Because the design is obviously faulty, St Petersburg will not enter service, that should be proof enough.
If it is obviously faulty then why are they keeping the original in service as a testing platform for new systems, and continuing to build the other two vessels laid down?
When planning and developing a new complex system you have design objectives that you have no idea whether they can be met. with new systems you have to estimate and calculate but until the thing is actually built and tested you may never know its real world performance.
There were requirements and specifications for the Lada sub and when the sub was finally built it was found it did not meet requirements in a couple of areas. Before the other two were built they were able to test the first and decide on new systems and parameters and solve the problems.
the two new subs will get more powerful Lithium ion batteries and an indigenous AIP system to greatly improve performance... almost to SSN level in fact and your expert opinion is it is a failure?
Remember the Project 685 Plavnik? Just built in one example, and for a reason.
It was an operational test bed designed to test a range of new technologies... it was expensive to build, so when it was lost most of the new technologies were tested on other new sub designs and its design was cancelled as too ambitious.
The Lada didn't sink, so information about what worked and what didn't and what needed improving and what was performing fine was collected and applied to the other two vessels in the class.
The PAK-FA is not a faulty design, it keeps meeting performance criterias. You reason with mockery and sarcasm, i dont like that and it doesnt add to a good discussion.
One PAK FA lost an engine and could not be displayed, and another caught fire... Cancel it immediately!
When a submarine has been on the staples for 10 years, one should question if its a good project. And no i dont read twitters.
I have never been to twitter, but it seems to be a website for insecure people who want to talk to anyone about their mundane lives. Is it because you have not heard constant updates about Lada that you think it is a failure?
They have tested its AIP and it will be fitted to the other two Lada hulls... does that suggest they are failures?
Do you seriously think the construction time is two years?
Why not? You were happy to think it was 10 years... they aren't finished yet... if they enter service in 2017 that would mean 5 years construction, does that sound excessive?
Its called prestige, and we can blame much to that.
We certainly can, but cancelling a project when you spent all that money to actually make it work would be stupid if the final product is a generation ahead of everything else you have and you have a need for it.
The new 636 is a top of the line submarine, and can certainly be used as a stopgap until a new design is ready for production. Like the T-90, T-95 and finally Armata.
The problem there is that the T-95 was a cold war dead end, while Armata is a family of vehicles of a new concept.
If they cancelled the Lada now and started from scratch developing a new sub using all new technologies they would develop... a Lada... it already uses new technologies and does everything they want it to do.
It would be like having the T-90s in service and developing the Armata and then cancel the armata and make more T-90s for 10 years while you throw out the Armata design and come up with... an armata design that could be called Armata-M.
The M551 was a great design with a crappy gun, with a 105 it would have been amazing...
Ignoring the gun, which was a colossal waste of money and time, the Sheridan is basically what you get if you want an airborne armoured vehicle... for airborne forces given the choice of armour or walking I think the advantages of some armour protection and much better mobility is clear.
It is pretty funny when the Discovery channel does a programme on the worlds best tanks and includes the Sheridan... Sprut is far superior...
EDIT; It will be *commissioned* around the end of 2017 at the very latest.
Boy, my guess above was pretty accurate.
They are adding new batteries and a new AIP so the production time for the next vessels in the class should be quicker to make.
Really? So every lead ship is built without knowledge of problems, and some so grave the ship will never enter service? I agree every lead ship have Some problems, but none so bad it wont enter service, then its a much bigger problem. Design.
Look at the Kiev class ships... especially near the take off ramp... they spent a fortune trying to fix the air flow there with ramps and walls on all the vessels of that class, the last in the class had so many changes they wanted to call it Improved Kiev in the west.
there are so many complex interactions in a modern vessel that problems will be expected... the question is, what sort of solutions are there and how easy are they to impliment... especially without creating new problems.
It became a common scene to observe melted Sheridan hulls with their sunken steel turrets sitting at odd angles with their gun tubes pointing towards the sky in various parts of the country.
The Sheridans gun used combustable propellent stubs made of cardboard that were an enormous fire risk. Storing ammo in the crew compartment any penetration showered the ammo with sparks leading to immediate ignition of the propellent... T-64 and T-80 have the same problem.
Change to 105 would fix that.
The aluminium armor was not good, it was very vulnerable and couldnt drive through trees as could the M48.
Delivered by parachute the Sheridan is a useful light vehicle with a crap gun. the M48 would be a hole in the ground.
Several attempts to improve or replace the Sheridan have been made over the years since it was introduced. Several experimental versions of the Sheridan mounting a new turret carrying the NATO-standard 105mm gun were made, but the resulting recoil was so great as to make the vehicle almost unusable.
Even a 90mm gun would be an improvement over the 152mm gun it carried.
Cancel and Continue with the next step in evolution.
The Lada-M with LI Ion batteries and AIP IS THE NEXT STEP.