Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

Those late Soviet subs really are THICC.

Even Kilos are Kardashian ass scale wide.
Kilo 9.9m beam is nearly as wide as LA/Virginia 10m, German Type 212 is only 6.8m.

Akula 13.5m is fatter than Ohio 13m.

I never forget a series of pierside comparisons I once saw:
VictorIII (about same size as LA) looking tiny next to Akula
Akula looking tiny next to Oscar
Oscar looking tiny next to Typhoon

PapaDragon wrote:
Gepard almost ready

When was this pic taken?

Showed up on Balancer forum with this caption

The submarine "Gepard" in PD-50
Severomorsk, June 2018. Photo: Svyatoslav Morozov.

Okay thanks. Just didn't realize it was in repair. Open sources I checked had it listed as in service. The Ru SSN forces really seems to be suffering with low numbers of operational units though.

slasher wrote:Okay thanks. Just didn't realize it was in repair. Open sources I checked had it listed as in service. The Ru SSN forces really seems to be suffering with low numbers of operational units though.

It was in dry dock for a short period of time.
Probably to fix some tiny problems and refresh the hull and make it quieter.
It had similar "repair" at the same time last year in Nerpa.

Northern Fleet has 9 active nuclear subs + Kazan in trials, which is definitely not low number of operational subs.
Not to mention, Diesel electric subs, special purpose subs and SSBNs in Northern Fleet.

Ned86 wrote:

slasher wrote:Okay thanks. Just didn't realize it was in repair. Open sources I checked had it listed as in service. The Ru SSN forces really seems to be suffering with low numbers of operational units though.

It was in dry dock for a short period of time.
Probably to fix some tiny problems and refresh the hull and make it quieter.
It had similar "repair" at the same time last year in Nerpa.

Northern Fleet has 9 active nuclear subs + Kazan in trials, which is definitely not low number of operational subs.
Not to mention, Diesel electric subs, special purpose subs and SSBNs in Northern Fleet.

Thanks for the clarification @Ned86. However, according to Wikipedia.ru, these eight SSNs below are listed as currently operational. Is this correct and if so which would be the ninth?

Project 971 - Active: 3 (K-317 Pantera, K-154 Tigr, K-335 Gepard)
Project 945 - Active: 1 (B-276 - Kostroma)
Project 945A - Active: 2 (B-534 Nizhny Novgorod, B-336 Pskov)
Project 671RTMK - Active: 2 (B-138 Obninsk, B-414 Daniel Moskovsky)

With regards to my initial observation, it was in reference to the fact that of the 10/11 Project 971 SSNs in hand, I was wondering, having seen the pic of the Gepard in dry dock, if that would have made it just three of these currently operational for the entire Navy. Also, units of the other older models are being/have been retired. 

The Navy has indeed been addressing the issue of improving the quantity and quality of their SSN fleet though, with upgrades and new builds after having reached a critical state. Things are however expected to turn around in a couple years according to plans.

slasher wrote:

Thanks for the clarification @Ned86. However, according to Wikipedia.ru, these eight SSNs below are listed as currently operational. Is this correct and if so which would be the ninth?

Project 971 - Active: 3 (K-317 Pantera, K-154 Tigr, K-335 Gepard)
Project 945 - Active: 1 (B-276 - Kostroma)
Project 945A - Active: 2 (B-534 Nizhny Novgorod, B-336 Pskov)
Project 671RTMK - Active: 2 (B-138 Obninsk, B-414 Daniel Moskovsky)

Wikipedia is not good source of info.
Regarding nuclear attack and cruise missiles SUBs operational are:

Northern Fleet:

Project 949A OSCAR II - Active 3
Project 885 SEVERODVINSK- Active 1 + 1 in trials

Project 945A SIERRA II- Active 2
Project 971 AKULA- Active 2
Project 671 VICTOR III-Active 1

Pacific Fleet:
Project 949A OSCAR II - Active 2
Project 671 AKULA - Active 1

Source

Russian navy composition in early October

https://navy-korabel.livejournal.com/200105.html

Note that number of operational SSNs dropped over summer from 6 to 4. Only 4 inactive ones will definitely be modernised, so basically, Russian underwater defence relies on Kilo class, until Husky boats start coming.

verkhoturye51 wrote:Russian navy composition in early October

https://navy-korabel.livejournal.com/200105.html

Note that number of operational SSNs dropped over summer from 6 to 4. Only 4 inactive ones will definitely be modernised, so basically, Russian underwater defence relies on Kilo class, until Husky boats start coming.

Don't try to spin facts and show things like Ru Navy has only 4 SSN + KILO class.

Reality is:
5 x Oscar II
1 x Severodvinsk
1 x Kazan (sea trials, soon)
2 x Akula class (Gepard was just temporary in dry dock after long patrol, maybe is already fully active)
2 x Sierra II class
1 x Victor III class

-----------------------------
so, at this moment you have 12 Attack + Cruise missile nuclear subs ready to sail.

plus by the end of the year we could have:
2 x Akula
K - 157 Vepr, (final stage of upgrade)
K - 328 Leopard (deep modernization)

1x Victor III
B - 448 tambov (upgrade)

1x Oscar II Omsk (overhaul)

The SSN's primary role is ASW, that's why they r called hunter-killers in the USN. Other Russian subs such as SSGNs & SSKs r multi-role with land & anti-ship attack primary missions, they r poor substitutes for SSNs. The submarine fleet must be balanced, but it's not now.

Tsavo Lion wrote:The SSN's primary role is ASW, that's why they r called hunter-killers in the USN. Other Russian subs such as SSGNs & SSKs r multi-role with land & anti-ship attack primary missions, they r poor substitutes for SSNs. The submarine fleet must be balanced, but it's not now.  

Severodvinsk and Kazan submarines are listed as SSGN in that table, but they are far better than any other SSN in the Ru Navy and maybe even in the world.
The fact that they have 8 missiles tubes and carry 32 missiles, doesn't downgrade their anti submarine capabilities.
They are definitely the best subs in Ru navy. Their Sonars system, data processing and weapons systems are all new generation ones.
Kilo class is primary anti submarine platform, only recent one have ability to fire missiles at ships and coastal targets.

Point is, Ru navy doesn't  have only 4 nuclear attack subs. Roughly, right now there are around 40 operational subs in total, SSBN+SSGN+SSN+SSK. Others are in overhaul or modernization
It is important to look at sub fleet in total, only then you can realize true size and power.

https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/06/04/russias_nuclear_battery_ambition_see_a_10x_increase_in_power/


could this result in a completely new approach and lower cost for nuclear subs? Based on the yield of 3.3W/g a power plant to produce 26,000 KWh (same as a Los Angeles class sub) would weigh about 8 tons.

I don't think so.
Nickel-63 is a synthetic radio isotope & they're using manufactured diamond wafers between.
Manufacturing that on a scale suitable for powering a sub is likely to be catastrophically expensive I think

only 1 /1000th of a mm thick.. so who knows how much they will need. I am sure they can come up with something else as well maybe graphine, who knows. I have no idea how nickel 63 is produced so can't comment on that one. The battery will last for 100 years so it may still be not bad. Also they could go with much smaller batteries to replace diesel in a diesel electic sub, but with nuclear endurance.

Sure, but they'll have many subs in overhaul &/ modernization at any given time, due to slow new construction.

How many Akula is in service/modernisation at the moment?

Wiki show 4+5+ the Indian one.

Kuzbass is the only active in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky. 8 are on the other hand getting modernization, enabling them to remain in service till Husky class comes after 2030. Considering that they were better then contemporary US SSNs in early 1990s, they'll when modernized pose significant threat to rusty 1980s Ohio SSBNs.

Tsavo Lion wrote:The SSN's primary role is ASW, that's why they r called hunter-killers in the USN. Other Russian subs such as SSGNs & SSKs r multi-role with land & anti-ship attack primary missions, they r poor substitutes for SSNs. The submarine fleet must be balanced, but it's not now.  

No for SSK except 6 last Kilos 06363 armed with SS-N-30/3M-14S SSKs have for primary role ASW and ofc anti-ships 
But agree a Russian SSBN which left his homeport is surely better escorted by a Akula /Sierra/Yasen than a Oscar II but in the PF with only one seems soon finaly 2 Akulas Oscar II sometimes do the job.

Yasen is special a SSGN coz he have 32 missiles... but in fact SSGN/SSN

And agree with Ned86 these numbers are ridiculous as i have yet pointed out some boats can be in repair as in all others  Navies and ready in few days if the need is there…
minor repairs should not be taken into consideration for the number of boats usable.

verkhoturye51 wrote:Kuzbass is the only active in Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky. 8 are on the other hand getting modernization, enabling them to remain in service till Husky class comes after 2030. Considering that they were better then contemporary US SSNs in early 1990s, they'll when modernized pose significant threat to rusty 1980s Ohio SSBNs.

They are as good as Seawolfs, and way better than any of the Virginias.

Singular_Transform wrote:They are as good as Seawolfs, and way better than any of the Virginias.

Yes, Virginias don't even deserve mentioning really. 250 m test depth vs. 600 m of Shchuka-B. Underwater speed 25 knots vs. 35 knots. Tomahawks vs. Kalibr

Russia made 4 SSBNs in the last 5 years, how many did the US?

It's good to put things in perspective. The number of Russian and US submarines is the same, if you add diesels.

verkhoturye51 wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:They are as good as Seawolfs, and way better than any of the Virginias.

Yes, Virginias don't even deserve mentioning really. 250 m test depth vs. 600 m of Shchuka-B. Underwater speed 25 knots vs. 35 knots. Tomahawks vs. Kalibr

Which Virginia's I do not understand why it's so hard for people to grasp here, Newer Virginia's are better than the older ones, much like akula 2's are better then akula ones.

1. The Test Depth you speak off which is 250 was made with the older hulls. the newer ones can go deeper. Also you are leaving out keywords greater than 800 ft (240 m). If you had the time to look up test depth you would have known the submarine can go greater then 250 so should I consider you a liar?.

600m (rumored to be) it is also the Akula's 2 max operational depth and once they go that low it really limits what they can do, that's just the depth they go at the very max before the hull starts to crack.

They cannot even launch torps from that Depth.

How many Akula's two's does Russia have....1.

2. Not one person here can honestly tell me the true Depths of the submarines fact of the matter is that's classified and Russia and the Us keep the max dive depth of their subs quite hidden. That is a literally matter of national security.

US started to plan the Virginia replacements, supposed to be in the Seawolf class.

Each of them will be twice as expensive as the Virginias without payload modules, by the preliminary calculation. So it is expected to have cost overruns. : )

5.5 billion each means the two Yassen really cost as much as a Nimitz class.