Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Share
    avatar
    verkhoturye51

    Posts : 39
    Points : 43
    Join date : 2018-03-02

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  verkhoturye51 on Sat Apr 14, 2018 12:30 pm

    @GarryB

    I don't think they'll keep torpedos in the middle. Wiki article on Yasen suggests they'll move them back in the bow on Husky. Also in the picture there are no torpedo hatches in the middle.

    EDIT: You can see two circuit hatches in the bow above the white line Smile
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 6418
    Points : 6520
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  PapaDragon on Sat Apr 14, 2018 4:04 pm


    About Husky SSBN version: if they build one it will be carrying way more than 8 SLBMs

    There are no reasons to go with anything less than 16, this thing is big enough to haul as many
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17736
    Points : 18330
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Sun Apr 15, 2018 1:50 am

    I don't think they'll keep torpedos in the middle. Wiki article on Yasen suggests they'll move them back in the bow on Husky. Also in the picture there are no torpedo hatches in the middle.

    Well to be honest having the torpedo tubes up nearer the front would be better as flank arrays on each side of the nose would be limited in size and could be effected by the nose mounted spherical array... so putting torpedo tubes on either side of the UKSK launcher at the front would make sense just fine.

    That would free up the sides of the vessel for enormous flank arrays... or if needed... potentially more UKSK launchers for the SSGN version...

    About Husky SSBN version: if they build one it will be carrying way more than 8 SLBMs

    Why?

    Making it smaller and cheaper makes more sense than having all your eggs in one basket...

    Reducing the number of onboard missiles means more targets for the US to find and also it means once it starts firing it will take less time to launch all its missiles.

    From a practical point of view its MARV warheads can only engage targets on its flight path... in other words having 6 warheads on one missile means all six targets it is aimed at need to be all in the same direction from the boat that launches it... so having more boats means you can distribute the launch position to more places and hit more widely separated targets without having to split the launch into multiple volleys from different places...

    There are no reasons to go with anything less than 16, this thing is big enough to haul as many

    Why stop at 16? Why not put 128 missiles on a big super tanker sized barge? but it would be harder to hide and easier to find and engage... so which would be better... 8 Boreis, or 16 smaller newer Huskies?  But then of course it will actually be more like 32 Huskies because half will be SSBNs and the other half will be SSGNs or SSNs... which one is which?  Needle in a haystack of needles?


    _________________
    “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
    verkhoturye51

    Posts : 39
    Points : 43
    Join date : 2018-03-02

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  verkhoturye51 on Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:43 am

    Any rationale behind prioritizing flank sonars over bow spherical arrays? Using common sense, submarine should know what's in front of her as soon as possible, prior to everything else.

    Regarding ballistic missiles, you are right to say that spreading them accross several boats makes sense, that's why Borei A has 16 Bulavas and not 20. Nonetheless, there's also an argument in favor of larger ships. Americans put 24 Tridents on Ohio because of economies of scale. It's cheaper to build 14 larger boats than 15 small, because few extra meters of steel don't really add to the costs (120 m Yasen is twice more expensive than 170 m Borei). And Russia should be even more aware of this as their US counterparts, having 10 % of their defense budget (and falling).

    Their long and ragged coastline makes perfect sense for having large fleet of corvettes and frigates instead of fewer larger ships. But the same logic doesn't really apply to the submarines - that's why historically both superpowers had roughly the some number of submarines and missiles.
    avatar
    verkhoturye51

    Posts : 39
    Points : 43
    Join date : 2018-03-02

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  verkhoturye51 on Sun Apr 15, 2018 9:43 am

    Any rationale behind prioritizing flank sonars over bow spherical arrays? Using common sense, submarine should know what's in front of her as soon as possible, prior to everything else.

    Regarding ballistic missiles, you are right to say that spreading them accross several boats makes sense, that's why Borei A has 16 Bulavas and not 20. Nonetheless, there's also an argument in favor of larger ships. Americans put 24 Tridents on Ohio because of economies of scale. It's cheaper to build 14 larger boats than 15 small, because few extra meters of steel don't really add to the costs (120 m Yasen is twice more expensive than 170 m Borei). And Russia should be even more aware of this than their US counterparts, having 10 % of their defense budget (and falling).

    Their long and ragged coastline makes perfect sense for having large fleet of corvettes and frigates instead of fewer larger ships. But the same logic doesn't really apply to the submarines - that's why historically both superpowers had roughly the some number of SSBNs.
    avatar
    Singular_Transform

    Posts : 601
    Points : 597
    Join date : 2016-11-13

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Singular_Transform on Sun Apr 15, 2018 10:04 pm

    verkhoturye51 wrote:Any rationale behind prioritizing flank sonars over bow spherical arrays? Using common sense, submarine should know what's in front of her as soon as possible, prior to everything else.


    Towed/flank sonars are the main tools to found other submarines, the spherical sonar good for communication / found noisy targets like ships.

    But by design the spherical/cylindrical sonar is not good to found low noise targets.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17736
    Points : 18330
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Mon Apr 16, 2018 3:11 am

    Flank arrays can be enormous... which gives them rather better long range performance than a spherical array for quiet targets especially at longer range.

    Regarding ballistic missiles, you are right to say that spreading them accross several boats makes sense, that's why Borei A has 16 Bulavas and not 20. Nonetheless, there's also an argument in favor of larger ships.

    But then the Akula class had only 20 missiles yet had 10 warheads per missile... meaning 200 targets per boat could be engaged, while the Trident with 24 missiles with only 8 warheads could only engage 192.

    Yes, I know the Akula is much bigger than the US boat, but that was so it could operate through the ice in the north pole, which is also why the conning tower on the Akula looks so different to other Soviet subs.

    I remember in the early 1990s there were even suggestions to make all new Russian subs carry two SLBMs, so every Russian sub would be a boomer... and also an SSN or SSGN... but I think they realised the complication that would create where an SSN chasing down a target then stops because it just received orders to launch its SLBMs... except its current location means its targets are out of range...

    The simple fact is that making all new Russian subs of one design (ie Husky) with minor variations in equipment and weapons makes sense and should help control costs without compromising performance too much...

    Having corvettes and frigates is nice but it is like having MANPADS and short range SAMs like TOR and OSA... with heavy coverage you will get rather good defence, but you will only ever be shooting down weapons and most of the time not shooting down weapons platforms... which means you will continue to shoot down missiles until you run out of missiles. If you could knock down their platforms there would be less missiles to deal with and they will actually pay a real penalty for their attack... which might deter the attack in the first place.


    _________________
    “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
    verkhoturye51

    Posts : 39
    Points : 43
    Join date : 2018-03-02

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  verkhoturye51 on Mon Apr 16, 2018 9:01 am

    But the Russians put cruise missiles even on Buyan corvettes, so the arnament is not their weak point. The defense is, but again that's why they build them in big quantities.

    There's a geography behind every naval doctrine. NATO and Indian navies historically had fewer larger ships and prioritized CVNs over the submarines, because they had to control world oceans/Indian ocean resp. It was of utmost importance for them to be able to reach any point at any time and pose a constant threat of invasion.

    In Russia or China it's the opposite, the navy is simply the first line of defense. Especially Russia, which is despite it's long coastline basically a landlocked country, whose main ports are either frozen for much of the year or located in a sea with enemy-controlled chokepoints. Thus they prioritize submarines over surface ship and they excel in that area, so I still see no problem for essentially defensive Russia if they don't build a significant offensive CVN/cruiser/destroyer fleet.

    Cost saving is the idea behind Husky, but I still hope they'll make a SSBN version quieter and more resistant against torpedo hits, a SSN faster and deeper diving and so on.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 6418
    Points : 6520
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  PapaDragon on Mon Apr 16, 2018 10:28 pm

    franco wrote:
    Top figure is total, check individual fleets to see those submarines operational.
    http://russianships.info/eng/today/
    verkhoturye51 wrote:Minus first two Pacific fleet submarines - Podolsk and Sv. Georgiy Pobedonosets, as they were decomissioned last month.


    Okay so according to this website I am coming up with following numbers of nuclear submarines in use, correct me if I'm wrong:


    SSBN: 10 total (3 Borei-class + 7 Delta-class) 2 Deltas are in overhaul, I am not counting last Typhoon-class since it's just there for testing

    SSGN: 9 total (8 Oscar-class + 1 Yasen-class) 2 Oscars are in overhaul but are not slated for decommission unlike Akulas

    SSN: 13 total (4 Sierra-class + 2 Victor-class + 7 Akula-class) I have no idea what exactly here is slated for repair and what for decommission so I'll just count ones in use now



    So in use at the moment:

    SSBN: 8 (+2 in overhaul)

    SSGN: 7 (+2 in overhaul)

    SSN: 13


    Is this right?
    avatar
    KiloGolf

    Posts : 2359
    Points : 2373
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  KiloGolf on Mon Apr 16, 2018 10:35 pm

    [quote="PapaDragon"]
    franco wrote:So in use at the moment:

    SSBN: 8 (+2 in overhaul)

    SSGN: 7 (+2 in overhaul)

    SSN: 13


    Is this right?

    Pretty much.
    And looking at the SSN numbers begs the question, is it enough?

    Don't think so, for the size of patrol areas of Russia.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 6418
    Points : 6520
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  PapaDragon on Mon Apr 16, 2018 10:50 pm

    KiloGolf wrote:.......
    Pretty much.
    And looking at the SSN numbers begs the question, is it enough?

    Don't think so, for the size of patrol areas of Russia.


    Yeah it's bit anemic but that gap can be plugged by spamming non-nuclear subs like Kilos (and later ones). Work the littoral area with those and send SSNs further out.

    I still wonder if they plan on pursuing SSN version of Husky or will they just skip it go with all SSGN fleet like USA did (Los Angeles and Virginia) That seems to be target approach given Yasen design.

    But as long as SSBN and SSGN numbers are stable then it's all pretty much okay. If gap shows up there there is no way to plug it with Kilos so they better keep eyes on the ball. Fortunately they seem to be doing it.
    avatar
    franco

    Posts : 2886
    Points : 2922
    Join date : 2010-08-18

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  franco on Mon Apr 16, 2018 11:13 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    franco wrote:
    Top figure is total, check individual fleets to see those submarines operational.
    http://russianships.info/eng/today/
    verkhoturye51 wrote:Minus first two Pacific fleet submarines - Podolsk and Sv. Georgiy Pobedonosets, as they were decomissioned last month.


    Okay so according to this website I am coming up with following numbers of nuclear submarines in use, correct me if I'm wrong:


    SSBN: 10 total (3 Borei-class + 7 Delta-class) 2 Deltas are in overhaul,  I am not counting last Typhoon-class since it's just there for testing

    SSGN: 9 total (8 Oscar-class + 1 Yasen-class) 2 Oscars are in overhaul but are not slated for decommission unlike Akulas

    SSN: 13 total (4 Sierra-class + 2 Victor-class + 7 Akula-class) I have no idea what exactly here is slated for repair and what for decommission so I'll just count ones in use now



    So in use at the moment:

    SSBN: 8 (+2 in overhaul)

    SSGN: 7 (+2 in overhaul)

    SSN: 13


    Is this right?

    I think that the 2 SSBN's that the tender for their demolition was announced last month are still active. The tender process was started while awaiting the arrivals of their replacements.
    avatar
    verkhoturye51

    Posts : 39
    Points : 43
    Join date : 2018-03-02

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  verkhoturye51 on Mon Apr 16, 2018 11:23 pm

    SSBN: there are 8 Deltas in comission, 7 Delta IV and 1 Delta III, all finished overhaul. Dmitry is part of the fleet and is able to fire Bulavas

    SSGN: 7 (+2 in overhaul) OK

    SSN: 4 Sierra (3 active, 1 in modernization)+ 3 Victor (active) + 11 Akula (6 active, 5 in modernization) = 18.


    Right now total numbers are 14 + 9 + 18 + Kilos and Ladas = 63 + reserve fleet > US submarine fleet
    avatar
    GunshipDemocracy

    Posts : 2197
    Points : 2241
    Join date : 2015-05-17
    Age : 76
    Location : fishin on Stalin´s Strait between Mexico and Canada

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  GunshipDemocracy on Tue Apr 17, 2018 12:01 am

    verkhoturye51 wrote:

    Cost saving is the idea behind Husky, but I still hope they'll make a SSBN version quieter and more resistant against torpedo hits, a SSN faster and deeper diving and so on.

    indeed making "up-armored" SSBN/SSN version could make fairly resistant against smaller torpedoes ... something like T-34 against 37mm guns.





    verkhoturye51 wrote:Nice!

    Weird thing in the bow doesn't really resemble VLS. Current trends in Russian submarine building favour big sonars in the bow and torpedos/missiles in the middle of the boat anyway.

    So all in all it's just 8 VLSs in the middle of a hull or half of Yasen's capacity, which is consistent with official releases, signaling size much under Yasen's.

    And that pump jet propulsor looks stealthy, too. Can't wait too see her get wet in 2-3 years!


    agree bad ass looks - especially "bondisch" sail's windows. Whether it's smaller than Yasen? unlikely - loom as size of sail's doors or VLS for Calibrs - Calibr is ~8 m long.
    Torpedo tubes are visible (in higher res) in front upper part of


    Is should have also some hidden modules to store robots or perspective weaponry.


    Last edited by GunshipDemocracy on Tue Apr 17, 2018 12:19 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    verkhoturye51

    Posts : 39
    Points : 43
    Join date : 2018-03-02

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  verkhoturye51 on Tue Apr 17, 2018 12:16 am

    5- hull Typhoon was able to survive a torpedo hit.
    avatar
    TheArmenian

    Posts : 1792
    Points : 1947
    Join date : 2011-09-14

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  TheArmenian on Tue Apr 17, 2018 12:43 am

    verkhoturye51 wrote:SSBN: there are 8 Deltas in comission, 7 Delta IV and 1 Delta III, all finished overhaul. Dmitry is part of the fleet and is able to fire Bulavas

    SSGN: 7 (+2 in overhaul) OK

    SSN: 4 Sierra (3 active, 1 in modernization)+ 3 Victor (active) + 11 Akula (6 active, 5 in modernization) = 18.


    Right now total numbers are 14 + 9 + 18 + Kilos and Ladas = 63 + reserve fleet > US submarine fleet

    Some corrections and additions for subs in service:

    SSBN:
    1 Typhoon class - Dimitry Donskoi
    3 Borei class - Dolgoruky, Nevsky and Monomakh
    6 Delta IV class - Verkhoturye, Ekaterinburgh, Tula, Bryansk (in modernization), Karelia and Novomoskovsk
    3 Delta II class - Podolsk, Georgy Pobedanosetz, Ryazan (2 of them will be retired soon)

    SSGN
    1 Yasen class- Severodvinsk
    8 Oscar class - Voronezh, Smolensk, Tver, Orel, Tomsk, Irkutsk, Chelyabinsk and Omsk (the last 3 are in modernization)

    SSN
    2 Sierra I class - Kostroma and Karp (in modernization)
    2 Sierra II class - Zubatka and Okun
    11 Akula class - Kashalot, Bratsk, Magadan, Kuzbass, Samara, Panthera, Volk, Leopard, Tigr, Vepr and Gepard (7nof them are in modernization)
    3 Victor III class - Obninsk, Danil Moskovsky and Tambov

    SSK
    20 Kilos class (approximate)

    Special Submarines
    1 Podmoskovye (ex- Delta IV class)
    1 Orenburg (ex- Delta III class)
    1 Sarov
    ? Losharik
    ? etc.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 6418
    Points : 6520
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  PapaDragon on Tue Apr 17, 2018 2:07 am

    franco wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:............

    So in use at the moment:

    SSBN: 8 (+2 in overhaul)

    SSGN: 7 (+2 in overhaul)

    SSN: 13


    Is this right?

    I think that the 2 SSBN's that the tender for their demolition was announced last month are still active. The tender process was started while awaiting the arrivals of their replacements.

    I know, I already deducted those two


    Last edited by PapaDragon on Wed Apr 18, 2018 10:02 pm; edited 2 times in total

    walle83

    Posts : 29
    Points : 31
    Join date : 2016-11-13
    Location : Sweden

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  walle83 on Tue Apr 17, 2018 2:11 am

    I think we can forgett about the last Akula submarine. It just used for missile tests and for show off. Yes it can fire the Bulava missile but i think only one or two of its missile tubes was modified for that use. And all SS-N-20 missiles have been scrapped by now.
    Also the submarine had its overhaul in 2002 so it will soon need major repairs and overhaul again. Doubtfull Russia will pay for that once again when they can spend that money on new Borei subs insted.
    Just like Kirovs cruisers this Soviet killer is just a wounderfull sight, but in reality it belongs in the past and not in the modern Russian navy. Scrap it and spend the money on something better.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 6418
    Points : 6520
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  PapaDragon on Wed Apr 18, 2018 10:05 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:.....
    So in use at the moment:

    SSBN: 8 (+2 in overhaul)

    SSGN: 7 (+2 in overhaul)

    SSN: 13
    .....


    And just in time, infographics on Russian submarine fleet:

    Huge picture, 7776x4848:
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 1537
    Points : 1533
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Isos on Wed Apr 18, 2018 10:18 pm

    PapaDragon wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:.....
    So in use at the moment:

    SSBN: 8 (+2 in overhaul)

    SSGN: 7 (+2 in overhaul)

    SSN: 13
    .....


    And just in time, infographics on Russian submarine fleet:

    Huge picture, 7776x4848:

    Yasen will start coming in really big numbers. They have modernized soviet era nuclear attack subs. Future diesel subs will have AIP so much more usefull than diesel subs they have now. And Oscar will get their new uksk vls.

    The russian navy will be much more powerfull than the soviet probably in 6 years because all their ships will be able to lunch kalibr oniks and tzirkon.

    walle83

    Posts : 29
    Points : 31
    Join date : 2016-11-13
    Location : Sweden

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  walle83 on Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:09 am

    Isos wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:.....
    So in use at the moment:

    SSBN: 8 (+2 in overhaul)

    SSGN: 7 (+2 in overhaul)

    SSN: 13
    .....


    And just in time, infographics on Russian submarine fleet:

    Huge picture, 7776x4848:

    Yasen will start coming in really big numbers. They have modernized soviet era nuclear attack subs. Future diesel subs will have AIP so much more usefull than diesel subs they have now. And Oscar will get their new uksk vls.

    The russian navy will be much more powerfull than the soviet probably in 6 years because all their ships will be able to lunch kalibr oniks and tzirkon.

    Will Yasen-class start to come in "really big numbers"? Care to explain how this will happen?
    Yes Russia do overhaul and upgrade some of its older nuclear subs. But its going really slow, and most probably wont return to service before 2020-2025.
    avatar
    Isos

    Posts : 1537
    Points : 1533
    Join date : 2015-11-06

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Isos on Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:22 am

    walle83 wrote:
    Isos wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:.....
    So in use at the moment:

    SSBN: 8 (+2 in overhaul)

    SSGN: 7 (+2 in overhaul)

    SSN: 13
    .....


    And just in time, infographics on Russian submarine fleet:

    Huge picture, 7776x4848:

    Yasen will start coming in really big numbers. They have modernized soviet era nuclear attack subs. Future diesel subs will have AIP so much more usefull than diesel subs they have now. And Oscar will get their new uksk vls.

    The russian navy will be much more powerfull than the soviet probably in 6 years because all their ships will be able to lunch kalibr oniks and tzirkon.

    Will Yasen-class start to come in "really big numbers"? Care to explain how this will happen?
    Yes Russia do overhaul and upgrade some of its older nuclear subs. But its going really slow, and most probably wont return to service before 2020-2025.

    They are building 6 of them if I'm not wrong. So they will be put into service one after the other really quickly. Now they don't have them but they will get those being build and that will change drasticly the level of technology of sub forces. While the old one are being upgraded also right now so they will come back with the yasen. So the number of subs will increase if they keep the old ones and get new ones.

    6 is a big number for sub forces. Specially if it is about Yasen class. But what's important here is that they will put into service all of them in the same period which should be 2020-2025.

    2025 will be the year where old rusty russian navy will no exist anymore. They will have plenty of new ships and far less old ships. Like new kilo, new yasen, new borei, and husky will be start in the shipyards.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17736
    Points : 18330
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  GarryB on Thu Apr 19, 2018 5:57 am

    I think we can forgett about the last Akula submarine. It just used for missile tests and for show off. Yes it can fire the Bulava missile but i think only one or two of its missile tubes was modified for that use. And all SS-N-20 missiles have been scrapped by now.

    The last Akula sub used for testing should not be forgotten... it would be ideal for testing a range of weapon and system types that would not require taking an operational sub off the line to do the same work.


    _________________
    “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

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Apr 26, 2018 7:26 pm