Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

PapaDragon wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:.......
The US needs more ABM system, submarine, carrier, new strategic missile force.But at the moment the US spending more  for military in % term than China at the moment, so   all of them together is just enough to slow down the eroding competitiveness.

So, maybe they want to have more asses, but it is a big question if the US is capable to afford those assets.

USA has no problems paying for that stuff, especially Naval vessels, that's where the money is.

Russia has less "ground" to cover here so they don't need to do anything other than what they already do. Simple as that.

And Yasen is excellent product so it's not like they are throwing money on junk. Unlike Soviet subs it's designed for upgrades so they will be getting way more mileage out of them than from previous models.

The backbone of the US submarine navy is still the old cold war relic Los Angeles class, the real Oscar/Sierra/Akula/Yassen competitor Seawolf was too expensive for the US NAvy.

Singular_Transform wrote:..................
US can't afford the f35, the new carriers, or the seawolf class

They can't afford even to make two Virginia in every year.....

Singular_Transform wrote:.....The backbone of the US submarine navy is still the old  cold war relic Los Angeles class, the real Oscar/Sierra/Akula/Yassen competitor Seawolf was too expensive for the US NAvy.....

Singular_Transform wrote:....And as soon as China break up the US pacific alliance the cost of weapon system will explode to the sky,as the pacific supply chain / market die .

Seawolf is competitor to first Yasen only. Los Angeles is superior to all others you listed.

PapaDragon wrote:

They can and they do. Easily. All they needed was justification. They have it now.

PapaDragon wrote:
Seawolf is competitor to first Yasen only. Los Angeles is superior to all others you listed.

PapaDragon wrote:

China will not be breaking up anything any time soon. And even if they do Russian considerations will be completely irrelevant.

Stop expecting China to do heavy lifting for anyone.

verkhoturye51 wrote:Russians modernized 3 out of 4 Sierras, but they are still noisy as hell.

But Akula III is entirely different story. She is the only Russian boat in the history that was more quite than American boats, when comissioned in 1996 (105 dB vs 105-110 dB). She's the real reason for Seawolf.

Isos wrote:......
Akula are very good. I still can't understand that they gave one of their best Akula to India while they needed it.

PapaDragon wrote:

Isos wrote:......
Akula are very good. I still can't understand that they gave one of their best Akula to India while they needed it.

Renting one Akula pays for construction of one brand new Yasen

verkhoturye51 wrote:As far as I know, modernization of Sierras isn't cancelled. They've modernized the third last year and the forth is about to enter Zvezdochka.

TheArmenian wrote:
-Virginia is less capable than Seawolf only in some aspects, in other aspects it is just as good
-Virginia built rate started slow (1 per year), the rate is building up to be 2 per year

Singular_Transform wrote:

TheArmenian wrote:
-Virginia is less capable than Seawolf only in some aspects, in other aspects it is just as good
-Virginia built rate started slow (1 per year), the rate is building up to be 2 per year

-virginia cheaper, has better computers , has VLS , but can't dive as deep and not as fast as the seawolfs.

So, a seawolf is effective to hunt down virginias, and the virginia is effective to attack targets on land: )

It is similar like to say a 2018 BMW is way better in many aspect than a T-72 tank.
It is true, but  irrelevant.

-They would like to increase the number of commissioned Virginias. Like the US wanted to introduce the F-35 half decade earlier into the service then its actual delivery date.

Isos wrote:
Or maybe all those US information about Seawolf being a super sub are lies and they found out that for its super price the seawolf is not that much better than virginia, probably on the same lvl, and they stoped its construction for a more economical sub. It's not like they would say to people that one of their military stuff is bad. Same with Zumwalt they probably found out it isn't that great and Burkes had much more advantages. It's not only about weapons. Those things are size of buildings that need to work 24/7.

PapaDragon wrote:
Can anyone type a quick list of RuN nuclear attack subs and number of them per class (just class and number, not individual ships) that are in service now and those that are undergoing overhaul?

We have Sierras, Akulas, Oscars and Yasens but how many of each exactly right now?

I am getting lost in those spreadsheets in Russian....

verkhoturye51 wrote:Minus first two Pacific fleet submarines - Podolsk and Sv. Georgiy Pobedonosets, as they were decomissioned last month.

franco wrote:
Top figure is total, check individual fleets to see those submarines operational.
http://russianships.info/eng/today/

verkhoturye51 wrote:Minus first two Pacific fleet submarines - Podolsk and Sv. Georgiy Pobedonosets, as they were decomissioned last month.

franco wrote:So in use at the moment:

SSBN: 8 (+2 in overhaul)

SSGN: 7 (+2 in overhaul)

SSN: 13


Is this right?

KiloGolf wrote:.......
Pretty much.
And looking at the SSN numbers begs the question, is it enough?

Don't think so, for the size of patrol areas of Russia.