The method of propulsion does not matter. It could be coal and still be an effective warship.
I disagree. I doubt it could be effective. Engineering does matter, particularly in naval operations and warfare where critical functions like damage control make the difference between dead in the water taking on water, or continuing the mission.
There are some things the Soviets/Russians are good at, but naval aviation is not one of them. If propulsion is a flaw in this vessel, it is a gigantic flaw.
And if that major, most important aspect is flawed, how many other things, like firefighting infrastructure, ventilation, or just plain quality of work are critically flawed, just waiting to rear their heads at an inopportune time?
My guess is a lot. Doesn’t mean the US vessels are perfect, but they do work.
Actually, it does matter. The spankingly new USS Arizona was not sent to Europe during WWI, mostly for the lack of readily available fuel oil in Britain at the time.
Not so with the older, coal-fired BBs.