Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Project 667BDR(M): Delta III/IV class

    Share

    rambo54

    Posts : 138
    Points : 142
    Join date : 2014-04-01

    Re: Project 667BDR(M): Delta III/IV class

    Post  rambo54 on Sun Aug 16, 2015 5:36 pm

    I know -
    but it's still Delta IV (Stretched)
    misplaced?
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10778
    Points : 11257
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Project 667BDR(M): Delta III/IV class

    Post  George1 on Sun Aug 16, 2015 9:32 pm

    rambo54 wrote:I know -
    but it's still Delta IV (Stretched)
    misplaced?

    no its ok, i just reported some info


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10778
    Points : 11257
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Project 667BDR(M): Delta III/IV class

    Post  George1 on Fri Oct 23, 2015 9:17 am



    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov


    rambo54

    Posts : 138
    Points : 142
    Join date : 2014-04-01

    BS-64

    Post  rambo54 on Sat Jun 04, 2016 6:11 pm

    seems that Severodvinsk got new image update on GE exposing the BS-64
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10778
    Points : 11257
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Project 667BDR(M): Delta III/IV class

    Post  George1 on Wed Oct 12, 2016 3:21 pm

    Russian Pacific Fleet nuclear sub successfully live-fires sea-launched ICBM

    The nuclear sub’s successful test-firing showed high level of the Pacific Fleet submarine forces’ readiness

    MOSCOW, October 12. /TASS/. The Russian Pacific Fleet’s Project 667BDR (Kalmar class) Georgy Pobedonosets nuclear submarine has successfully live-fired a sea-launched intercontinental ballistic missile from the Sea of Okhotsk at the Chizha practice range in north Russia, the press office of Russia’s Defense Ministry said on Wednesday.

    "The launch was carried out from the submerged position. The missile’s warhead arrived at the Chizha practice range in north Russia at the designated time," the press office said.

    The nuclear sub’s successful test-firing showed "the high level of the Pacific Fleet submarine forces’ readiness and confirmed the efficiency of the system of the sea-based strategic nuclear forces’ combat control," the Defense Ministry said.

    "The actions of the commander and the crew of the nuclear submarine Georgy Pobedonosets have been recognized as professional and competent. The crew is ready to accomplish tasks as part of the constant alert forces," the Defense Ministry said.


    More:
    http://tass.com/defense/906014?_ga=1.102415937.1337049799.1447427261


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10778
    Points : 11257
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Project 667BDR(M): Delta III/IV class

    Post  George1 on Sat Jan 21, 2017 3:29 pm

    Service Life Extension of Project 667BDR & 667BDRM Submarines Makes No Sense - Rubin CEO

    The extension of the Project 667BDR and Project 667BDRM submarines’ service life makes no sense as they do not meet future requirements, CEO of Russia’s Rubin Central Design Bureau for Marine Engineering Igor Vilnit said. Vilnit made this statement in an interview with Rambler News Service.


    Project 667BDR Delta III SSBN Submarine k433 Svyatoy Georgiy Pobedonosets RussiaProject 667BDR SSBN "Svyatoy Georgiy Pobedonosets" (K-433). Russian Navy picture.

    "Considering the potential service life extension, the ‘youngest’ submarines have been operational for almost 30 years. The stealth of these submarines does not always meet present-day requirements, let alone future ones. Thus, the extension of their service life is unreasonable," Vilnit said.

    According to him, the Project 966 submarine fleet is adequate both to economic and national security situations.

    "Can we continue to cut the number of strategic submarines without reducing the effectiveness of deterrence? Unlikely," the CEO said.

    "Our country’s political situation and geographical position force our Northern and Pacific Fleets to operate strategic submarines. If their number continues to decrease, we may face an unpleasant situation - there will be no submarine at sea and the grouping’s combat effectiveness and, as a result, deterrence effectiveness will decline," he added.

    The Project 667BDR nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine is designed to destroy the enemy’s strategic facilities. It can also launch torpedoes to fight surface and underwater targets.

    The Project 667BDRM nuclear-powered submarine is armed with 16 intercontinental ballistic missiles of various types, as well as four nose-based 533mm torpedo systems.

    http://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2017/january-2017-navy-naval-forces-defense-industry-technology-maritime-security-global-news/4812-service-life-extension-of-project-667bdr-667bdrm-submarines-makes-no-sense-rubin-ceo.html


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov

    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5760
    Points : 5864
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Project 667BDR(M): Delta III/IV class

    Post  PapaDragon on Sat Jan 21, 2017 6:52 pm


    What are the odds of these Deltas being converted into arsenal ships/missile farms?

    They may no longer pass the mustard as SSBNs but having 50+ Kalibr missiles on proven available ship with skeleton crew will definitely come in handy in the era of neocolonial wars we have boldly entered.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 971
    Points : 969
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Project 667BDR(M): Delta III/IV class

    Post  Isos on Sat Jan 21, 2017 7:50 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    What are the odds of these Deltas being converted into arsenal ships/missile farms?

    They may no longer pass the mustard as SSBNs but having 50+ Kalibr missiles on proven available ship with skeleton crew will definitely come in handy in the era of neocolonial wars we have boldly entered.

    The crew will be probably send on a Borei submarine. Better go for a converted Borei class. The price would be the same as they would probably upgrade the Delta's accoustic signature which is not as good in the middle of pacific as it is in the north under the ice.

    Moreover, they are planning to do it with oscars and all their futur ships will have UKSK for lunching cruise missiles.

    Arrow

    Posts : 163
    Points : 163
    Join date : 2012-02-12

    Re: Project 667BDR(M): Delta III/IV class

    Post  Arrow on Sun Jan 22, 2017 10:13 am

    Better go for a converted Borei class. wrote:

    Borey has a problem with Bulava missile.
    avatar
    Viktor

    Posts : 5669
    Points : 6312
    Join date : 2009-08-25
    Age : 37
    Location : Croatia

    Re: Project 667BDR(M): Delta III/IV class

    Post  Viktor on Sun Jan 22, 2017 10:54 am

    Arrow wrote:Borey has a problem with Bulava missile.

    What problem? Its being solved.

    The thing is that Rubin thinks its more reasonable to allocate more funds for 5th gen subs than modernization of the projects development of the 70ies

    especially when you have limited resources and once Boreis are here to stay and I agree with them. Still Delta class could still have its useful applications.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5760
    Points : 5864
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Project 667BDR(M): Delta III/IV class

    Post  PapaDragon on Sun Jan 22, 2017 12:27 pm

    Viktor wrote:
    Arrow wrote:Borey has a problem with Bulava missile.

    What problem? Its being solved.

    The thing is that Rubin thinks its more reasonable to allocate more funds for 5th gen subs than modernization of the projects development of the 70ies

    especially when you have limited resources and once Boreis are here to stay and I agree with them. Still Delta class could still have its useful applications.

    That is what I was talking about. They are poor SSBNs by today's standards due to noise but they can used as arsenal ships. Noise would not matter in this role.

    And when I say that I do not mean convert them into attack subs like Isos assumed.  They can't be used for that (too loud and slow)

    I mean replace ICBM tubes with UKSK launchers (a lot of them) staff them with basic crew (targets will be received from other ships and many other functions will not be needed in this role) and use them as mobile warehouse for LACMs. They can be as loud as surface vessels in this role but it would be irelevant since diving would no longer be priority because they would be practically used as surface ships.

    Just look at Syria. One cruiser and pair of frigates or corvettes supported by this modified sub would be very useful. Ships provide data, sub stays behind and launches missiles. Once it's out of missiles it goes back to port while other ships stay on duty with full load of their missiles loaded and ready.

    They would not be as useful in near-peer conflicts but they would be great for these low-tier wars. Three ships instead of whole group. Especially when you take Russia's lack of aircraft carriers into account. And if they develop some cheaper simpler LACM even better. Makes you think?

    Scraping these ships would be wasteful. They could be used for something else as well like mothership for spy subs (e.g. Podmoskovlye). There should be other options as well.
    avatar
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 867
    Points : 885
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Project 667BDR(M): Delta III/IV class

    Post  Big_Gazza on Mon Jan 23, 2017 3:57 am

    PapaDragon wrote:
    That is what I was talking about. They are poor SSBNs by today's standards due to noise but they can used as arsenal ships. Noise would not matter in this role.

    And when I say that I do not mean convert them into attack subs like Isos assumed.  They can't be used for that (too loud and slow)

    I mean replace ICBM tubes with UKSK launchers (a lot of them) staff them with basic crew (targets will be received from other ships and many other functions will not be needed in this role) and use them as mobile warehouse for LACMs. They can be as loud as surface vessels in this role but it would be irelevant since diving would no longer be priority because they would be practically used as surface ships.

    Just look at Syria. One cruiser and pair of frigates or corvettes supported by this modified sub would be very useful. Ships provide data, sub stays behind and launches missiles. Once it's out of missiles it goes back to port while other ships stay on duty with full load of their missiles loaded and ready.

    They would not be as useful in near-peer conflicts but they would be great for these low-tier wars. Three ships instead of whole group. Especially when you take Russia's lack of aircraft carriers into account. And if they develop some cheaper simpler LACM even better.  Makes you think?

    Scraping these ships would be wasteful. They could be used for something else as well like mothership for spy subs (e.g. Podmoskovlye). There should be other options as well.

    Agreed, particularly with the Delfin boats. I think the Kalmars are long in the tooth, but depending on their condition could still be useful conversions for special purposes like the Orenburg as a mini-sub carrier).

    Even in a near-peer conflict, Delfin SSGN conversions with 2500km range Kalibres would be useful for long-range land-attack platforms when operating deep within Russian waters. If the RuN can provide appropriate targetting and mid-course corrections, they would be useful for stand-off mass salvo attacks against HATO surface units/formations. Three Kalibres per Sineva silo (should be plausible) gives 48 missiles per hull, a strike force that would keep HATO war(crime) planners up with some sleepless nights, bless their little psychopathic souls...
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16887
    Points : 17495
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Project 667BDR(M): Delta III/IV class

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jan 23, 2017 7:14 am

    Well they might not be as quiet as newer subs but an arsenal ship with the sub equivalent of UKSK tubes could easily be used in a conventional war as a bomb truck with 3000km range land attack cruise missiles but could be used in WWIII with supersonic and hypersonic anti ship missiles as a sort of mobile coastal battery...

    No carrier would get very close with that sort of threat around...

    A skeleton crew could be used as targets could be detected via satellite (ie carriers and carrier groups) and the target data could be used to position the sub for a launch if the targets try to move too close...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5760
    Points : 5864
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Project 667BDR(M): Delta III/IV class

    Post  PapaDragon on Mon Jan 23, 2017 7:56 pm

    GarryB wrote:Well they might not be as quiet as newer subs but an arsenal ship with the sub equivalent of UKSK tubes could easily be used in a conventional war as a bomb truck with 3000km range land attack cruise missiles but could be used in WWIII with supersonic and hypersonic anti ship missiles as a sort of mobile coastal battery...

    No carrier would get very close with that sort of threat around...

    A skeleton crew could be used as targets could be detected via satellite (ie carriers and carrier groups) and the target data could be used to position the sub for a launch if the targets try to move too close...

    Exactly. Although anti-ship function would be a stretch in today's environment but since launchers are universal it is default secondary function anyway.

    Sort of like discount Zumwalt. Not that Russia needs one but if you already have old sub that works why not use it.

    It covers basic two functions that Elmo has:

    Land attack missiles: whole lot of them even if they just stuff Kalibr adapters in Sineva tubes. Even more if they replace Sineva tubes with mucho UKSK.

    Low observability: once it's submerged no radar will detect it, naturally. Heck, that's even more stealth than Elmo right there. Very Happy

    And as a bonus it has sonar and torpedo tubes for basic self-defense against other vessels should SHTF. More than Zumwalt when you think about it. Not bad for old and (by now) cheap to operate sub.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10778
    Points : 11257
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Project 667BDR(M): Delta III/IV class

    Post  George1 on Fri Feb 17, 2017 2:43 pm

    Ryazan Project 667BDR submarine is back in service

    One of the three remaining Project 667BDR submarines, Ryazan, has returned to its base in Vilyuchinsk after an overhaul at the Zvezda plant in Vladivostok.

    The submarine was transferred to the Pacific from the Northern Fleet in 2008. It began its overhaul in 2012 and its return to service was delayed a number of times.

    Ryazan is an old submarine - it began service in 1982. It is not clear what is the reason submarines of this class are kept in service, but they seem to be doing reasonably well. Each submarine carries 16 R-29R missiles with three warheads, so the return of Ryazan will increase the New START warhead count.

    http://russianforces.org/blog/2017/02/ryazan_project_667bdr_submarin.shtml


    _________________
    "There's no smoke without fire.", Georgy Zhukov


    Sponsored content

    Re: Project 667BDR(M): Delta III/IV class

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Mon Dec 18, 2017 12:24 am