather than part of the solution” and suspects that he was an unhelpful influence on Yeltsin during the last weeks of the trilateral process. He shares with Lake the talking points for Secretary Christopher’s upcoming meeting with Kozyrev where they were scheduled to discuss the Partnership for Peace and European security.

Strobe Talbott’s backstage version of this conversation, published in 2002, gave a colorful, conflict-ridden account of the Clinton stopover in Kyiv on the way to Moscow. But that version is not supported by the actual transcript, only declassified in 2018. According to Talbott, “Clinton and Christopher, neither of whom was in the habit of roughing up a head of state, decided to make an exception. They told Kravchuk in the bluntest of terms that if he backed out of the deal that had already been made it would be a major setback for Ukraine’s relations with both Russia and the U.S.” Kravchuk was “visibly shaken” in Talbott’s version.

The transcript (Talbott was not actually in the room, according to the list of participants on the memcon) shows far more diplomatic language, with Clinton praising Kravchuk’s “enormous vision and courage” and promising “to do everything I can for the people of Ukraine and for you, sir.” Clinton points to the $175 million in Nunn-Lugar funds coming to underwrite the nuclear dismantling and offers to persuade the G-7 and the IMF to develop ways to pay for energy imports (Ukraine’s were all from Russia and already indebted).

Kravchuk responds gratefully: “Certainly we should start our broader cooperation so that I can tell our people that after I took this position on the nuclear question, there was a change in attitude toward assistance to our country. That would help. When we have stabilization for our currency and private investment for Ukraine, then everyone will understand that the agreements signed by the three Presidents were the only possible step.” The only apparent moment of U.S. pressure comes when Christopher says the signing in Moscow will be “an historic event and a celebration. It will not be a negotiating session.” The conversation concludes with interesting commentary by Kravchuk on Russia to the effect that Yeltsin understands, “but there is no eternal president and we worry about expansion.”

While Yeltsin is eager to greet Bill Clinton in the Kremlin, the long-awaited state visit is happening in less-than-ideal circumstances. The December Duma elections brought a backlash against the democratic forces due to the harshness of economic reform and Yeltsin’s heavy-handed approach to the constitutional crisis. Clinton’s planned speech to the newly elected parliament had to be scrapped. Yeltsin starts the meeting talking about the composition of the new Duma saying that he does not “share the concern that is felt abroad about Zhirinovskiy.” Yeltsin gives a correct diagnosis that the Zhirinovsky vote was a response to economic hardship, that the people “didn’t vote for taking back Alaska, Ukraine and Crimea or for the fascism that he embodies but rather because they are unhappy.”

In response, and clearly in view of the future presidential election in Russia, Clinton gives his counterpart some sound political advice on how to work with the opponents and how to make his political program more appealing to people. He says that “the reformers’ campaign showed a recklessness,” comparing it to some U.S. Democrats. Clinton advises Yeltsin to come back to the image of the man on the tank and focus more on values, not programs. He offers Yeltsin advice from his political experts, suggesting he should send Gaidar or his other associates to Washington for a “quiet meeting,” which Yeltsin enthusiastically accepts.

Turning to economic reform, Yeltsin complains about the slow pace of G-7 and IMF assistance and the lack of U.S. investment in Russia and points to the continued existence of the Jackson-Vanik amendment. He says Russia does not “want aid since that can lead to an anti-Western flair-up.” He asks for investment, help in rescheduling of foreign debt, and to redirect 10% of the Nunn-Lugar program funding to Russian research institutes. Clinton expresses his continued support for the reform but names three issues that prevent him from moving more decisively in his Russia agenda— Russia’s arms sales to Iran, slowness in joining the Partnership for Peace, and lack of agreement on the withdrawal of Russian troops from the Baltic states.

This document is a placeholder for the first big economic discussion of the summit, the “First Expanded Bilateral” that took place on the morning of January 13, 1994. The highly professional staff at the Clinton Presidential Library have to date been unable to locate a transcript (memcon) of this meeting and speculate that perhaps one was not written up afterwards, perhaps due to a division of labor between the National Security Council staff, who would normally have taken the notes, and the Treasury Department personnel, who were also in attendance and were personally invested in the Yeltsin economic reform program.

Beforehand, the NSC and Treasury staff prepared Clinton for the meeting with this revealing briefing memo and talking points. The memo says, “The Parliamentary elections were a wake-up call generally, but specifically the Russian people view the government’s two-year attempt to begin a historic economic transition from command economics to a ‘Russian’ market economy as harsh and directly responsible for the decline in living standards during this period. Russia’s economic reforms have not succeeded on at least two fronts. They haven’t established a social safety net for the average Russian and have also not reduced subsidies to large state enterprises.”

Clinton’s main concern was to insist on continuing “bold economic reforms” while acknowledging “our understanding” of “greater emphasis on social welfare programs.” At the top of Clinton’s talking points was the affirmation “that reform program and team will stay in place.” That was not to be. In fact, during the summit the Americans learned that the leading reformers, Yegor Gaidar and Boris Fyodorov, were being fired by Yeltsin. Perhaps the Americans shouldn’t have been so surprised. Even Strobe Talbott had commented in December that the U.S. goal now after the elections was to promote “less shock and more therapy.” The remark “managed to infuriate both Russian liberals and my colleagues at Treasury,” Talbott later wrote; “it sounded to both groups that I too was blaming Gaidar and Fyodorov for the rise of Zhirinovsky and undercutting our own government’s insistence on rapid, disciplined structural reform and strict conditionality for IMF lending.” [6] Indeed.

President Clinton meets with the Russian Orthodox Patriarch in the hospital as part of the plan to widen his circle of Russian interlocutors and to appeal to the Russian believers. Clinton’s mother has just passed, and the Patriarch offers a prayer for her. Aleksiy expresses his church’s support for democratic reform in Russia and his concern about the results of the recent parliamentary elections. He delicately hints about the proliferation of various proselytizing preachers from the West, who flooded Russia in the early 1990s, which the official Orthodox church saw as a competing influence on Russians’ souls. Clinton responds that he is a Baptist himself (a denomination previously considered a sect in the USSR) and that he appreciates the religious liberty in Russia. He reminisces about his visit to the Novodevichy Monastery 24 years ago and his visit to St. Basil’s Cathedral earlier in the day. The U.S. president’s remarks are very brief but empathetic and respectful of Russian spirituality. It’s worth noting that the second Church official in attendance, Metropolitan Kirill, went on to become the Patriarch himself, blessing the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

The dinner at Yeltsin’s official dacha in Novo-Ogarevo features moose lips in wine sauce, Bill Clinton playing saxophone, and a most lavish 24-course dinner with lots of toasts. It was designed as a showcase of the U.S.-Russian partnership and a display of warm personal relationship between the two presidents. The cable drafted by Ambassador Pickering misdates the dinner, which took place on the evening of January 13. Among the many issues covered, most important were the Russian role in European security, the Partnership for Peace and the future expansion of NATO, and Russian policies in the near abroad.

Yeltsin reflects on the challenges of working with the new parliament and the changes he was planning to make in his cabinet. Clinton comes to the dinner straight from the Spaso House reception where he met with representatives of many Russian political parties and movements, most of whom were critical of Yeltsin’s policies. Yeltsin gives his counterpart a somewhat optimistic review of his prospects of working productively with the new parliament but mentions that Yegor Gaidar would have to step down and work in the Duma.

Turning to the security agenda, Yeltsin tells Clinton that his information about arms sales to Iran is incorrect and asks him if sanctions on Iraq could be eased so that Russia could collect some of the debt that Iraq still owed it. Clinton noted that if Iraq was permitted to sell oil, the falling oil prices would harm Russian interests. Defense Minister Grachev talks about military-to-military relations, his recent meetings with U.S. Defense Secretary Les Aspin, and his first call on the Partnership for Peace hotline on January 5, 1995. He wants to meet with the new U.S. Defense Secretary as soon as possible (retired Admiral Bobby Inman had been nominated by Clinton to succeed Aspin but later withdrew) and to brief the Secretary General of NATO on the new Russian military doctrine. Grachev is very pleased with the close cooperation with the U.S. military and even invites Clinton and Yeltsin to personally observe a planned bilateral military exercise in July 1994.

One of most important issues for the U.S. team, according to the scene-setter, is the deployment of Russian peace-keeping forces in the near abroad. This issue is painful for Yeltsin, who is trying to be a force for good in the former Soviet space. The Russian president talks about Russia’s constructive actions in Moldova and Georgia and his desire to stop bloodshed. He says that “allegations of imperial aspirations are harming us and are not correct.”

Yeltsin wants to speak about his favorite subject—U.S.-Russian partnership, and Russia’s relationship with NATO. In his memoir, Kozyrev wrote that Yeltsin was shocked by Clinton’s “not whether but when” statement in Prague about future NATO expansion, and even felt betrayed by Clinton. Here, however, Yeltsin says to Clinton “we certainly agree with you on NATO” but also states that “Russia has to be the first country to join NATO,” followed by other states from Central and Eastern Europe. He even proposes “a kind of cartel of the U.S., Russia and Europeans to help to ensure and improve world security.” Clinton’s response is very careful, mentioning Russian’s sense of greatness but not engaging on the idea of a cartel or Russia’s membership in NATO.

The Russian president expresses his deep appreciation of Clinton: “You come to Russia not to confront us, but with the affection and love of our people and with a sense of support for Russia.” In response, Clinton talks about their “relationship of trust and confidence” and the unique chance it creates if Russia stays the course: “we could guarantee the countries of Europe a century of peace or more.” Such were the high hopes of the 1990s.

This very brief (one might even say rushed) meeting between presidents Clinton, Kravchuk and Yeltsin is the formal event to present the “crowning achievement” of the summit—the Trilateral Statement on withdrawal of nuclear weapons from Ukraine. This meeting was preceded by months of work by diplomats from all three countries and was still in question as Clinton was flying to Europe. Yeltsin summarizes the details of the statement, emphasizing that “Russia and the U.S. will give [Ukraine] full guarantees of security.” Kravchuk confirms that “there is no alternative to nuclear disarmament” and pledges full cooperation with the trilateral process. Clinton commends Russia and Ukraine on their cooperation and praises the Trilateral Statement that “this agreement makes the world safer and each of our countries more secure.” Relieved that the agreement was finally in hand, he suggests that everybody has already said enough and they “should go sign the agreement.” Yeltsin suggests they exchange the letters spelling out each side’s commitments first.

Document 10

 Clinton Presidential Library

In his scene setter (Document 1) Tony Lake calls the prospective signing of the Trilateral Statement “the crowning achievement of the summit.” The U.S. team doubted that they would be able to sign it with the agreed wording even as they arrived in Moscow. Both the Ukrainians and the Russians were trying to reopen the text, but Clinton pushed back on both. [7] The historic agreement achieves the goal of Ukrainian nuclear disarmament as well as settling the issue of Russia’s payment for the uranium contained in the nuclear warheads that would be moved to Russia for dismantlement. Ukraine commits to eliminating all nuclear weapons on its territory by dismantling them and sending the warheads to Russia. Russia commits to providing Ukraine with fuel rods for civilian nuclear power plants using downgraded uranium from the warheads. The United States commits to providing assistance for dismantlement of nuclear weapons under the Nunn-Lugar Program. Ukraine is to get at least $175 million of this assistance. All three signators commit to treating each other as full and equal partners. The Annex specifies the security assurances that Russia and the United States gave Ukraine (these were later formalized in the Budapest Memorandum in December 1994). However, the assurances did not go beyond the commitments already contained in the text of the Helsinki Final Act and the Non-Proliferation Treaty. Russia violated its commitments in 2014 with the annexation of Crimea and again with the invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

Document 11

After the Trilateral Statement is signed, the entire Russian and U.S. security teams meet face to face to discuss dozens of issues on their agenda. Clinton starts by noting that the HEU agreement first discussed in Vancouver, under which the United Stated would purchase the uranium from nuclear warheads dismantled in Russia, is being signed later in the day. After mentioning START I, the U.S. president moves quickly to raise a very sensitive issue—biological weapons remaining from the Soviet program. His talking points from Anthony Lake instruct him to link the issue to Nunn-Lugar certification if Russia does not resolve bio concerns. Clinton reminds Yeltsin of his personal commitment to end the program and notes that U.S. experts believe that illegal work was still happening. Yeltsin and Defense Minister both deny that anything illegal is going on and “shake [their] head[s] vigorously.”

In the first part of the conversation, Yeltsin seems not fully engaged, saying almost nothing, stating that Russia has ratified the Chemical Weapons Convention (it had not) and sounding surprised when Clinton mentions Russian arms sales to Iran, Libya and North Korea. However, when he takes the floor, he is quite eloquent but prefers to talk about grand ideas and designs rather than specific issues. His favorite subject is how the U.S.-Russian partnership would transform the world, creating a “new system of international relations.” He suggests they should “propose an initiative to reshape world institutions such as the United Nations and the Conference for Security and Cooperation in Europe.” He sees a need to formulate an official document formalizing the U.S.-Russian partnership, sounding like a partnership between two superpowers (even while Russia, by 1994, was just a shadow of the former USSR). While Yeltsin wants to reshape the world and build new structures, the U.S. side is concerned about preserving and expanding its own main security structure—NATO. Clinton wants to be very careful about how they describe the partnership, so that other countries “don’t think we are dividing Europe.” Clinton expresses his commitment to a fully integrated Europe “for the first time in history” but does not engage with Yeltsin on his grand reformist designs.

The meeting is very productive in terms of achieving specific understandings on ABM, the need to ratify START II, Soviet troops in the Baltics and elimination of chemical weapons. Russian Defense Minister Pavel Grachev carries most of the arms-control and non-proliferation discussions for the Russian side.

Document 12

This last conversation was not planned, but Clinton requested it after he learned that Yeltsin was about to let go of some of his most committed reformers led by Yegor Gaidar, who would resign the day after the U.S. delegation left Moscow. Clinton (who does all the talking here) tells Yeltsin that he now understands better that Russian people were hurt by the reform, that “most ordinary citizens and some well-educated ones did not feel connected to what Yeltsin was doing,” and that they “did not feel that their lives had improved.” Still, he encouraged Yeltsin to try to keep the reformist team, among other things, because Clinton’s “credibility was connected to President Yeltsin’s indication that he would continue the reforms, which were linked to a specific team of people.” Departure of those people would hurt Clinton’s ability to deliver on promises of IMF credits and debt relief. Yeltsin replies only that “President Clinton saw the situation, and these difficulties did exist.”

[1] The most revealing insider account of U.S.-Russia policy in the 1990s is found in Strobe Talbott’s The Russia Hand (2002). The title refers not to Talbott himself, but rather to Bill Clinton, who personalized his support for Boris Yeltsin all the way to Yeltsin’s resignation in 1999, anointing his successor, Vladimir Putin.

[2] The Ostankino event with young people is the highlight of Clinton’s own account of the summit in his book, My Life (2004, pp. 570-71), while Talbott commented: “Watching Clinton prepare for and deliver this speech was both frightening and inspiring, in that it captured both his indiscipline and his genius,” scribbling amendments to his speech text in the car on the way. ( The Russia Hand , p. 115)

[3] The most thoughtful high-level Ukrainian account is in Volodymyr Horbulin, “Nuclear Disarmament of Ukraine,” pp. 240-254 of his memoir, My Journey In The Looking Glass (2019), translated by Sarah Dunn in the National Security Archive e-book, Nuclear Weapons and Ukraine , https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/nunn-lugar-russia-programs/2019-12-05/nuclear-weapons-ukraine . A rocket engineer, Horbulin served as Ukraine’s national security adviser and as head of the Ukrainian Academy of Sciences.

[4] The blow-by-blow of the extensive diplomacy involved, both bilaterally with Ukraine and trilaterally including Russia, is detailed in Steven Pifer, The Eagle and the Trident (2017), pp. 37-76, with reflections on this history post-Crimea. The best scholarly account is in Mariana Budjeryn, Inheriting the Bomb (2023).

[5] For the backstage story, see Strobe Talbott, The Russia Hand , pp. 117-118, including the commentary from Talbott’s counterpart, Yuri Mamedov: “You want us to be a democracy, so don’t be surprised when a president and a prime minister have to sacrifice a minister or two who are tarred with the brush of failed policies. This is real politics. At least we don’t shoot people.” For an indictment of the Gaidar program, see Peter Reddaway and Dmitri Glinski, The Tragedy of Russia’s Reforms (2001). For an invaluable oral history centering on Gaidar, see Petr Aven and Alfred Kokh, Gaidar’s Revolution (2015).

[6] See Strobe Talbott, The Russia Hand , pp. 106-107.

[7] For the details of Clinton’s pressure both on Kravchuk and on Yeltsin, see Strobe Talbott, The Russia Hand , pp. 112-113.