5th gen Husky-class nuclear submarine

I would not like to go into the topic of submarines 949A and 971, but I am referring to new future ones...
I'm not writing that you wrote anything I don't agree with except that the modernization of project 971 submarines to 971M and 949A to 949AM proved to be a failure.
I only referred to the fact that I hope that what was published less than a year ago will come true.,..


13 July 2022, 08:00
Russia looks into building four extra Borei, Yasen-class submarines – source
The laying of some of them may begin in 2022 at the Sevmash shipyard, a source in the military-industrial complex said

MOSCOW, July 13. /TASS/. Russia is looking into the possibility of building two extra Borei-class and two extra Yasen-class submarines, a source in Russia’s defense industry has told TASS.

"In addition to the 10 Borei/Borei-A-class missile carriers and nine Yasen/Yasen-M attack submarines, at least two extra submarines may be built within each of those two families," the source said.

In his words, the keel laying for some of them may take place later this year at the Sevmash shipyard.

TASS was unable to officially confirm this information at the time of the publication.

Earlier, an unnamed source told TASS that two Borei-A nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (NATO reporting name: Dolgorukiy-class) will be laid down by the Sevmash Shipyard (part of the United Shipbuilding Corporation) in 2023.

By now, Sevmash has produced five Borei-class submarines for the Russian Navy.

Besides, Russia has three Yasen-class underwater cruisers in service, while six more are at various stages of completion.

https://tass.com/defense/1479217

Podlodka77 wrote:I would not like to go into the topic of submarines 949A and 971, but I am referring to new future ones...
I'm not writing that you wrote anything I don't agree with except that the modernization of project 971 submarines to 971M and 949A to 949AM proved to be a failure.
I only referred to the fact that I hope that what was published less than a year ago will come true.,..


MOSCOW, July 13. /TASS/. Russia is looking into the possibility of building two extra Borei-class and two extra Yasen-class submarines, a source in Russia’s defense industry has told TASS.

https://tass.com/defense/1479217

Yes, the two additional Borey's are planned (contract will probably be signed this summer - Armiya Forum 2023) and will be launched in mid-2024.
One of them will have the name "Peter the Great" since the Cruiser pr. 1144 "Peter the Great" will be docommisioned when it enters service "Nakhimov".

So, as I see it:

summer-2021 keel laying of 9th and 10th Borey's
Dec-2022 launching of 7th Borey
Dec-2023 launching of 8th Borey
summer-2024 keel laying of the 11th and 12th Borey's

by 2026-2027 the 9th and 10th Borey´s could be launched

so by 2027-2028 the 1st and 2nd Husky's could be laid and the number of submarines under construction between both types would be maintained

the question of pr.885M and Poseidon carriers is a separate matter, the Oscar IIs will continue to be used for a while, inlcuded a at least couple of 949AM that means at least 10-12 more years of use, and the construction of the 885M will last until at least 2035 or something else
so the construction of 885M is not as pressing as in the case of the SSBNs, and this construction will be done in parallel both to the Borey's now as the Huskys in the future

Could they build borei variants with the same size missile bays so that they could be monstrous cruise missile carriers? Essentially like the yasen but with emphasis on the larger cruise missile load out and less on the sub hunting capabilities with fewer torpedoes and a less powerful sonar array?

[quote="TMA1"]Could they build borei variants with the same size missile bays so that they could be monstrous cruise missile carriers? Essentially like the yasen but with emphasis on the larger cruise missile load out and less on the sub hunting capabilities with fewer torpedoes and a less powerful sonar array?

Edit: maybe for the future they could build more 955a subs and when it's time for overhaul they could modify the 3 older 955 variants to be cruise missile carriers?

It is the SSBNs that tend to be held on to for that sort of thing, I would suggest an old SSGN is more use as an SSGN than as some sort of arsenal weapon sub.

To AMCXXL.....

That story about "Peter the Great" is nonsense, and I strongly doubt that a ship that has been in service for only 25 years, that is, since April 1998, will be decommissioned. The Russians had many such idiotic statements...
Don't fall for that nonsense, AMCXXL.

Regarding the years you mentioned, yes, the Russians started building two Borei submarines in 2021, while the K-XXX Emperor Alexander III was launched last year. K-XXX "Knyaz Pozharskiy" will most likely be launched this year.

I have written a couple of times some of my assumptions about when keels could be laid for certain ships. I saw that it was completely ungrateful and that there could always be surprises.

Podlodka77 wrote:To AMCXXL.....

That story about "Peter the Great" is nonsense, and I strongly doubt that a ship that has been in service for only 25 years, that is, since April 1998, will be decommissioned. The Russians had many such idiotic statements...
Don't fall for that nonsense, AMCXXL.


\.

25 years but with problems with refurbishment - everything needs ot be remade form scratch practically - even though some documentation can be reused form Nakhimov. But PtG is large very expensive ship.

GunshipDemocracy wrote:25 years but with problems with refurbishment - everything needs ot be remade form scratch practically - even though some documentation can be reused form Nakhimov.  But PtG is large very expensive ship.

The refit of the Nahkimov isn't just new weapons and sensors bolted on and a few new cables run. The ship looks to have been gutted of its old Soviet-era equipment for which the suppliers have long since ceased to operate.  If we make the reasonable assessment that much of the equipment refit required sub-suppliers to design, engineer, manufacture and deliver new customised packages, then that will indeed explain the long delay in completing the refit and the blow-out in budget.   Its to be expected quite frankly, and should have been anticipated in such a huge refit project.

PtG will be cheaper and quicker as the replacement packages will essentially be repeat orders, and much of the vessel-wide infrastructural refit documentation will be directly reuseable.  Take 95% of the R&D and design elements out of the equation and a lot of cost/schedule simply vanishes.

in any case

Could they build borei variants with the same size missile bays so that they could be monstrous cruise missile carriers? Essentially like the yasen but with emphasis on the larger cruise missile load out and less on the sub hunting capabilities with fewer torpedoes and a less powerful sonar array?

I suspect the ideal solution would be to design a new sub that could have a large weapon bay/space that could be used for anti ship missiles which can also be used as land attack weapons, or ballistic missiles, or perhaps for that space to carry torpedoes.

That would mean smaller subs but that could be fitted with storage for Torpedos so the sub could be used as an SSN, or for vertical launch hypersonic anti ship and land attack missiles as well as anti sub weapons like Otvet, or be fitted with ballistic missiles of strategic or even larger numbers of tactical range missiles.

This would mean one sub design for SSN, SSGN, and SSBN, but would lead to a few issues because SSNs need excellent sensors, while SSBNs don't really need such amazing sensor suites.

Of course ideally in a world with no international strategic weapons limitations having a fleet of SSBNs makes little sense because they are single role tools of deterrence...

Having attack subs that carry land attack hypersonic missiles and anti ship hypersonic missiles and anti sub missiles but also a couple of long range sub launched hypersonic manouvering SLBMs would make the sub more useful and so instead of having say 20 SSNs and 20 SSGNs and say 10 SSBNs, you could have say 40 SSBN/SSGNs and say 20 small SSNs optimised for small attack interceptor subs, while your 40 bigger subs can carry land attack and anti ship and anti sub weapons as well as a couple of strategic missiles each.

If you had 40 of these subs you could spread the 16 missile tubes from 10 SSBNs across 40 subs by having 4 launch tubes each... you have the same number of missiles but the enemy has to hunt 40 subs instead of 10, and if they sink ten subs you still have 30 subs left with missiles.

It would be faster to launch your strike because at most you only carry 4 missiles, and then your mission does not end, you are now a hunter looking for enemy ships and subs to take out.

Of course a problem will be your SSBNs spend most of their time trying to get lost and keep within missile range of enemy primary and secondary targets, while you SSGNs will look for enemy ships and subs and generally try to look for threats to Russia.

Sort of not having all your eggs in one basket.

And giving a conventional role to an otherwise strategic vessel.

You could also manage the balance if you need to so most of your subs might not carry ballistic missiles except in times of tension and if you really wanted to you could load all your 40 subs with 16 or more missile tubes for ballistic missile use.

Honestly I think the days of huge SLBMs and ICBMs might be numbered as scramjet motors offer rocket and faster speeds with a massive reduction in required fuel weight... smaller and lighter missiles with the same range and same flight speed taking up less space and all round being safer... no oxygen producing chemicals in the fuel tanks needed.

Regarding PtG, it would be a good opportunity to test new naval NPPs and new bigger calibre guns and new missile options and also space for drones and other platforms, and also testing automation technology to reduce the crew size and automate systems... as well as new air defence systems and sensors to deal with hypersonic threats and drone threats...

If cheap was a good idea T-14s and T-90AMs would be cancelled for T-72M3s and future M4s, and MiG-29Ms would be in production (and in service in numbers by now) instead of the slow rate the MiG-35s are being produced... but production rates always start slow with new stuff and with experience and testing you get better products faster.

Kiko wrote:The design bureau announced the timing of the appearance of new nuclear submarines in the Navy, by Sergey Safronov for RIA Novosti. 06.20.2023.

The head of the Central Design Bureau "Rubin" Vilnit: new nuclear submarines should replace the "Boreys" after 2037.

New strategic nuclear submarines should replace the submarine cruisers of the Borey series after 2037, Igor Vilnit, director general of the Rubin Central Design Bureau for Marine Engineering (TsKB MT), said in an interview with RIA Novosti.

TsKB MT "Rubin" is Russia 's main developer of nuclear strategic and non-nuclear submarines, as well as marine drones. Now the Central Design Bureau is developing a project for a promising submarine "Arctur" for the Russian Navy.

"Naturally, Arcturus is not the only possible way for the development of nuclear submarines. The future is always multivariate. We are also working on more traditional versions focused on the medium term. Our work is also being carried out at Malachite. The formation of such a" field of options "allows the Military the marine fleet to correlate their tasks and the capabilities of industry and reasonably choose areas of development, set goals for scientific research.The time has come for this, because already in 2037 "Yuri Dolgoruky" - the lead "Borey" - will celebrate the 25th anniversary of service, and it will be replaced by a new ship will have to come," Vilnit said, without specifying the project due to secrecy.

https://ria.ru/20230621/podlodki-1879469485.html

As far as we can see, the Ohio class SSBN and strategic submarines of project 667BDRM will spend up to 40 years of active service, and this idiot is saying that "Dolgorukiy" will be replaced after 25 years of service.
Such statements by the Russians give me a headache because I know they are pure idiocy and have nothing to do with reality.
On the submarine K-535 "Yuri Dolgorukiy" the flag of St. Andrew was raised on December 29, 2012 and that submarine will have 38 years of active service in 2050, that is LESS than K-84 "Verkhoturye" (project 667BDRM) which has been active since December 1984.

Perhaps they have decided that it's replacement needs more missiles and that they do not want to waste money on operating an excessively large number of low capacity submarines.

The-thing-next-door wrote:Perhaps they have decided that it's replacement needs more missiles and that they do not want to waste money on operating an excessively large number of low capacity submarines.

Greetings to you...
As far as you can see, all nuclear submarines in the USA and Russia serve for more than 30 years, so the paragraph in the text "Dolgorukiy will turn 25 years old in 2037 and will be replaced" is pure idiocy.

And to add to make it clear, I was not criticizing KIKO who shared the link but the idiocy that was posted...

I suspect what they mean is that in 2037 that they wont instantly replace all the Borei class SSBNs all at once from the oldest to the newest, but that the oldest ones and any that have had problems or suffered damage would be replaced first.

More importantly it does say After 2037... 2090 is after 2037.

What they are saying is that by 2037 they are looking at technologies that might make the Borei at that time to start to not be ideal and in need of replacement...

Lots of ifs.

It would be like someone in the 1930s when the I-16 fighter was new speculating that by 1950 they might need to develop a new fighter to replace the I-16 from service... in the 1930s it was state of the art and the best available at the time, but technology moved on rather rapidly and within 10 years it was totally obsolete and was replaced much faster than they could possibly have guessed... but was their guess unreasonable... compare the Wright Flyer from about 1910 with the I-16 from about 1930 and the difference is enormous too.