Project 955: Borei class SSBN

Serial Yasen-M

No info given yet.

verkhoturye51 wrote:You means increased from 1,5 bn to 3,5 bn?  

https://www.russiadefence.net/t1692p425-project-677-lada-class-submarine#250377

From what contract have you ever taken those figures verkhoturye51 ?

From what contract have you ever taken those figures verkhoturye51 ?

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/885.htm
https://www.rbth.com/defence/2017/04/03/the-russian-navy-unleashes-its-most-powerful-and-expensive-attack-sub_733357
https://iz.ru/news/680714

verkhoturye51 wrote:

From what contract have you ever taken those figures verkhoturye51 ?

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/885.htm
https://www.rbth.com/defence/2017/04/03/the-russian-navy-unleashes-its-most-powerful-and-expensive-attack-sub_733357
https://iz.ru/news/680714

verkhoturye51 i don't see any contract in those links.

The contract for the construction of пр. 885М submarine was signed in 2011, for a fixed amount of 164 billions rubles for 4 submarines (41 bl rubles or 640 ml dollars at today exchange rate) and 47 billion rubles for the first hull of the Ясень-М "Казань" (730 ml dollars at today exchange rate).

Now i want to know from where those figures balooned up to 3,5 billion dollars for пр. 885М submarine.....

In mine opinion is not inconceivable that some ignorant, or even worse some foreign-backed PR operative, had taken the entire amount for the program (included the figure for R&D and engineerization of the design's changes) meanly citing it at it was the cost of a SINGLE пр. 885М.

For a product, like пр. 885М that greatly exceed the capabilities of Virginia class in virtually all the physical fields metrics and also in dynamics performances a price of less than 1/3 is a very good deal (even if MoD had aimed and still aim at reduce the cost of the series).

Mindstorm wrote:

verkhoturye51 wrote:

From what contract have you ever taken those figures verkhoturye51 ?

https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/885.htm
https://www.rbth.com/defence/2017/04/03/the-russian-navy-unleashes-its-most-powerful-and-expensive-attack-sub_733357
https://iz.ru/news/680714

verkhoturye51 i don't see any contract in those links.

The contract for the construction of пр. 885М submarine was signed in 2011, for a fixed amount of 164 billions rubles for 4 submarines (41 bl rubles or 640 ml dollars at today exchange rate) and 47 billion rubles for the first hull of the Ясень-М "Казань" (730 ml dollars at today exchange rate).

Now i want to know from where those figures balooned up to 3,5 billion dollars for пр. 885М submarine.....

In mine opinion is not inconceivable that some ignorant, or even worse some foreign-backed PR operative, had taken the entire amount for the program (included the figure for R&D and engineerization of the design's changes) meanly citing it at it was the cost of a SINGLE  пр. 885М.

For a product, like  пр. 885М that greatly exceed the capabilities of Virginia class in virtually all the physical fields metrics and also in dynamics performances a price of less than 1/3 is a very good deal (even if MoD had aimed and still aim at reduce the cost of the series).

 

Thank you for a dose of reality. There is too much garbage on this board derived from pro-NATO media propaganda.

kvs wrote:Thank you for a dose of reality.   There is too much garbage on this board derived from pro-NATO media propaganda.

Agree 100%. Given the relative purchasing power between Russia and US, spending the equivalent of 3.4B USD on the 885M is not far from the US spending 14B on their latest Robo-Carrier. It's clearly absurd that this sum is for a single boat, yet Atlantacist media stenographers (both in the West and their 5th columnist counterparts in Russia itself) happily regurgitate the BS for their weekly allotment of Judas coin.

Eventually the truth will become undeniable, but by then the Scribblers for Empire will have moved on to the latest disinfo, and as we all know, they NEVER look back and admit past distortions.

885М that greatly exceed the capabilities of Virginia class in virtually all the physical fields metrics and also in dynamics performances wrote:

No, Virginia is quieter. It has a pump jet instead of a traditional screw. It probably has better electronic equipment.

I remember that the Russian mod compared the Russians and foreign weapons some months ago, I can't find the links but Vesti made videos about that...



Yasen-M costs 53% less than the noisy Virginia! How much costs  the noisy-Virginia?

US are getting 1 Virginia per year. And they are not noisy.

The US is currently building 11 Virginia class submarine . They build them much faster than Russia 885M. Now they have 17 submarines and Russia has only two 885 project    

For a product, like  пр. 885М that greatly exceed the capabilities of Virginia class in virtually all the physical fields metrics and also in dynamics performances a price of less than 1/3 is a very good deal (even if MoD had aimed and still aim at reduce the cost of the series).

Yes Mindstorm it appears that 47 bn rub is price formed in 2005, before the high inflation era. Then before signing 2011 contract Sevmash wanted a tripple increase to 112 bn rub, which ministry of defence refused to pay and contract was signed for 47 bn rub.

Isos wrote:US are getting 1 Virginia per year. And they are not noisy.

US Navy is procuring 2 "Virginia" class SSN at year since 2011, therefore in the next years we will see the introduction in service of two SSN of the series for year.

The ready formation of an effcient and standardized chain production of the main component basis (including the increase in size of the bow compartment hull pieces ,to reduce time and costs of making) for this class has been, by far, the greatest achievement of the program, for which both the scientifical and economic management of the project has been awarded several times.

From the management and engineerization of the production of Virginia there is only to learn and imitate where possible.


If we talk instead of the in-built features of the submarine itself (both in the physical fields metrics that in dynamic and sensor suit, even more for the improved пр.885М) we can very confidently say that our designers at СПМБМ "Малахит" have greatly outpaced theris over-ocean counterparts; in a duel situation against a Virginia class, discounting any other external variable, the defeat chances would be massively unbalanced in favour of "Малахит" product.

Naturally : "Quantity has a quality all its own", therefore the solution to the chronical problems in the formation of an efficient industrial basis for the chain production of main marine construction components must become a true central priority for the reform of that field now in course.


Returning to the question of the cost of Virginia class , those are the typical, largely over-inflated, ones characteristic of today US military industry ($2,8 billions for each submarine of the former design and $3,2 billions each for the new with the VPM addition), 3-4 times at least the cost of a пр.885М.


Latest info (16 April 2019) from Congressional service on Virginia class acquisition

https://fas.org/sgp/crs/weapons/RL32418.pdf

If the official price of the Virginia is 2.8 Billions and the Russian MOD says  Yasen-M costs 53%...1.5 Billions, not 740 millions, not 3.5 Billions

I was obviously joking with the noisy-Virginia, but...

Developer "Borei" compared it with "Virginia"

MOSCOW, December 17 - RIA News . Russian strategic submarine of the project 955 "Borey" produces two times less noise than the American multi-purpose submarine of the type "Virginia", said the general director of the Kurchatov Institute, who participated in the development of nuclear submarines, Alexander Blagov.
"Virginia" was adopted by the US Navy in 2004, "Borey" adopted by the Russian Navy in 2013.

The noise of the fourth-generation atomic submarine Borey is two times less than that of the American Virginia," Blagov said on Monday during the round table "Submarine fleet to protect Russia's national interests."

https://ria.ru/20181217/1548089645.html

Edit: it probably had a price of 740 million dollars before sanctions, Russia mod don't pay his weapons in dollars

Edit2: if we convert the rubles to dollars we get that in 2011 the price in dollars was ~1.6 Billions and now ~740 millions, maintaining the 47Billion rubles price

Another myth bites the dust!
Mindstorm was correct apologize

In what 885M has such an advantage over Virginia?

in a duel situation against a Virginia class, discounting any other external variable, the defeat chances would be massively unbalanced in favour of "Малахит" product.

Who cares about that "duel". US has 50 SSN and will use all of them, not only 2 because russia has 2 ready Yassen.

It's 1 vs 25 in this case.

And just like a m-60 can destroy an armata or a t-64 can destroy an m1a2, or like a mig-21 can destroy a f-22 external conditions matters and even a LA class can destroy Yasen. Even luck matters. The more ships they have the more chances they have to win.

Developer "Borei" compared it with "Virginia"

What are you expecting him to say ? Those words have no value.

If you ask Virginia's developer he will tell you the same.

And none of them will show you any real data.

Isos wrote:Who cares about that "duel". US has 50 SSN and will use all of them, not only 2 because russia has 2 ready Yassen. It's 1 vs 25 in this case.

Heh?

They've got:

• Log Angeles class: 32 in commission
  
• Ohio class: 18 in commission
  
• Virginia class: 17 in commission
  

They're planning to phase out Log Angeles class subs and replacing them with 66 planned Virginia class subs.

The Russian fleet is a little bit more diverse:

• Typhoon class: 1 in commission
  
• Delta class: 7 in commission
  
• Borei class: 3 in commission
  
• Oscar II class: 8 in commission
  
• Yasen class: 1 in commission
  
• Sierra class: 3 in commission
  
• Victor class: 3 in commission
  
• Akula class: 10 in commission
  
• Kilo class: 15 in commission
  
• Varshavyanka class: 6 in commission
  
• Lada class: 1 in commission
  

That's a total of 58 submarines. Versus the 67 submarines of the United States, which also have to deal with several other countries, in addition to guarding CSG's.

To put things into future perspective, they currently plan to have a total of:

• Nuclear ballistic: 10 (Borei) subs
  
• Nuclear cruise: 10 (Yasen) subs
  
• Attack subs: 34 (Kilo) + 12 (Lada) subs = 46 total
  

Which brings the total of new submarines that will continue prospective service for quite a while up to 66. They will likely replace older Kilo-class submarines with new designs and build them accordingly.

Effectively nothing really changes. Except that China's growing it's navy at such speeds that soon Russia and US combined will not be able to catch up. With the way things are going it's not Russia that the United States should worry about, it's China. And it's currently in the phase of building ships to defend it's trade-routes.

Big_Gazza wrote:Eventually the truth will become undeniable, but by then the Scribblers for Empire will have moved on to the latest disinfo, and as we all know, they NEVER look back and admit past distortions.

Oh they do, sometimes.

But then they just keep on doing it

Will y'all just knock it off already with Yasens and Virginias?

This is Borei thread, you not only have wrong sub type, you got the whole segment wrong

Thats probably my fault for suggesting Borei-K could allow a simpler, cheaper Husky

Actually I remember a suggestion on a Russian forum that instead of having 6-8 SSBNs that strategic ballistic missiles should be shared around every Russian sub platform... so every SSGN and indeed SSBN would carry only two SLBMs in the sail area because of its height without making the sub too much bigger and bulkier so every sub can carry SLBMs...

It means that their eggs are spread out over an enormous number of baskets and would be much harder to defeat in a first strike attempt to disable Russia.

It would only take seconds to launch the missiles and with proper compartmentalisation the two missiles could even be launched from a sub that has already been hit by enemy torpedoes and is in the process of sinking...

The location of the sub and range of the missiles would determine the range of targets it could engage, but having atmosphere skipping avangard warheads allowing range extensions of thousands of kms then perhaps total actual ranges of 20,000km could be possible, which means attacks on the US from the Indian ocean or pretty much anywhere else...

955


955A

955


955A

GarryB wrote:Actually I remember a suggestion on a Russian forum that instead of having 6-8 SSBNs that strategic ballistic missiles should be shared around every Russian sub platform... so every SSGN and indeed SSBN would carry only two SLBMs in the sail area because of its height without making the sub too much bigger and bulkier so every sub can carry SLBMs...

It means that their eggs are spread out over an enormous number of baskets and would be much harder to defeat in a first strike attempt to disable Russia.

It would only take seconds to launch the missiles and with proper compartmentalisation the two missiles could even be launched from a sub that has already been hit by enemy torpedoes and is in the process of sinking...

The location of the sub and range of the missiles would determine the range of targets it could engage, but having atmosphere skipping avangard warheads allowing range extensions of thousands of kms then perhaps total actual ranges of 20,000km could be possible, which means attacks on the US from the Indian ocean or pretty much anywhere else...

The SSBN is a strategic asset, putting it at risk of discovery to operate in a conventional role is not something we want to be doing with the guaranteeor of our sovereignty. It's job is to remain undiscovered so it can play the deterrent role it serves.

The other advantage of having all of the missiles on one platform is the saturation effect of the attack. If you split them up getting to the target at different times from different directions in smaller numbers, the saturation of defences is lost.

Is the A version longer ? It looks like a new typhoon with tubes for BM in the front.

Also this pic


And wiki has these



Its a lot more blended & stern area much less prominent.