Project 949A: Oscar-II

not while following enemy ships' movements!

Most shipping moves at about 12-16 knots most of the time. Subs hunting western ships or carrier groups can use satellite information to get into position in front of a target group. the missiles themselves handle the attack with the leader missile flying high and gathering target information and then dropping down and sharing its radar image of the carrier group and then allocating missiles to targets as required based on target size.

All the sub has to do is launch a volley of missiles... with Granit it could be two volleys of 12 missiles or one volley of 24.

With newer missiles like Zircon it might only need to launch half a dozen missiles at an enemy carrier group to "break it".

raising comm antenna may be detected before it's lowered again- all of NATO+Japan has many MPA, UAVs & ASW helos to prosecute subs.

Trailing a cable antenna a kilometre long and it can communicate with satellites at operational depths.

The Tu-142 has a 3 km long cable antenna it can drag for the same communications in extremely low frequency signals... (ELF)

even if it was, it's the biggest of all subs since the Typhoon SSBNs been retired, making more turbulence thx to increased H2O resistance.

And flying at mach 3.2 means the SR-71, which is not a small aircraft, is subject to enormous drag and compression induced heating makes it dangerous to touch when it lands after flying at top speed. Doesn't make it a slow plane despite enduring more drag than most other aircraft are naturally subjected to.

it's possible, but the UK has bases on its islands there & Swedes/Germans/Spanish/Italians/French can send their SSK/SSNs to track it 24/7

The SSKs wouldn't have the speed nor the endurance to keep up and I rather doubt they would have the sensor range to find it or keep track of it for very long either...

More efficient to use them as escorts or sentinels in the N. Atlantic/Pacific/Med.Sea to augment newer SSN/GN subs.

You say they are noisy, so you want to compromise the stealthiness of their new types by having a noisy sub follow them around?

The missiles this sub carries means it can handle entire battle groups or land strikes all on its own.

Even armed with nuclear armed Kh-102 missiles with 5,000km range and a nuclear payload... 72 missiles in the vertical launch tubes would be devastating to many countries.

or warehouses full of arms/production of drones.

The point is that they wont be making new ships with Granit or Vulcan or Moskit, so keeping them in storage for the future makes no sense.

With a nearly 1 ton warhead for the first two and significant kinetic energy for all three there are probably a few targets they could be used against that would free up naval missile storage space for new weapons. A bit like using 25mm naval guns and naval gun ammo in the ground to ground role because it is already paid for and can do a good job.

or they could cut off the missile section on retired Oscar & bring it to the Azov/Caspian Sea by rivers before launching them, if the entire sub is too big to sail it there.

Probably would be easier and cheaper to mount them in vertical launch ramps on a river barge... or old cargo ship.

Angeled.
P-500, 700 and 1000 have an angeled starting system, not vertical.
But it is a cosmetic matter, the case is that soon they will have a three zeros number of heavy anti ship missiles to spare.
All of them are still very potent, and better than any western competitor in all range, guidance, and firepower.
With only minor changes, all can be effectively used to target land base targets, the same way as Ch-22 were modified en masse. I suppose that with help of the same components ...
Those giant, penetrative, and armored warheads can devastate any target. ANY.
And are still being highly immune to countermeasures.
Honestly, I am shocked that no Ch-22 has ever been intercepted over Ukraine, with MAYBE one case that is arguable - the one that hit an apartment building.

Honestly, I am shocked that no Ch-22 has ever been intercepted over Ukraine, with MAYBE one case that is arguable - the one that hit an apartment building. wrote:

This shows that supersonic or hypersonic missiles are very difficult to intercept. Even the highly advanced subsonic stealth Kh 101 was intercepted over Ukraine. Of course, this does not give the full picture because the number of kh 101s fired into Ukraine was much greater than the kh 22/35, P-800, and Kindzhal. The advantage of supersonics and hypersonics is a very short time to do anything. In the case of subsonics, if they detect them, there is time for some preparation, etc

Yes, but that was only my secondary point.
The primary is, that Ch-22 is in service for more than 50 years. By any standards of the Soviet/Russian missile technology - it is an ancient ordnance followed by multiple next generations. Every single having better parameters.
Yet even this ancient missile can't be effectively intercepted by the most sophisticated AD that NATO can supply.
Which is a shocking observation, because leaves a very serious concern, that back in the 70s, when those missiles were already wide spread, Soviet naval aviation would have simple decimate a whole of US Navy.
If they can do shit about intercepting those in 2024, having both PAC2 and PAC3 MIM-104, what was a chance of dealing with them back in 1975 with the help of a Tartar?

We need more Naval Commander and DCS simulators, to intercept all the incomings! Hurray, murican armchair admirals, sleep well!

ALAMO wrote:Yes, but that was only my secondary point.
The primary is, that Ch-22 is in service for more than 50 years. By any standards of the Soviet/Russian missile technology - it is an ancient ordnance followed by multiple next generations. Every single having better parameters.
Yet even this ancient missile can't be effectively intercepted by the most sophisticated AD that NATO can supply.?

There is one more important aspect. Since Russia has a wide range of different supersonic and now hypersonic missiles, it can also design AD systems against such weapons. The West does not even have anything to test against to increase the capabilities of its ADs against hypersonic weapons. Unless they take those supersonics from Japan and France. They once bought some modifications of the Kh-31 from Russia, but where can they compare with such a modified P-800
The S-500 was definitely tested against this type of weapon. Moreover, the Russians claim that this system is capable of intercepting hypersonic weapons. Just being intercepted by s SLBM set is impressive For a mobile system.

 they will have a three zeros number of heavy anti ship missiles to spare.

Maybe that baby will get an successor. 

Exactly my point

Soviet/Russian one will be faster, will dive deeper, will be better armed with a wider variety of weaponry, and will be operated by half a crew. wrote:

They had or still have. The important SOKS system is a non acoustic submarine detection system. Track and thermal trace tracking system from submarines,and changes in the refractive index of water in the wake of submarines etc. Western ships did not have this. It is not known how effective it is, the system is very mysterious. You can't see it on the 885M, maybe it's hidden. However, you can hear elements of this system on 971. An interesting thing.

Wake detection is very effective.
It is a guidance system of Type 65 torpedos, which means that it needs to be able to detect and home on a wake path at least 2-3h old - it is a logical assumption for a weapon of such a range.
In general, Soviet subs carried tons of pimped-up toys for boys that nobody even considered seriously.
A torpedo tube launched helicopter? Like ... really?!?
A torpedo tube launched diversion submersible with a crew of two? Like ... really?
It is just one more proof how versatile and advanced projects those have been.

If you look at 705 type os subs, it is a shocking piece of engineering that outclasses every single idea the west had at the time.
Interceptor submarine?
A 1000+m dive capable?
42+ knots?
16 people shift crew?
Half of the boat operated in automatic mode only, with not a single person was needed?

At the time, its US based equivalent was Sturgeon ...

Wake detection is very effective. It is a guidance system of Type 65 torpedos, which means that it needs to be able to detect and home on a wake path at least 2-3h old - it is a logical assumption for a weapon of such a range. wrote:

So this is a very powerful support for a submarine's sonar systems.

If you look at 705 type os subs, it is a shocking piece of engineering that outclasses every single idea the west had at the time. Interceptor submarine? A 1000+m dive capable? 42+ knots? 16 people shift crew? Half of the boat operated in automatic mode only, with not a single person was needed? wrote:

There was one more innovative feature in this ship. LFMR liquid metal cooled reactor. An alloy of lead and bismuth. The reactor was reportedly more compact and more powerful. The only disadvantage was that it had to heat the coolant even in the port etc.?
The USA also tried using molten sodium, but they had many problems.

Honestly, I am shocked that no Ch-22 has ever been intercepted over Ukraine, with MAYBE one case that is arguable - the one that hit an apartment building.

Not a huge surprise, a relatively small supersonic target flying over a relatively large country with a non functioning IADS that relies on radar coverage operated by a third party and air defence systems scared of being destroyed when they set up or turn on their search radar.

Ancient Soviet huge subsonic drones flew several countries into HATO air space without being detected let alone shot down...

Regarding their old anti ship/land attack missiles I would say they have likely stopped production and don't want to make any more, which means new systems should be modular to allow the old missiles to be used up and then replaced with launch tubes that allow newer missiles to be used.

The problem there is that new missiles will likely be scramjet propelled and therefore much lighter than these rocket ramjet powered types.

A barge with angled launch tubes that is say 20m wide and 150-200m long could carry a lot of ready to launch missiles for salvo launches. Perhaps 4 missiles side by side and 20 missile launchers in length... so 80 missiles... of the various different types.

Equally you could mount them on a train carriage able to be elevated to the angle you need to launch on a platform that could be devised to handle all the different old launch tubes and multiple new launch tubes for the future.

The mobility of a train would be rather useful and enable missiles to be moved to where they were needed.

The idea is not to keep storing them but to get them in a usable platform to launch them.

You could even use them over much shorter ranges with much increased payloads for coastal attack... firing from 200km away with the equivalent of 2 or more tons of payload might allow specific targets to be hit that save newer model weapons for more heavily defended targets.

Another interesting solution used on the 955A project, probably also on the 885M. Additional electric drive for ultra-quiet swimming at low speed and maneuvers. The concept itself is nothing new. The Russian 971 and 671 had such an electric drive.
What's new is the propeller itself, which is both a screw and an electric motor in one. The screw is the rotor and the housing is the stator. Patrol on such a drive, excluding part of the gearbox etc. for the main screw/pump jet, is probably ultra quiet.



Electric drive Ok 300 from project 971. These submarine had two such drives. Project 955A has a total of four such drives, which look larger and more efficient.

Concerning SOKS -Система обнаружения кильватерного следа, Royal Navy also experimented with such a system on Trafalgar class SSNs. wrote:

Yes, it's true that the British experimented with a similar system. But the Russians had been experimenting since the 1960s. The 627A class already had this type of first-generation sensors installed. The Soviets then continued to develop these systems until now. They probably have it on the newest ships too. So they have the most experience in these non-acoustic detection means. These measures support Sonars etc. They are effective because they further develop them. There is no need to even mention the USA in this matter. The Russians also emphasize the non-acoustic stealth of their submarines in their ships.

But these electric motors are not more than an auxiliary drive in case of an accident or the reactor breakdown. A "get home" measure giving not more than 4-5 knots. wrote:

That's right, however, the Yasen/M and probably the Borey A also have some kind of hybrid drive. You can shift into a quiet gear using the Turboelectric drive at low speeds. There is something similar on the latest French SSN Barracuda.

"A feature of the Mirage steam turbine plant developed by the Kaluga Turbine Plant, which was originally intended for Yasen, was its block layout with a high degree of integration of all elements. In addition, it had to provide both high-speed travel under turbo-gear units with a reduction gearbox and drive to the main shaft, and a “sneak mode” driven by a propeller electric motor, powered, in turn, by autonomous turbogenerators. GTZA, which is one of the main sources of noise on nuclear submarines, remains disconnected. Such hybridization of the power plant made it possible to take full advantage of the fact that the new type of reactor operates in the same heat release mode in all operating modes. Also, the design of the gearbox has been greatly simplified"