Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Share

    Arrow

    Posts : 150
    Points : 150
    Join date : 2012-02-12

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Arrow on Sat Apr 01, 2017 9:27 am

    Interesting why Russia doesn't use pump jet propulsion which generate less noise. All modern nuclear submarine use this propulsor. Astute, Virgina, Borey, Le Triomphant.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16375
    Points : 16990
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Sat Apr 01, 2017 10:09 am

    The Russians have plenty of experience with pump jets... they tested them on a modified Kilo class sub for several years...


    _________________
    “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

    Arrow

    Posts : 150
    Points : 150
    Join date : 2012-02-12

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Arrow on Sat Apr 01, 2017 10:21 am

    But the pump jet generate loss noise than screw. Russia use this propel in project 955. Of course this is more expensive.
    avatar
    TheArmenian

    Posts : 1708
    Points : 1865
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  TheArmenian on Sat Apr 01, 2017 10:29 am

    Arrow wrote:Interesting why Russia doesn't use pump jet propulsion which generate less noise. All modern nuclear submarine use this propulsor. Astute, Virgina, Borey, Le Triomphant.

    Pump jets are a method to avoid the cavitation noise from propellers.
    Cavitation noise is inversely proportional to depth at which the submarine sails.

    For example:
    At a given depth, cavitation noise is generated once the speed reaches a certain level.
    At lower depths, the same cavitation noise will start only at higher speeds.
    At 500 m depth there is virtually no cavitation noise even at high speeds.

    For strategic subs (SSBNs) who have to go to shallow depths to fire their Ballistic Missiles, pump-jets are a good idea (although they penalize performance). Hence, the Russians are equipping their Borey class SSBNs with pump-jets.
    Attack submarines (SSNs), usually operate at lower depths where cavitation noise is a much lesser problem. In order not to sacrifice performance, the Russians are staying away from pump-jets in the Yasen class submarines.


    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 470
    Points : 466
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Interesting why Russia doesn't use pump jet propulsion which generate less noise.

    Post  Singular_Transform on Sat Apr 01, 2017 11:42 am

    TheArmenian wrote:
    Arrow wrote:Interesting why Russia doesn't use pump jet propulsion which generate less noise. All modern nuclear submarine use this propulsor. Astute, Virgina, Borey, Le Triomphant.

    Pump jets are a method to avoid the cavitation noise from propellers.
    Cavitation noise is inversely proportional to depth at which the submarine sails.

    For example:
    At a given depth, cavitation noise is generated once the speed reaches a certain level.
    At lower depths, the same cavitation noise will start only at higher speeds.
    At 500 m depth there is virtually no cavitation noise even at high speeds.

    For strategic subs (SSBNs) who have to go to shallow depths to fire their Ballistic Missiles, pump-jets are a good idea (although they penalize performance). Hence, the Russians are equipping their Borey class SSBNs with pump-jets.
    Attack submarines (SSNs), usually operate at lower depths where cavitation noise is a much lesser problem. In order not to sacrifice performance, the Russians are staying away from pump-jets in the Yasen class submarines.




    Pump jet has an optimal speed, above that the prupulsion will generate more noise than without it, and will slow done the submarine.

    Additionaly the Russian akula/yassen submariens operating around 1000 meters deep, the others are operating half of this deep.

    The only exeption is the Seawolf, that could go as deep as the akulas/yassens.

    The Los angeles is inferrior compred to the seawolf/akula/yassen. Only advantage is it is cheaper .
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10350
    Points : 10821
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  George1 on Mon Apr 03, 2017 3:06 am

    Korolev on New Submarines
    Posted on March 31, 2017 | 1 Comment

    At today’s launch of Russia’s first proyekt 885M or Yasen-M SSN Kazan, Navy CINC Admiral Vladimir Korolev said the third Yasen-M, Krasnoyarsk, will be launched in 2019. But he didn’t mention the second, Novosibirsk.

    According to RIA Novosti, Korolev also indicated that the sixth Yasen-M (seventh Yasen overall) will be laid down this summer, and will be named Ulyanovsk.

    Korolev also said the first modernized proyekt 955A or Borey A SSBN Knyaz Vladimir will be launched this summer. It will be the fourth Borey overall, and will carry the improved Bulava-M SLBM.

    At the launch ceremony for Kazan, the Navy CINC reported that:

    “Last year we reached the same number of underway days which existed before the post-Soviet period. That is more than 3,000 days at sea for Russia’s submarine fleet. It’s a wonderful indicator.”

    While launch is a very significant milestone in submarine production, Kazan still faces a lengthy period of pierside fitting out, factory trials, and state testing.

    https://russiandefpolicy.blog/2017/03/31/korolev-on-new-submarines/


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

    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 10350
    Points : 10821
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  George1 on Thu May 25, 2017 2:27 am

    "Russia's naval nuclear forces have nine strategic submarines that provide continuous military patrols in the sea. The Russian Navy is also planning to increase the number of strategic nuclear submarines to 13, including seven 'Boreys' with 'Bulava' missiles," Shoigu said.

    https://sputniknews.com/military/201705241053929379-russia-strategic-submarines/


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


    nastle77

    Posts : 193
    Points : 249
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    SLBM in anti-ship role

    Post  nastle77 on Thu Jun 15, 2017 6:03 am

    Is it atleast theoretically possible to use SS-N-20 and SS-N-23 missiles of the Delta IV and Typhoon class SSBN in the anti-ship role ?

    From what I could find their CEP is 500 m , this may not be accurate enough to hit an individual shipon the high seas but what about exploding it about the location of the SAG, knocking out the ECM and making it more vulnerable to cruise missile strikes ?

    These SLBM had multiple MIRV, could they increase the changes of having a nuclear blast as close to the location of a SAG as possible ?

    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5280
    Points : 5386
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  PapaDragon on Thu Jun 15, 2017 12:34 pm

    nastle77 wrote:Is it atleast theoretically possible to use SS-N-20 and SS-N-23 missiles of the Delta IV and Typhoon class SSBN in the anti-ship role ?

    .........


    Theoretically yes (a lot of stuff is possible in theory) but practically why bother?

    You have far better platforms for dealing with surface threats (nukes and all) and Deltas have more important roles to fulfill.

    They do have 3 older Deltas that are deemed too noisy even for SSBNs but it would make more sense to convert them into land attack ships by installing Kalibr LACMs instead of ICBMs. Far better than scraping them (they still sail and dive no problem)

    It would also trim down their crew complement significantly, probably operational costs as well. They would be very useful for dealing with low priority third world issues.

    nastle77

    Posts : 193
    Points : 249
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  nastle77 on Thu Jun 15, 2017 1:29 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:Is it atleast theoretically possible to use SS-N-20 and SS-N-23 missiles of the Delta IV and Typhoon class SSBN in the anti-ship role ?

    .........


    Theoretically yes (a lot of stuff is possible in theory) but practically why bother?

    You have far better platforms for dealing with surface threats (nukes and all) and Deltas have more important roles to fulfill.

    They do have 3 older Deltas that are deemed too noisy even for SSBNs but it would make more sense to convert them into land attack ships by installing Kalibr LACMs instead of ICBMs. Far better than scraping them (they still sail and dive no problem)

    It would also trim down their crew complement significantly, probably operational costs as well. They would be very useful for dealing with low priority third world issues.

    Would it not be worth it if an entire SAG is wiped out by a single and couple of SSN20 missiles
    Esp if other platforms have been destroyed by the enemy like slava sovermenny nanuchka etc
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5280
    Points : 5386
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  PapaDragon on Thu Jun 15, 2017 1:47 pm

    nastle77 wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:Is it atleast theoretically possible to use SS-N-20 and SS-N-23 missiles of the Delta IV and Typhoon class SSBN in the anti-ship role ?

    .........


    Theoretically yes (a lot of stuff is possible in theory) but practically why bother?

    You have far better platforms for dealing with surface threats (nukes and all) and Deltas have more important roles to fulfill.

    They do have 3 older Deltas that are deemed too noisy even for SSBNs but it would make more sense to convert them into land attack ships by installing Kalibr LACMs instead of ICBMs. Far better than scraping them (they still sail and dive no problem)

    It would also trim down their crew complement significantly, probably operational costs as well. They would be very useful for dealing with low priority third world issues.

    Would it not be worth it if an entire SAG is wiped out by a single and couple of  SSN20 missiles
    Esp if other platforms have been destroyed by the enemy like slava sovermenny nanuchka etc

    What you describe is full blown nuclear war. If it comes to that Navies will be pretty irelevant.

    nastle77

    Posts : 193
    Points : 249
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  nastle77 on Thu Jun 15, 2017 5:00 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:Is it atleast theoretically possible to use SS-N-20 and SS-N-23 missiles of the Delta IV and Typhoon class SSBN in the anti-ship role ?

    .........


    Theoretically yes (a lot of stuff is possible in theory) but practically why bother?

    You have far better platforms for dealing with surface threats (nukes and all) and Deltas have more important roles to fulfill.

    They do have 3 older Deltas that are deemed too noisy even for SSBNs but it would make more sense to convert them into land attack ships by installing Kalibr LACMs instead of ICBMs. Far better than scraping them (they still sail and dive no problem)

    It would also trim down their crew complement significantly, probably operational costs as well. They would be very useful for dealing with low priority third world issues.

    Would it not be worth it if an entire SAG is wiped out by a single and couple of  SSN20 missiles
    Esp if other platforms have been destroyed by the enemy like slava sovermenny nanuchka etc

    What you describe is full blown nuclear war. If it comes to that Navies will be pretty irelevant.
    Not if the other side has no nukes
    Is it possible militarily?
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5280
    Points : 5386
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  PapaDragon on Thu Jun 15, 2017 5:27 pm

    nastle77 wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:....................
    What you describe is full blown nuclear war. If it comes to that Navies will be pretty irelevant.

    Not if the other side has no nukes
    Is it possible militarily?

    I don't think any side out there has navy that big without nukes other than Japan. But going full Armageddon on some medium sized navy would be total overkill.

    I mean if they wanted to they could incinerate region of the ocean where targets are with either nuke sub or land based ICBM without a problem but why? Especially if it is a non-nuclear military.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 792
    Points : 792
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Isos on Thu Jun 15, 2017 7:52 pm

    Even nuk warehead need to explode near a ship to destroy it. All modern ships have NBC protection so they are safe if the explosion occure too far. I don't think intercontinantal missile could be reprogrammed to follow a moving ship. The flight is like 20-30 minutes, if a ship goes at 50km/h it will move 25 km for this time so it is safe.
    avatar
    flamming_python

    Posts : 3227
    Points : 3333
    Join date : 2012-01-30

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  flamming_python on Thu Jun 15, 2017 9:22 pm

    RS-28 Sarmat should be able to handle ships; satellites can ascertain their bearing and speed; giving their position in 15 minutes time - and this would be enough time for a Sarmat to get there.

    As I understand it has a manuevering bus with about 3 kinetic kill warheads on board that it can release along its flight-path. The idea is these vehicles can bust a silo wide-open; but since this is basically the Russian equivalent of America's global strike doctrine and with the same capabilities; there's no reason why they can't be used for precision strikes against targets of any nature anywhere in the world.

    nastle77

    Posts : 193
    Points : 249
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  nastle77 on Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:07 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:....................
    What you describe is full blown nuclear war. If it comes to that Navies will be pretty irelevant.

    Not if the other side has no nukes
    Is it possible militarily?

    I don't think any side out there has navy that big without nukes other than Japan. But going full Armageddon on some medium sized navy would be total overkill.

    I mean if they wanted to they could incinerate region of the ocean where targets are with either nuke sub or land based ICBM without a problem but why? Especially if it is a non-nuclear military.
    Well the impression i got from posters on another US forum was that without using nukes soviet pacific fleet would be slaughtered by Japan navy like a repeat of 1904
    Thats why i asked this question

    nastle77

    Posts : 193
    Points : 249
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  nastle77 on Fri Jun 16, 2017 4:09 pm

    Isos wrote:Even nuk warehead need to explode near a ship to destroy it. All modern ships have NBC protection so they are safe if the explosion occure too far. I don't think intercontinantal missile could be reprogrammed to follow a moving ship. The flight is like 20-30 minutes, if a ship goes at 50km/h it will move 25 km for this time so it is safe.

    Then best to use SLBM against naval bases to destroy ships undergoing refits etc
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 5280
    Points : 5386
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  PapaDragon on Fri Jun 16, 2017 5:28 pm

    nastle77 wrote:......
    Well the impression i got from posters on another US forum was that without using nukes soviet pacific fleet would be slaughtered by Japan navy like a repeat of 1904
    Thats why i asked this question

    Urghhhh, not this again.....

    Just​ tell those geniuses that Russian Navy has this thing called submarines in addition to surface ships out in the Pacific

    Also those coastal missiles and naval aircraft also come into equation

    nastle77

    Posts : 193
    Points : 249
    Join date : 2015-07-25

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  nastle77 on Fri Jun 16, 2017 8:16 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    nastle77 wrote:......
    Well the impression i got from posters on another US forum was that without using nukes soviet pacific fleet would be slaughtered by Japan navy like a repeat of 1904
    Thats why i asked this question

    Urghhhh, not this again.....

    Just​ tell those geniuses that Russian Navy has this thing called submarines in addition to surface ships out in the Pacific

    Also those coastal missiles and naval aircraft also come into equation


    The argument i heard was that the sea manship of jap navy is so much superior and that soviet navy could barely leave port and be overwhelmed

    Even in surface warships pacific fleet has kiev kirov and slava and their missiles far outrange the harpoons they can decline or accept engagement depending on the circumstances, thsts my opinion
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 792
    Points : 792
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Isos on Fri Jun 16, 2017 9:49 pm

    nastle77 wrote:
    Isos wrote:Even nuk warehead need to explode near a ship to destroy it. All modern ships have NBC protection so they are safe if the explosion occure too far. I don't think intercontinantal missile could be reprogrammed to follow a moving ship. The flight is like 20-30 minutes, if a ship goes at 50km/h it will move 25 km for this time so it is safe.

    Then best to use SLBM against naval bases to destroy ships undergoing refits etc

    Even using nuk in pacific would be a suicide for the earth, let alone targeting costal cities. Stupid idea and totaly fiction not even imaginable.



    Japan wouldn't go at war and risk to lose most important ships that are here to counter China, north corea, south corea... All these countries haven't forgotten what Japanese did in 45 ... And the only reason why a war could start between Ru and Japan is Kurils island. Even if Japan destroys all Rusian navy they could never exploit ressources out there because Ru air force would destroy all Japan fishing boat. It's better for Japan to talk by diplomatic means and try to reach an agreement.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16375
    Points : 16990
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Sun Jun 18, 2017 6:24 am

    Well if the future is doomed to be a repeat of history why pick 1905?

    Why not pick a more recent time like 1939 when Soviet air and land power gave the Japs such a hiding they turned south and would rather face the navy of the US and the British commonwealth than go another round in a land war with the Russians?

    Russia could simply use ground forces and move down the islands they hold now to the islands to the south that they don't...


    _________________
    “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 : 5280
    Points : 5386
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Husky-class

    Post  PapaDragon on Wed Aug 23, 2017 3:29 pm

    http://tass.com/defense/961526

    ...As the United Shipbuilding Corporation reported earlier, the work to develop the outlook and the sketch of the fifth-generation Hasky-class nuclear-powered submarine will be finished within two years....

    Exclamation Two years at least before first one is even ordered let alone laid down.

    That leaves quite a lot of time for more Yasens and/or Boreis.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Wed Sep 20, 2017 6:27 pm