Project 949A: Oscar-II

Radar can be jammed and decoyed...false radar track beams can be bounced off the sea behind the sea skimming missile.

When planning an attack you generally take the vessels that make up the target to design your attack around.

A battlegroup sailing around with radars scanning for targets gives away its position... a group with radars off will need 3-5 minutes to turn them on from cold... an attack during a storm at night... or in the middle of a refuelling session or while passing though an island chain etc etc.

Remember on paper the exocet missiles of the Argentiine navy should never have gotten through British defences... but they did.

Also keep in mind that support vessels are a much more valuable target most of the time and their loss would be far more devastating on an attack force than even the loss of a major ship... imagine the ship with all the heavy armour is sunk... how will that effect the invasion?

Zvezdochka Shipyard Launched SSGN Smolensk

Project 949A Antei submarine Smolensk was launched at Zvezdochka Ship Repair Center, a source in Russian defense industry told Central Navy Portal.

Slipway phase of repair has been completed. In the night of Aug 5, was put afloat.

Smolensk was laid up for technical recovery in Sept 2011. Most of hull and dock works were done during the slipway phase of repair. After launching, the overhaul will be continued afloat.

Shipwrights of Zvezdochka will reload reactor core and carry out other repair works on the sub's hardware. Upon termination of repairs, service life of SSBN Smolensk will be 3 years longer.

The submarine is to be recommissioned in the summer of 2013.

Seems the Oscar-2 upgrade with Kalbir and Oniks.

Each shipwreck tube can carry 4x Calbir or 3x Oniks

Carrier Killers for the Russian Navy: The Strategic Environment

The design documentation for the refit and modernization of the Project 949A has been prepared. It calls for replacement of the Granit by the Onix and Caliber. No changes to the submarine’s original load bearing structures are required. Three Onix or four Caliber missile containers can be squeezed into one Granit launch site – the latter will be reworked accordingly. The submarine will receive an improved combat system able to employ the newer missiles.

12 twin Granit launchers × 4 Kalibr missiles = 48 missiles, about 1/3 of Ohio SSGN capacity (154 tomahawk)

I think Oscar-2 has 24 launchers with 24 Granit , so its 24x4 = 96 Kalbir

Austin wrote:I think Oscar-2 has 24 launchers with 24 Granit , so its 24x4 = 96 Kalbir

Is there some sort of official specification on Kalbir missile?

It seems that Kalbir missile is 3M-14E cruise missile with 2500km range and with 300km range in export variant.

If so whats the unrestricted range for 3M-54 missile?

12 twin Granit launchers × 4 Kalibr missiles = 48 missiles, about 1/3 of Ohio SSGN capacity (154 tomahawk)

Already previously debated with photographic elements too















3 "Oniks" tested in each Granit countained tube.

An Oscar class carry therefore 72 "Onik" or 96 "Caliber" cruise missiles, no bad at all for a submarine designed primarily to engage CBG with Granit ASCN/650 mm heavy torpedos

Mindstorm wrote:

12 twin Granit launchers × 4 Kalibr missiles = 48 missiles, about 1/3 of Ohio SSGN capacity (154 tomahawk)

Already previously debated with photographic elements too















3 "Oniks" tested in each Granit countained tube.

An Oscar class carry therefore 72 "Onik" or 96 "Caliber" cruise missiles, no bad at all for a submarine designed primarily to engage CBG with Granit ASCN/650 mm heavy torpedos

i dont think for a submarine platform to carry 72 oniks anti-ship missiles will ever needed. More possiple to carry kalibr LACM.

i dont think for a submarine platform to carry 72 oniks anti-ship missiles will ever needed.

Depend on the task , if the Russian Central Command would commit to this unit to engage and destroy from stand-off range a CBG, likely this would be the missile load chosen (with likely almost the whole torpedo load occupied by MDM-1/2 and SMDM low-magnetic active mined, useful for create deadly trapped areas for incautious surface or submarine hunters ...)

"Kalibr" LACM (naturally domestic version...) instead is an unique missile which ,thanks to its outstanding range and precision (more than 2500 km and 2-3 meters of CEP or 900-1000 km more than UGM-109E and 1/3 of its CEP !!! ), allow russian Nothern Fleet submarines to attack practically any major NATO European targets ,from big cities -like London or Paris- to any major NATO airfield or Navy bases -such as the HMNB of Devonport- remaining well hidden and fully protected behind three-four defense layers within major Russian submarine and Naval Nothern "Sanctuary" zones.

Naturally ,at today, unless tensions with USA will unexpectedly grow at dangerous levels in the next years, a full load of "Oniks" for a similar Submarine unit will be unlikely.

Mindstorm ,But wont Kalbir like Tomahawk would be vulnerable to anti-missile system on ships like Aster , ESSM and on land against PAC-3 , European Land based air defence.

After all NATO has layered AD network with AWACS and Baloon based Radar.

After all these are subsonic missile with RCS similar to tomahawk

Mindstorm ,But wont Kalbir like Tomahawk would be vulnerable to anti-missile system on ships like Aster , ESSM and on land against PAC-3 , European Land based air defence.

After all NATO has layered AD network with AWACS and Baloon based Radar.

NATO IADS ?

NATO lack even only the BASIS CONCEPTS of the design ,architecture, organization and construction of an organic, advanced, multilayered IADS ,it lack even merely the elementary "pieces" to construct one .

The historical reason leading to this is that both its Geography (NATO lack the territorial deepness for organize efficient IAD layers's nodes and is effectively splitted in two by Ocean) and its Doctrine (conceived around power-projection with insulated bases spread around the globe impossible to insert in an effcient IADS) prevented NATO to hope to realize something even only near to URSS's titanic IADS.

The result is that ,already since Soviet times, Russia prepared itself for repel (and contemporaneously "dismember" one piece at time and degrade NATO's offensive structure up to its nullification through overwhelming concentrated attacks) coordinated stand-off air attacks with several hundreds of incoming cruise missiles and decoys released at the same time.

On the other side we observe the lacking of even only the basis elements to organize one IADS : where are NATO's TOR-M1/2 ,Tunguska-M1, Strela-10M, BUK-M1/2 ,Pantsyr-S1,SPN-30, SPN-40/SPN-40M2, MiG-31/MiG-31BM etc.. etc..etc... ?

Also the systems you named (with the exception of Aster ,naturally at now in very low numbers) are not conceived to repel serious cruise misille attack : MIM-104 Patriot launchers are uncaple or 360 degrees coverage and it lack an equivalent of 76N6 Clam Shell....about RIM-162 i image that i must not explain that ship based defenses ,and even more short range ones, are totally useless to repel cruise missile attack against key ashore targets (radar stations, C4, Airfields etc...) ,ships are too slow to be placed on the course of incoming cruise missiles.

The unique asset in NATO aerospace defense structure, showing some good capabilities against cruise missiles attacks - and anyhow limited in respect to highly optimized interceptors with very long range AAM such as MiG-31/31BM equiped with R-33M/R-37M, is F-22A , but cause its numbers , limited range, lack of a very long range AAM and.... lack of any serious SAM defense for the airfields hosting them, those assets wouldn't last for long in a large scale war against a powerful enemy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLuhtTTAUvw&feature=player_embedded

Smolensk back in water @ Zvezdochka. 1080p video

12 twin Granit launchers × 4 Kalibr missiles = 48 missiles, about 1/3 of Ohio SSGN capacity (154 tomahawk)

Ohio was an SSBN, the Oscars were SSGNs.

If you want to compare Ohio to something then compare with Akula (NATO TYPHOON) if they bother to convert it to a SSGN.

Quick question..hmm we know that typical russian sub today are using double hull construction where "stronger" internal pressure hull is "encased" by lighter and thinner outer hull.

Now i know that Russian submarine did use Titanium hull for the internal pressure hull..did the outer hull used same material ? or did it use other metal..like say steel ?

Only several subs used Titanium, most were steel.

One of the purposes of using Titanium was low magnetic signature.

AFAIK subs like the Alfa class were all Ti.

The inner hull is pressurised to keep the sea water out, while the outer hull does not need to be strong as such, but in between there is space for sound damping material, ballast tanks, and in the case of the Oscar for missile tubes.

Regarding why Russia would need a sub with very large numbers of missile tubes... if you want to overwhelm modern defences you need large numbers of missiles on hand... and to be able to launch them in large numbers.

Against an unsuspecting enemy of limited military power then individual cruise missiles could be launched with a good chance of success. Against better prepared enemies then a more sophisticated attack is needed with multiple launches and using carefully chosen flight paths to bypass the strong defences, yet still get to the targets.

Zvezdochka Shipyard Puts Afloat Vamped SSN Smolensk

Russian defense-oriented shipyard Zvezdochka Ship Repair Center launched Northern Fleet (NF) nuclear-powered attack submarine K-410 Smolensk (Project 949A) after dock and recovery repairs, the yard's press service told ITAR-TASS today.

The submarine was put in a dry dock in Dec 2011. Shipwrights of Zvezdochka have performed main scope of hull repair works on the slipways. After launching, the overhaul will continue afloat. It is planned to refuel nuclear propulsion plant and perform all-round repair of onboard systems. "Upon termination of repairs, the submarine's service life will become 3 years longer. Smolensk is to be recommissioned in the summer of 2013", said the shipyard's spokesman.

SSN Smolensk is the second Project 949A (Antei-class) submarine passing repair at Zvezdochka. In Nov 2011, the shipyard had finished breakdown maintenance and prolonged by 3.5 years service life of similar submarine SSN Voronezh. "Returning Antei subs to the ranks, we prepare not only production facilities for prospective upgrade but our staff, too", said Vladimir Nikitin, Director General of Zvezdochka. "Experience acquired on Voronezh and Smolensk will be a perfect basis for further effective modernization of those and other third-generation nuclear subs, in particular Project 971 Schuka-B".

When lifetime of Project 949A submarines is expired, they are supposed to be modernized and equipped with up-to-date arms, such as Onyx and Caliber missile systems. Those works will be performed by companies of United Shipbuilding Corporation. Antei-class subs of Northern Fleet will be refitted by Zvezdochka, and Pacific Fleet ones – by Zvezda shipyard.

As is known, SSN Smolensk was built in 1990 by Sevmash shipyard (Severodvinsk) under the project developed by Rubin Design Bureau (St. Petersburg). It is a third-generation Project 949A Antei nuclear-powered attack submarine (known in NATO as Oscar II). Length of such subs is 155 meters, displacement is up to 24,000 tons, operating depth is down to 600 meters, max submerged speed is 32 knots (approx. 59 kph), complement is 107 men. Antei-class submarines are armed with 24 launch tubes for Granit cruise missiles with firing range of 500 km, and 6 torpedo tubes.

Today, Antei subs armed with supersonic cruise missiles are the main strike force of Russian Navy capable to counter any surface targets including carrier groups.

http://rusnavy.com/news/navy/index.php?ELEMENT_ID=15774

http://forums.airbase.ru/2012/10/t64446,22--podvodnye-lodki-proekta-949-i-949a.1524.html

Orel in drydock, scroll down.

Media: SSGhttp://rusnavy.com/news/navy/index.php?ELEMENT_ID=16327N Orel to Pass Upgrade in 2013

Project 949A Antei nuclear-powered ballistic missile K-226 Orel will undergo modernization in 2013, a source in defense ministry told Izvestiya. It is planned to put a shaft line removed fr om perished SSN Kursk in 2001.

In addition, shaft line of the second propeller will be replaced as well. According to Izvestiya, it will be taken from a non-completed submarine of the same project.

An insider in defense industry told Izvestiya that "when Orel was laid down in 1989, both shafts driving the sub's propellers consisted of separate parts attached to each other by bolts and coupling joints. All parts must be solid, just like in Kursk, but shaft parts of Orel are hollow. Siliceous sand was put inside. According to designers, such shafts were supposed to be as robust as solid ones, and be lighter, more silent, cheaper, and easier in manufacturing". As for the source, "the hollow shafts needed light-weight screws. Unfortunately, designing of new screws terminated with the breakup of the Soviet Union, and in 1992 the sub was launched with new shaft lines but old heavy propellers. Problems started right after commissioning into the Navy. Shafts critically distorted at attaching points and began rubbing against the hull".

"As a result of that friction, when accelerating under water, the sub was making a specific sound clearly heard by Russian and foreign sonars. The shaft defect made Northern Fleet command lim it the submarine's operational zone. Although Orel did not leave the Barents Sea her detection was very easy. That is why, in 2001 it was decided to take solid shafts from Kursk which had been lifted and dismantled by that time", writes Izvestiya citing the insider.

According to the newspaper, "except for renewed propulsion, K-226 will receive a new data system, navigation aids, communication facilities, and sonars. The submarine's attack capability will be also improved, obsolete Granit antiship missiles will be replaced with new supersonic Onyx ones".

http://rusnavy.com/news/navy/index.php?ELEMENT_ID=16327

So Granit missiles are being replaced by Onyx? Is that official?

Izvestia has gone from full retard to flat out making shit up.
There is so much BS in their "sources" I want to cry.

George1 wrote:So Granit missiles are being replaced by Onyx? Is that official?

Not 100% confirmed but looks that way

Granit is no longer in production and all new vessels will have Onyks so it would make sense to make such a change.

The primary difference between the two in terms of launchers is that the Granit has an angled launcher while the Onyks uses a vertical launch tube.

Onyks is also lighter and smaller.

By the end of 2013:

- Zvezdochka will complete work on the nuclear submarine K-410 Project 949A "Smolensk"
- Work will begin on the nuclear submarine K-266 Project 949A "Orel"

LINK

Viktor wrote:By the end of 2013:

- Zvezdochka will complete work on the nuclear submarine K-410 Project 949A "Smolensk"
- Work will begin on the nuclear submarine K-266 Project 949A "Orel"

LINK

what kind of work is being done?

George1 wrote:

Viktor wrote:By the end of 2013:

- Zvezdochka will complete work on the nuclear submarine K-410 Project 949A "Smolensk"
- Work will begin on the nuclear submarine K-266 Project 949A "Orel"

LINK

what kind of work is being done?

Same as they did on the Voronezh. Repairs + overhaul, small modernization, life extension.