Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


+84
TMA1
ALAMO
Arkanghelsk
Krepost
Mir
Podlodka77
owais.usmani
ult
lancelot
limb
Kiko
magnumcromagnon
Rasisuki Nebia
lyle6
andalusia
LMFS
miroslav
xeno
ultimatewarrior
thegopnik
Rodion_Romanovic
miketheterrible
Labrador
mnztr
Ned86
franco
hoom
PapaDragon
walle83
KiloGolf
Hole
verkhoturye51
Tsavo Lion
Peŕrier
Singular_Transform
Arrow
Project Canada
Honesroc
Tolstoy
Singular_trafo
SeigSoloyvov
Isos
nastle77
slasher
Svyatoslavich
Big_Gazza
artjomh
Morpheus Eberhardt
JohninMK
GunshipDemocracy
Stealthflanker
RTN
jhelb
Kimppis
Dima
Werewolf
mack8
flamming_python
eridan
kvs
Zivo
sepheronx
max steel
Austin
chicken
par far
Mike E
KomissarBojanchev
Flyingdutchman
collegeboy16
etaepsilonk
navyfield
calripson
Vann7
George1
dionis
TheArmenian
Hachimoto
TR1
Viktor
GarryB
runaway
Admin
Russian Patriot
88 posters

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    avatar
    ALAMO


    Posts : 6931
    Points : 7023
    Join date : 2014-11-25

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  ALAMO Tue Nov 01, 2022 5:30 pm

    Let me take a bat and make some noise in the cages, the gorillas will wake up this thread for good ! Laughing Laughing

    Hole, Mir and Podlodka77 like this post

    The-thing-next-door
    The-thing-next-door


    Posts : 1308
    Points : 1364
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Uranus

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  The-thing-next-door Tue Nov 01, 2022 5:30 pm

    One thing I have been wondering lately is, when the nuclear treaties fall through and everyone can have as many ballistic missile submarines as they wish. The Borie class submarines can only carry 96-160 lightweight nuclear warheads. Would we se something like the Akula return with perhaps liquid fueled SLBMs based around the Sarmat,s engines?
    Mir
    Mir


    Posts : 3283
    Points : 3285
    Join date : 2021-06-10

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Mir Tue Nov 01, 2022 5:42 pm

    Podlodka77 wrote:I take all the credit for waking up this section...  Laughing
    It's nice that people get away from the special military operation.
    And let me add that Russia announced in May that it tested the K-561 Kazan at the maximum depth of application, and that depth is 600 meters. That's twice as much as diesel-electric submarines.

    https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/14672145

    The working depth for project 885/885M and 949A submarines is 520 meters. For project 971 submarines, it varies from variant to variant and ranges from 480 to 520 meters.

    You can not trust these figures at all. As an example the K-278 Komsomolets (Mike)with an inner titanium hull was designed to reach depths of 1200+ meters. Some sources (besides Wikipedia) gives some interesting figures regarding the Lira/Alfa class saying it could reach depths just short of that at 1160 meters, but the test depth in Wikipedia is given at something like 400 meters! What a Face

    The Los Angeles on the other hand (due to a thin hull design in order to breach 30+ knots) could dive to around 390 meters max which was 90 meters less than the previous generation Sturgeon class!

    Hole, Broski and Podlodka77 like this post

    Podlodka77
    Podlodka77


    Posts : 2589
    Points : 2591
    Join date : 2022-01-06
    Location : Z

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Podlodka77 Tue Nov 01, 2022 5:42 pm

    The-thing-next-door wrote:One thing I have been wondering lately is, when the nuclear treaties fall through and everyone can have as many ballistic missile submarines as they wish. The Borie class submarines can only carry 96-160 lightweight nuclear warheads. Would we se something like the Akula return with perhaps liquid fueled SLBMs based around the Sarmat,s engines?


    Lightweight ?
    The useful payload of the RS-24 missile is 1,250 kilograms, while the R-30 Bulava carries 1,150 kilograms of payload.

    Mir likes this post

    The-thing-next-door
    The-thing-next-door


    Posts : 1308
    Points : 1364
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Uranus

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  The-thing-next-door Tue Nov 01, 2022 5:49 pm

    Podlodka77 wrote:


    Lightweight ?
    The useful payload of the RS-24 missile is 1,250 kilograms, while the R-30 Bulava carries 1,150 kilograms of payload.


    The RS-24 carries fewer warheads.
    avatar
    ALAMO


    Posts : 6931
    Points : 7023
    Join date : 2014-11-25

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  ALAMO Tue Nov 01, 2022 5:57 pm

    Mir wrote:
    You can not trust these figures at all. As an example the K-278 Komsomolets (Mike)with an inner titanium hull was designed to reach depths of 1200+ meters. Some sources (besides Wikipedia) gives some interesting figures regarding the Lira/Alfa class saying it could reach depths just short of that at 1160 meters, but the test depth in Wikipedia is given at something like 400 meters! What a Face
    The Los Angeles on the other hand (due to a thin hull design in order to breach 30+ knots) could dive to around 390 meters max which was 90 meters less than the previous generation Sturgeon class!

    Liras were notorious for chasing 40kts 800m down.
    This thing was a fukin' Ferrari - nobody dared to go so far.
    Soviets really pushed the limit much, much up (down Laughing ).
    Komsomolets dived more than 1000m...


    GarryB, Hole, Mir and Podlodka77 like this post

    Hole
    Hole


    Posts : 10919
    Points : 10897
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 48
    Location : Scholzistan

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Hole Tue Nov 01, 2022 8:55 pm

    The-thing-next-door wrote:
    The RS-24 carries fewer warheads.
    There will be 12 Boreis. This means between 1.152 and 1.920 warheads. Only for the seabased part of the triad. How much do you want?  Suspect

    ALAMO and Podlodka77 like this post

    avatar
    ALAMO


    Posts : 6931
    Points : 7023
    Join date : 2014-11-25

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  ALAMO Tue Nov 01, 2022 8:58 pm

    Moooo ...!
    Moooo ....!
    He needs MOOOOO for further wanking!

    Podlodka77 likes this post

    Podlodka77
    Podlodka77


    Posts : 2589
    Points : 2591
    Join date : 2022-01-06
    Location : Z

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Podlodka77 Tue Nov 01, 2022 9:06 pm

    Hole wrote:
    The-thing-next-door wrote:
    The RS-24 carries fewer warheads.
    There will be 12 Boreis. This means between 1.152 and 1.920 warheads. Only for the seabased part of the triad. How much do you want?  Suspect

    My friend, we shall see about that.... welcome
    Yes, Russia will probably have 12 strategic submarines in total, but it is not impossible that the first two 955 submarines will be converted to replace the BS-136 Orenburg (ex-667BDR Kalmar/NATO; Delta III submarine) and the BS-64 Podmoskovye which was once a 667BDRM Dolphin submarine. /NATO; Delta IV. If that happens, then the Russians will have to build two more project 955A submarines, that is, the 13th and 14th.
    Therefore, 12 submarines would remain in strategic use, while the first two would be converted into special purpose submarines.


    lancelot
    lancelot


    Posts : 2722
    Points : 2720
    Join date : 2020-10-17

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  lancelot Tue Nov 01, 2022 9:52 pm

    There is no need to make another Losharik carrier when they have the Belgorod.

    Podlodka77 likes this post

    Podlodka77
    Podlodka77


    Posts : 2589
    Points : 2591
    Join date : 2022-01-06
    Location : Z

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Podlodka77 Tue Nov 01, 2022 9:59 pm

    lancelot wrote:There is no need to make another Losharik carrier when they have the Belgorod.

    That's what I thought too, but until the submarines 09851/09853 arrive, I think that the K-329 Belgorod will have the primary purpose of scaring the West every time it leaves its home port. Until then, Losharik will undergo a thorough refit and modernization and will be below the BS-64 Podmoskovye submarine, until a larger number of "Khabarovsk" submarines are in service.
    The-thing-next-door
    The-thing-next-door


    Posts : 1308
    Points : 1364
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Uranus

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  The-thing-next-door Wed Nov 02, 2022 6:30 am

    Hole wrote:
    The-thing-next-door wrote:
    The RS-24 carries fewer warheads.
    There will be 12 Boreis. This means between 1.152 and 1.920 warheads. Only for the seabased part of the triad. How much do you want?  Suspect

    From the strategic submarine fleet, no less than 30,000.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 39322
    Points : 39820
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  GarryB Wed Nov 02, 2022 7:58 am

    If they can perfect scramjet engines and enlarged the Zircon to quadruple its onboard fuel supply to get its flight range of 1,500km up four times to 6,000km or more then cruise missiles can compete with ballistic missiles in range and performance... even a Zircon at 2.5 tons with four times more fuel... say 10 tons (needs a bigger solid rocket fuel stage to get airborne and moving fast) is a fraction of the weight of an SLBM like Bulava that is about 3 and a half times heavier...

    With nuclear propulsion and therefore unlimited range then having hundreds of cruise missiles on a sub that can run away and hide in the farthest corners of the globe ready to launch on any target at all is a real goal to aim for... especially if it has a dozen Poseidons too...

    The-thing-next-door likes this post

    avatar
    Arrow


    Posts : 2823
    Points : 2815
    Join date : 2012-02-12

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Arrow Wed Nov 02, 2022 9:33 am

    ghtweight ? The useful payload of the RS-24 missile is 1,250 kilograms, while the R-30 Bulava carries 1,150 kilograms of payload. wrote:


    Yes, but Bulava is a light SLBM. It can carry 1150 kg, which is enough for 6 MIRVs, 150kT each. That's enough. On the other hand, Tident II or Sineva can carry a load of 2800 kg, which is almost three times heavier. More decoys and ABM defeating systems can be loaded. The Bulava probably has very advanced fuel anyway and is faster than the older generation SLBM missiles.
    Podlodka77
    Podlodka77


    Posts : 2589
    Points : 2591
    Join date : 2022-01-06
    Location : Z

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Podlodka77 Wed Nov 02, 2022 11:34 am

    Arrow wrote:


    Yes, but Bulava is a light SLBM. It can carry 1150 kg, which is enough for 6 MIRVs, 150kT each. That's enough. On the other hand, Tident II or Sineva can carry a load of 2800 kg, which is almost three times heavier. More decoys and ABM defeating systems can be loaded. The Bulava probably has very advanced fuel anyway and is faster than the older generation SLBM missiles.


    Yes, that's true, but Russia has a huge number of ICBM missiles in land-based launchers; in silos and on MZKT trucks. The wikipedia information of 6 warheads of 150 kilotons and 10 warheads of 100 kilotons means nothing. The Russians did not declare and it is probably possible that the rocket carries 3 warheads of 300 kilotons each or 4 of 250 kilotons. My opinion is that the payload is in the range of 800 kilotons to one megaton per ICBM. And that is certainly not a little, and one submarine carries 16 missiles.
    We should also add the already ordered 46 RS-28 Sarmat missiles (which do not have to be the final number) which have a payload of 10 tons, which is slightly less than 168 missiles on 7 Ohio submarines with Trident missiles or a total of 4704 tons, while 46 RS-28 the missiles has 4600 tons of payload. Older R-36M2 (modification 5) Voevoda have 8.8 tons of payload.
    Podlodka77
    Podlodka77


    Posts : 2589
    Points : 2591
    Join date : 2022-01-06
    Location : Z

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Podlodka77 Wed Nov 02, 2022 12:31 pm

    02.11.2022
    TASS

    In "Sevmash" compared the volume of loading of the plant with the Soviet period

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Submar10
    Project 955 Borey submarine at Sevmash.
    Image source: flotprom.ru

    The enterprise has built nine ships for the Russian Navy in 10 years

    MOSCOW, 1 November. /TASS/. The Northern Machine-Building Enterprise (Sevmash, part of the United Shipbuilding Corporation) has built nine ships for the Navy of the Russian Federation in 10 years. This volume of loading of the plant is comparable to the Soviet period. This was reported to TASS by the general director of the enterprise Mikhail Budnichenko.

    "The enterprise has a serious shipbuilding program. The load volume is quite comparable with the Soviet period. The tasks are huge, nevertheless, they are up to the team, whose professionalism I am sure. I see that shipbuilders love and know their job," said the head of the shipyard .

    Budnichenko stressed that nine ships have been handed over to the Navy in 10 years. A group of missile carriers of the modernized Yasen-M and Borey-A projects is being built in the workshops, and the project 11442M ship is being modernized. “We have not commissioned such a number of ships in one year for many years,” the head of the enterprise said, recalling that only in 2021, three nuclear submarines were handed over to the fleet at once: Kazan, Novosibirsk and Knyaz Oleg.

    Also, according to him, the laying of two strategic nuclear missile carriers of projects 955A "Borey-A" was completed at Sevmash: "Dmitry Donskoy" and "Prince Potemkin". According to the company's press service, during its history, Sevmash handed over 137 nuclear-powered ships, 40 diesel submarines and 45 surface ships to the country's Navy.

    Budnichenko headed the enterprise 10 years ago. The Board of Directors of JSC "PO "Sevmash" at a meeting held in St. Petersburg on October 28 extended the powers of the General Director of "Sevmash" for another five years. Chairman of the Board of Directors Vladimir Korolev noted the effective and dynamic development of the enterprise under the leadership of Budnichenko.

    https://vpk.name/news/648829_v_sevmashe_sravnili_obem_zagruzki_zavoda_s_sovetskim_periodom.html

    GarryB and Broski like this post

    The-thing-next-door
    The-thing-next-door


    Posts : 1308
    Points : 1364
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Uranus

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  The-thing-next-door Wed Nov 02, 2022 2:08 pm

    Podlodka77 wrote:


    Yes, that's true, but Russia has a huge number of ICBM missiles in land-based launchers; in silos and on MZKT trucks. The wikipedia information of 6 warheads of 150 kilotons and 10 warheads of 100 kilotons means nothing. The Russians did not declare and it is probably possible that the rocket carries 3 warheads of 300 kilotons each or 4 of 250 kilotons. My opinion is that the payload is in the range of 800 kilotons to one megaton per ICBM. And that is certainly not a little, and one submarine carries 16 missiles.
    We should also add the already ordered 46 RS-28 Sarmat missiles (which do not have to be the final number) which have a payload of 10 tons, which is slightly less than 168 missiles on 7 Ohio submarines with Trident missiles or a total of 4704 tons, while 46 RS-28 the missiles has 4600 tons of payload. Older R-36M2 (modification 5) Voevoda have 8.8 tons of payload.

    While I do agree that Russias heavy ICBMs will make up for the lack of potency of thier ballistic missile submarines, I forsee that SLBMs will likely increase in potency with the dawn of a multipolar world order owing to thier ability to strike at pindostan from unexpected angles and with less warning than say the Sarmat. Hence when the treaties go out the window being able to rapidly increase the number of submarine carried warheads is important and the lightweight Bulava does not offer that capability.
    Scorpius
    Scorpius


    Posts : 1482
    Points : 1482
    Join date : 2020-11-06
    Age : 36

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Scorpius Wed Nov 02, 2022 4:20 pm

    Arrow wrote:


    Yes, but Bulava is a light SLBM. It can carry 1150 kg, which is enough for 6 MIRVs, 150kT each. That's enough. On the other hand, Tident II or Sineva can carry a load of 2800 kg, which is almost three times heavier. More decoys and ABM defeating systems can be loaded. The Bulava probably has very advanced fuel anyway and is faster than the older generation SLBM missiles.
    6 warheads of 150 kilotons falling into a circle with a radius of 3-5 kilometers will cause much more damage than detonating a 1 megaton warhead at one point. the interference of shock waves and the physical laws of the growth of the radius of damage relative to the power do their job. So if you want to break through the protection of a fortified point object, you have to take a heavy warhead, but if you need to hit a vast or extended object, launch a handful of light charges into it and enjoy the fire.

    GarryB and Broski like this post

    Scorpius
    Scorpius


    Posts : 1482
    Points : 1482
    Join date : 2020-11-06
    Age : 36

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Scorpius Wed Nov 02, 2022 4:25 pm

    Mir wrote:
    Podlodka77 wrote:I take all the credit for waking up this section...  Laughing
    It's nice that people get away from the special military operation.
    And let me add that Russia announced in May that it tested the K-561 Kazan at the maximum depth of application, and that depth is 600 meters. That's twice as much as diesel-electric submarines.

    https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/14672145

    The working depth for project 885/885M and 949A submarines is 520 meters. For project 971 submarines, it varies from variant to variant and ranges from 480 to 520 meters.

    You can not trust these figures at all. As an example the K-278 Komsomolets (Mike)with an inner titanium hull was designed to reach depths of 1200+ meters. Some sources (besides Wikipedia) gives some interesting figures regarding the Lira/Alfa class saying it could reach depths just short of that at 1160 meters, but the test depth in Wikipedia is given at something like 400 meters! What a Face
    I know for sure that the designs of Soviet submarines were tested for extreme operating conditions corresponding to a diving depth of over 2 kilometers.
    AMCXXL
    AMCXXL


    Posts : 995
    Points : 995
    Join date : 2017-08-08

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  AMCXXL Wed Nov 02, 2022 5:41 pm

    Scorpius wrote:
    I know for sure that the designs of Soviet submarines were tested for extreme operating conditions corresponding to a diving depth of over 2 kilometers.

    I doubt it, I think you are confusing 2000 meters with 2000 feet (about 600 meters)

    On Aug. 4, 1984, the Soviet nuclear-powered submarine K-278 Komsomolets (Mike class) reached a record submergence depth of 1,027 meters in the Norwegian Sea. At a depth of 800 meters the submarine made a torpedo salvo. Nobody had done anything like this before, or since after. Even present-day submarines cannot go deeper than 600 meters.

    Big_Gazza, owais.usmani and Broski like this post

    Scorpius
    Scorpius


    Posts : 1482
    Points : 1482
    Join date : 2020-11-06
    Age : 36

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Scorpius Wed Nov 02, 2022 8:00 pm

    AMCXXL wrote:
    Scorpius wrote:
    I know for sure that the designs of Soviet submarines were tested for extreme operating conditions corresponding to a diving depth of over 2 kilometers.

    I doubt it, I think you are confusing 2000 meters with 2000 feet (about 600 meters)

    On Aug. 4, 1984, the Soviet nuclear-powered submarine K-278 Komsomolets (Mike class) reached a record submergence depth of 1,027 meters in the Norwegian Sea. At a depth of 800 meters the submarine made a torpedo salvo. Nobody had done anything like this before, or since after. Even present-day submarines cannot go deeper than 600 meters.
    I'm not confusing anything. My parents worked at the enterprises that built these submarines and took part in these tests. I repeat once again: these were tests of individual structures, and they are quite explicable by the military approach to the reliability of structures, when the margin of safety should be at least 100% of the nominal operational loads.
    I hope you don't think that K-278 would have collapsed if it had plunged not to 1078, but to 1080 meters? In reality, it could withstand a dive of up to 1800 meters before it would fail.

    I should also remind you that the AC-12 has about 1/4 displacement (about 2,000 tons) from the K-278 (about 8,500 tons) almost submerged, but the AC-12 has confirmed dives to a depth of more than 3,500 meters. You don't think that Russia got these technologies from aliens, do you? This is the result of a long and hard work that has been going on for many decades.

    GarryB, Hole, owais.usmani and Broski like this post

    Big_Gazza
    Big_Gazza


    Posts : 4699
    Points : 4691
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Big_Gazza Thu Nov 03, 2022 8:46 am

    Big difference between max operating depth and crush depth. The former can be guaranteed by engneering design so that commanders can operate at max depth with total confidence. Crush depth can only be estimated, and no commander anywhere would even think about skirting that limit.

    Having said that, I think that in combat situations a Russian sub "rated" at 600m will be able to achieve a significantly greater depths. I'd expect that this sort of info is a very closely guarded state secret. I knew some ex-RN boomer guys from my offshore oil & gas days, and they would steadfastly refuse to talk about the true operating max of the boats on which they served.

    GarryB, Hole and Broski like this post

    Podlodka77
    Podlodka77


    Posts : 2589
    Points : 2591
    Join date : 2022-01-06
    Location : Z

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Podlodka77 Thu Nov 03, 2022 9:27 am

    Construction of warships of the main classes for the Russian Navy as of 01.11.2022

    Submarines, nuclear;
    4 strategic submarines of project 955A + 2 more in the plan.
    5 multipurpose nuclear submarines of project 885M (the Navykorabel.ru still classifies the Ulyanovsk submarine as project 09853) + 2 more 885M in the plan
    1 special purpose submarine of the project 09851 Khabarovsk
    Submarines, diesel-electric;
    3 submarines of the project 677 + a construction contract has been signed for one more
    2 submarines of the project 636.3 + a construction contract was signed for another 4

    In total; 10 nuclear submarines under construction, 5 diesel-electric submarines under construction, 4 more nuclear submarines planned for construction and 5 more diesel-electric submarines planned for construction.

    Surface warships

    5 frigates of project 22350 are under construction, a contract on "Army-2020" for two more was signed, as well as a protocol on the possible construction of 2 frigates at the Amur Shipyard
    corvettes;
    1 project 20386 corvette under construction,
    4 project 20385 corvettes under construction + signed contract for the construction of 3 more,
    3 project 20380 corvettes under construction and a contract signed for 2 more.

    2 universal landing ships of project 23900 under construction,
    2 large landing ships of project 11711 under construction.

    These are submarines and ships launched on the water and in the testing phase and in some cases before being put into operational status;

    submarines;
    * K-XXX Generalissimus Suvorov (955A), final tests and before introduction into active status
    * K-571 Krasnoyarsk (885M); tests are underway and the submarine is about to be put into operational use, if not by the end of the year, then certainly in the first months of next.
    * B-586 Kronstadt; this submarine has already been tested several times and is waiting to be put into active status.
    * B-588 Ufa; final tests and before introduction into active status

    Surface warships;

    * Frigate Admiral Golovko (22350); i don't want to waste time..
    * Merkuriy; it is possible that the delivery date planned for this year will be moved to next year.
    * Rezkiy; final tests and before introduction into active status

    the construction of submarines is going much better..
    Thats all folks...

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 21704910

    GarryB and Big_Gazza like this post

    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 39322
    Points : 39820
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  GarryB Thu Nov 03, 2022 12:15 pm

    While I do agree that Russias heavy ICBMs will make up for the lack of potency of thier ballistic missile submarines, I forsee that SLBMs will likely increase in potency with the dawn of a multipolar world order owing to thier ability to strike at pindostan from unexpected angles and with less warning than say the Sarmat. Hence when the treaties go out the window being able to rapidly increase the number of submarine carried warheads is important and the lightweight Bulava does not offer that capability.

    Unexpected direction attacks... Sarmat can be launched via the South Pole to attack the US, and Poseidon and Thunderbird can come from any direction too... in fact a fractional orbital bomb over the US knocking out all their radar will mean missiles coming from any direction will be a surprise.

    6 warheads of 150 kilotons falling into a circle with a radius of 3-5 kilometers will cause much more damage than detonating a 1 megaton warhead at one point.

    It is about energy distribution... a single super powerful bomb is not actually that effective against a wide area target because its energy is vastly concentrated in the centre... think of it as bomb... by splitting up a bomb into small cluster bombs and spreading them over a large area you create more casualties amongst a deployed enemy force than dropping a bigger bomb anywhere in the field the enemy soldiers are in.

    A 500kg bomb will turn men to paste, but even a 200 gramme explosion will kill a man and if you split that 500kg bomb into 200 gramme bomblets then you vastly increase the area of territory that you can kill people over... and you get the added bonus of reflected blast waves to intensify the damage too.

    Podlodka77 likes this post

    Tolstoy
    Tolstoy


    Posts : 235
    Points : 229
    Join date : 2015-07-12

    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Tolstoy Sat Nov 05, 2022 6:53 pm

    GarryB wrote:in fact a fractional orbital bomb over the US knocking out all their radar will mean missiles coming from any direction will be a surprise.
    The U.S can set up radar units and listening posts in South America to detect a FOB approaching from the South.

    Sponsored content


    Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion - Page 30 Empty Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Jun 13, 2024 7:19 am