But can they also be used for torpedo attacks against surface warships ? I know they carried ASW missiles which were not effective against surface warships
How effective were they against an average western Frigate/destroyer in the 80s
nastle77 wrote:These classes of submarines were primarily designed for ASW during the cold war
But can they also be used for torpedo attacks against surface warships ? I know they carried ASW missiles which were not effective against surface warships
How effective were they against an average western Frigate/destroyer in the 80s
Thanksartjomh wrote:nastle77 wrote:These classes of submarines were primarily designed for ASW during the cold war
But can they also be used for torpedo attacks against surface warships ? I know they carried ASW missiles which were not effective against surface warships
How effective were they against an average western Frigate/destroyer in the 80s
I think you have it slightly backwards.
First generation nukes (November) were used primarily for against surface ships, while the second generation onwards were designed also with anti-submarine capability.
ASW was much much harder than ASuW in 1950's, so all submarines before Victor could do ASuW, but not ASW.
Because anti-submarine capabilities of surface ships increased significantly during the 60's, it was not considered very realistic that a torpedo attack would be able to penetrate a SAG's defensive screen. So, submarines naturally evolved for longer range using cruise missile which eventually created the SSGN/SSN split.
A pre-Victor 3 nuke getting into torpedo distance of a SAG is still pretty unrealistic due to introduction of ASROC and layered scouting capabilities.
Victor III was revolutionary for the Soviet Navy both in terms of quieting (thanks, Toshiba!), but also because it was the first Soviet SSN to carry long-range anti-ship missiles (Granat), while all SSN prior to it only carried torpedoes and rocket-torpedoes like Starfish/Vyuga. This has tremendously increased their ASuW capability.
All attack submarines since Victor III (except Alfa) were also able to carry a large arsenal of long-range anti-ship missiles and would participate in a PAD (Protoviavianosnaya diviziya), a counter-carrier division, a type of ad hoc SSGN/SSN ship formation that would be used for war-type surge.
nastle77 wrote:Thanks
How many SSN carried the Granat cruise missile ? by the end of the cold war
I have read only 8 victor III, akula and Sierra carried it
Do you think the earlier subs ( before victor III) could still participate in ASuW against non-USN SAG ( like those without carriers) ?
nastle77 wrote:Do you know if the Soviet navy conducted any excercises with its SSN to determine if they can penetrate a SAG , and any details of that available anywhere
artjomh wrote:nastle77 wrote:These classes of submarines were primarily designed for ASW during the cold war
But can they also be used for torpedo attacks against surface warships ? I know they carried ASW missiles which were not effective against surface warships
How effective were they against an average western Frigate/destroyer in the 80s
I think you have it slightly backwards.
First generation nukes (November) were used primarily for against surface ships, while the second generation onwards were designed also with anti-submarine capability.
ASW was much much harder than ASuW in 1950's, so all submarines before Victor could do ASuW, but not ASW.
Because anti-submarine capabilities of surface ships increased significantly during the 60's, it was not considered very realistic that a torpedo attack would be able to penetrate a SAG's defensive screen. So, submarines naturally evolved for longer range using cruise missile which eventually created the SSGN/SSN split.
A pre-Victor 3 nuke getting into torpedo distance of a SAG is still pretty unrealistic due to introduction of ASROC and layered scouting capabilities.
Victor III was revolutionary for the Soviet Navy both in terms of quieting (thanks, Toshiba!), but also because it was the first Soviet SSN to carry long-range anti-ship missiles (Granat), while all SSN prior to it only carried torpedoes and rocket-torpedoes like Starfish/Vyuga. This has tremendously increased their ASuW capability.
All attack submarines since Victor III (except Alfa) were also able to carry a large arsenal of long-range anti-ship missiles and would participate in a PAD (Protoviavianosnaya diviziya), a counter-carrier division, a type of ad hoc SSGN/SSN ship formation that would be used for war-type surge.
archangelski wrote:Hi artjomh, happy to see your posts here.
For Project 671 RTM Shchuka class (Victor III), the S-10 Granat (SS-N-21) is, as far as I know, only a strategic cruise missile for land based targets attack. Do you have info about an antiship version ?
The Project 971 Shchuka-B (Akula) class have the 3M-54 Klub (SS-N-27) antiship missile launch capabilities.
artjomh wrote:
Oh my, I just realized how much I brainfarted there. Please ignore, Granat of course only has inertial navigation... I don't know what I was thinking when I wrote "anti-ship". Thank you for noticing this, so people don't get misinformed.
And no, no 3M54 on 971 yet..
Defense Secretary Caspar W. Weinberger and other administration officials are blaming Japan and Norway for allowing their high-tech companies to ship to the Soviet Union the technology needed to manufacture smooth, quiet submarine propellers.
But those explanations are only the latest chapters of a long book, according to antisubmarine warfare (ASW) specialists inside and outside the government. "Quieting submarines is a laborious process of doing a lot of little things," one veteran ASW specialist said.
The Soviets have been doing that at the same time that they dared to go beyond the technologies pushed by the late admiral Hyman G. Rickover, the dictator of U.S. submarine design for three decades, the specialist said. As a result, he said, in addition to better propellers, Soviet boats today incorporate advances in power plants, metallurgy, hull shapes, low-friction coatings and a broad range of quieting techniques.
"The stuff the Soviets got from Toshiba and Kongsberg helped them manufacture smooth, precisely shaped propeller blades," said another ASW specialist and former Navy submariner. "But somebody had to design those propellers and do the engineering . . . the real breakthroughs the Soviets made to make their propellers quiet, not the milling by Toshiba's machines."
nastle77 wrote:Can anyone tell me when the following submarines were converted to the Yankee notch configuration ?
http://russianships.info/eng/submarines/project_667a.htm
this above link the information reads as
K-26 13.11.1983-1985,
K-253 17.05.1984-20.12.1985,
K-395 24.06.1988-30.12.1991,
K-423 16.10.1978-27.12.1987, «Zvezda», Bolshoy Kamen` –
K-236 с 23.11.1979-not completed,
K-399 с 18.01.1982-not completed,
K-408 8.07.1983-10.05.1984.
Does this mean that K-26, K-253 K-423 and K-408 were converted by 1990 ?
Or am I reading it wrong
artjomh wrote:nastle77 wrote:Can anyone tell me when the following submarines were converted to the Yankee notch configuration ?
http://russianships.info/eng/submarines/project_667a.htm
this above link the information reads as
K-26 13.11.1983-1985,
K-253 17.05.1984-20.12.1985,
K-395 24.06.1988-30.12.1991,
K-423 16.10.1978-27.12.1987, «Zvezda», Bolshoy Kamen` –
K-236 с 23.11.1979-not completed,
K-399 с 18.01.1982-not completed,
K-408 8.07.1983-10.05.1984.
Does this mean that K-26, K-253 K-423 and K-408 were converted by 1990 ?
Or am I reading it wrong
Only K-253 (1989), K-395 (1992) and K-423 (sometime between 1988 and 1992).
K-26 was supposed to be converted into a minisub mothership, but conversion was never finished.
236, 399 and 408 were never completed as cruise missile carriers.
nastle77 wrote:Was the Victor II class submarine equipped with type 65 21 inch ASuW torpedoes ? or any Asuw torpedoes ?
Also the SSN-16 Stallion was a dual role weapon ? ASuw and ASW?
Did it have the same range in the ASW and Asuw role ?
I'm assuming the Victor III was better suited to ASUW than Victor I/II
as the Victor III had the 2 65 cm tubes and can carry the type 65-76 torpedoes which had the longer range ( 8 torpedoes )
Also it seems the Akula and Sierra class also had the 65 cm tubes so can fire the ASUW type 65-76 torpedoes ?
However the Alfa class was kind of a ASW specialist as it had no 65 cm tubes only 53 mm tubes
is that accurate ?
High capacity SSN geared towards ASUW role ? Or just general purpose SsnGarryB wrote:They could carry cruise missiles but also torpedoes in the spaces where the SLBMs were, so they became large capacity SSNs... but were not intended as such.
The original purpose was cruise missile carrier.
A newer modification of a newer SSBN would involve ready to launch SLCMs that would be available to launch right away without being loaded into tubes and most armed with conventional warheads for land attack.
If sub standard UKSK tubes were used then anti ship and anti sub weapons could also be loaded to make it even more flexible.
GarryB, flamming_python, Big_Gazza, GunshipDemocracy, LMFS and lancelot like this post
GarryB and flamming_python like this post
lancelot wrote:Pretty impressive museum.
|
|