Russian Navy: Status and News #5

Have any of you seen the new ultra huge sonar nuke powered attack sub? Sonar is impressively huge.



https://th.bing.com/th/id/R4e4cd026818e635a089e8d25cfef2358?rik=HVJBwlCP1Mxrcw&riu=http%3a%2f%2faemstatic-ww2.azureedge.net%2fcontent%2fdam%2fmae%2fonline-articles%2f2017%2f06%2f688+submarine+26+June+2017.jpg&ehk=oIxOsyq9h4xYekMgrzx0GZliRVBYyQA%2bUmw%2bK6TPcWM%3d&risl=&pid=ImgRaw

Crazy huge they claim to hear anyone and anything first. Not trying to start a battle, guys, just info.

I called and predicted this some years back:

Putin supported the idea of ​​nationalizing defense enterprises that do not fulfill state defense orders


Today, a general agreement was signed between employers, trade unions and the government of the Russian Federation for a period until 2023. President Vladimir Putin also took part in the signing ceremony of this document. One of the topics that was discussed at the same time was the topic of the work of defense enterprises.

In particular, it was noted that there are still enterprises in the country that do not fully fulfill their obligations under the state defense order (SDO). As a result, when funds from government customers are fully transferred to the accounts of these enterprises, the state defense order is implemented with failures - the work can be postponed to a later date, not executed in full for the reporting period.

In such a situation, as the Kremlin press service notes, an idea was expressed about the possible nationalization of enterprises that do not ensure the fulfillment of the state defense order. Moreover, interestingly, such a proposal was made by the main FNPR (Federation of Independent Trade Unions of the Russian Federation) Mikhail Shmakov.

The Kremlin press service reports that President Vladimir Putin supported such a proposal.

According to the head of state, such a mechanism is possible in relation to malicious non-executors of the state defense order.

Thus, a kind of revision of the results of privatization is still possible. At this stage, we are talking about defense enterprises, the owners of which cannot actually fulfill their obligations to service orders from the state.

https://en.topwar.ru/181490-putin-podderzhal-ideju-nacionalizacii-predprijatij-oboronnoj-sfery-ne-ispolnjajuschih-gosoboronzakaz.html

What's interesting is that both the trade unions as well as VVP supports nationalizing the enterprises that failed state orders, and the vast majority of those are in the naval sector. I advocated for this a few years back as the proper remedy to get their acts together.

Currently Russia operates 1 Yasen. The second one Kazan should be commissioned in the next few years.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Hole wrote:1. Half of the american subs are in urgent need of maintenance.
2. Most of these subs are bound to protect carriers/assauls ships.
3. They have to keep at least 2/3 of the subs to "protect" them against China, Iran and all those other evil-doers aound the world.

I didn't realize you had access to classified information about US Nuclear Submarine maintenance...

Oh wait...you don't?

Oh right you're talking straight out your ass~.

The moronic shit people say on this forum, its like a bad comedy show.

I guess a genius like you can search the net for some of the reports that came out the last few years from different agencies/offices/think tanks that revealed the dire straits in which the maintenance of ships/subs and planes in all of the american forces is.

Hole wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Hole wrote:1. Half of the american subs are in urgent need of maintenance.
2. Most of these subs are bound to protect carriers/assauls ships.
3. They have to keep at least 2/3 of the subs to "protect" them against China, Iran and all those other evil-doers aound the world.

I didn't realize you had access to classified information about US Nuclear Submarine maintenance...

Oh wait...you don't?

Oh right you're talking straight out your ass~.

The moronic shit people say on this forum, its like a bad comedy show.

I guess a genius like you can search the net for some of the reports that came out the last few years from different agencies/offices/think tanks that revealed the dire straits in which the maintenance of ships/subs and planes in all of the american forces is.

Oh really? what offices and agencies, also "think tanks" LOL those don't matter at all as they aren't given such information and even if they do they aren't allowed to comment on it to the public, so any claims of such are false and bogus.

So show me buddy what US agencies and offices state half the US sub fleet is in need of dire maintenance

I'll be waiting.

the reality is you just an online anti-US troll spouting lies and other crap because it makes you happy to think so. That's all this is, fact is there is no evidence of this claim maybe some anti us sources have stated this but that's like me taking everything that comes out of the pentagon has fact.

bren_tann wrote:Currently Russia operates 1 Yasen. The second one Kazan should be commissioned in the next few years.

The Yasen is the su 57m of submarines.

They have 5 Akula 3's in service and another handfull coming in from being modernized.

Just because there's 1 Yasen doesn't mean the fleet is a slouch

Backman wrote:

bren_tann wrote:Currently Russia operates 1 Yasen. The second one Kazan should be commissioned in the next few years.

The Yasen is the su 57m of submarines.

They have 5 Akula 3's in service and another handfull coming in from being modernized.

Just because there's 1 Yasen doesn't mean the fleet is a slouch

Yasen lacks pump jet. The upcoming Khabarovsk should be able to go toe to toe with Seawolf / Virginia. In any event, Russia needs 10 Yasen and 10 Khabarovsk in order to be able to challenge America in undersea.

[quote="SeigSoloyvov"]

Hole wrote:

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

Hole wrote:1. Half of the american subs are in urgent need of maintenance.
2. Most of these subs are bound to protect carriers/assauls ships.
3. They have to keep at least 2/3 of the subs to "protect" them against China, Iran and all those other evil-doers aound the world.

I diis forum, its like a bad comedy show.

the reality is you just an online anti-US troll spouting lies and other crap because it makes you happy to think so. That's all this is, fact is there is no evidence of this claim maybe some anti us sources have stated this but that's like me taking everything that comes out of the pentagon has fact.

There has been stories in the media the last couple years that aren't typical of the USN.

Bedbugs found on US Navy submarine USS Connecticut

(CNN)The USS Connecticut, one of the most elite submarines in the US Navy, was infested with bedbugs, and some crew members chose to sleep in their cars.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/11/us/bedbugs-navy-submarine-trnd/index.html

With the Navy’s submarine maintenance woes, there may yet be hope
https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/navy-league/2019/05/08/among-the-navys-submarine-maintenance-woes-there-may-yet-be-hope/

The hapless Boise returned from a patrol in 2015, and it hasn’t gone back on patrol since. The inactivity has caused Boise to lose its dive certification, one of three attack subs in the fleet currently unable to submerge. It’s been four years and counting, and now it wasn’t even funded in the Navy’s fiscal 2020 budget request.

bren_tann wrote:

Backman wrote:

bren_tann wrote:Currently Russia operates 1 Yasen. The second one Kazan should be commissioned in the next few years.

The Yasen is the su 57m of submarines.

They have 5 Akula 3's in service and another handfull coming in from being modernized.

Just because there's 1 Yasen doesn't mean the fleet is a slouch

Yasen lacks pump jet. The upcoming Khabarovsk should be able to go toe to toe with Seawolf / Virginia. In any event, Russia needs 10 Yasen and 10 Khabarovsk in order to be able to challenge America in undersea.

Russia had a Kilo class submarine with a pump jet in 1990.

It was a design choice. But you are sitting here saying that pump jet is superior full stop. It isn't. If it was, the Yasen would have a pump jet.

First, pump jets don’t necessary mean quieter running. Propeller blade shape is actually more important, reportedly. Second, most common form of a pump jet employed in submarines, the ducted propeller, is most advantageous at lower speeds, about up to 10 knots, and rapidly lose efficiency above that level, requiring putting more power to the propeller, which actually defeats the noise advantage, as more power = more noise generated by the machinery. So the pump jet is best suitable for the somewhat slow-running subs like boomers, and not much so for attack subs. And, indeed, Russian boomers use pump jets since the project 941 (Typhoon/Akula class), but Yasen trades a somewhat higher noise of the screw for higher efficiency at speed, which allows it to use less power at the same speed. Less power=quieter at that speed.

In submarines design, you pick a speed range, and you pick your quiet level.

BTW, many subs in the same class can have different propellers and therefore are optimized for different missions. The operational depth of the sub has a lot to do with choice also. Water is more compressed at depth so less cavitation anyway.

Backman wrote:
It was a design choice. But you are sitting here saying that pump jet is superior full stop.  It isn't. If it was, the Yasen would have a pump jet.

As I've said a few times, pump-jets are good at reducing cavitation noise, but given that russian subs cruise deeper in colder waters, that is not the problem for them as it is with US subs with shallower operating depths running in warm waters including the tropics.

Agree especially in one key aspect - if pump jets were all they are cracked up to be, then the Yasens would have too. The fact that they don't (while the Boreis do) is a clear indicator that other factors come into play, not just the feeings of murican armchair admirals and fan-bois.

Gomig-21 wrote:Have any of you seen the new ultra huge sonar nuke powered attack sub?  Sonar is impressively huge.

Is it any bigger than the spherical array in the Severodvinsk, the MGK-600? I guess we can't tell as AFAIK there are no public images of it, but it certainly won't be any smaller.

bren_tann wrote:Currently Russia operates 1 Yasen. The second one Kazan should be commissioned in the next few years.

Kazan will likely be in service before the years end, and Novosibirsk stands a reasonable chance of being done with trials in the same timescale.  In 2022 we'll see both Krasnoyarsk and Arkhangelsk finishing trials.

With some luck that will be 1x 855 and 4x 855M by end-2022 or early 2023.  Thats a much better prospect than you are alluding too. Deliberate misinfo attempt or genuine error?... Hmmm...

Guys, don't you recognize your old friend Ultron?

I mean "10 Khabarovsk to challenge America undersea" c'mon he isn't even trying anymore

PapaDragon wrote:
Guys, don't you recognize your old friend Ultron?

Oh my, pls say it isn't so.....

I thought this forum had long wiped that shit from its shoe.

PapaDragon wrote:
Guys, don't you recognize your old friend Ultron?

I mean "10 Khabarovsk to challenge America undersea" c'mon he isn't even trying anymore

Or saying Kazan will be commissioned in few years, when it will be handed out to the VMF the 25th of July. Just low level

Yasen lacks pump jet. The upcoming Khabarovsk should be able to go toe to toe with Seawolf / Virginia. In any event, Russia needs 10 Yasen and 10 Khabarovsk in order to be able to challenge America in undersea.

They have been testing pumpjets on a Kilo class sub for quite some time... the fact that they chose not to use it suggests they have good reasons to do so.

Russia does not need to challenge the US... and even if they did... how exactly would have twenty very expensive submarines achieve that?

Submarines are only useful if they are invisible and near Russia their SSKs are better at that than any SSN anywhere.

If they hit their latest target 1/2 the time would still be 8 years!!!

Tying up one Kirov for 8 years is not the end of the world... they still have Slava class cruisers and one other operational Kirov that could escort the Kuznetsov around the world.

A few upgraded old destroyers would be ideal to support world wide operations because their size should allow good endurance while the newer ships patrol the waters around Russia and keep the home country safe.

GarryB There is no point in including new Russian aircraft carriers in these talks. Two decades have passed before they are created. They can only be considered after they have laid the keel for a new aircraft carrier. It is not known when this will happen. Not fast.

When you are planning you have to allow for what happens when you achieve your goals and their goals will be that probably by the mid 2030s they will have a CVN in the water fitting out supporting Kuznetsov operations... likely later on with two CVNs and perhaps four or six Helicopter carriers of the 40K ton class based on the two currently laid down would mean at best they could probably handle two major situations, where cruisers and destroyers and a CV/N could be sent to two locations allowing for one CV/N to be in dock or refit.

If you are not planning to have 10 CVNs then that will effect how many destroyers and cruisers your need and the timescale you will need to have them ready by... otherwise like the UK you might find you have two new aircraft carriers but no decent ships to escort them both on actual missions because the funding all went to these two aircraft carriers and their enormously expensive fighters while neglecting the support ships and escort ships they actually need to operate safely and effectively.

On the cost of the fleet that Russia needs

In the previous article " On the fleet that we need ", I outlined in the most general terms the composition of the fleet that would meet the requirements laid down in the Decree of the President of the Russian Federation of July 20, 2017 No. 327 "On the approval of the Fundamentals of the state policy of the Russian Federation in the field of military -marine activities for the period up to 2030 ".

It turned out, of course, on a very large scale. We will need aircraft carriers, missile carriers, new types of submarines, destroyers and all sorts of other things. And, of course, questions arise - are we capable of building such a fleet technically, and will we pull it economically?

Full article: https://6b6gjclcha6ibjpa45wvvqdamu--topwar-ru.translate.goog/181285-o-stoimosti-flota-kotoryj-nam-nuzhen.html

And yet another Russian Navy article...

Just because the americans can´t design and build a proper screw for there subs doesn´t mean that pump-jets are better.

The same folks that keep on telling us that western subs are quieter, western sonars are better, pump-jets are better then screws told us the last 20 years that the F-35 is the best fighter jet ever developed, with unmatched capabilities... and now the americans need a new fighter jet (propably a slightly modernised F-16) because the F-35 turned out to be a lemon.

Looking at real facts: russian subs are faster and can dive deeper then western ones. They´re equipped with rocket-propelled torpedos, super-cavitating torpedos, ASW missiles with far greater range then western ones, and now with tube-launched anti-ship and cruise missiles and soon hypersonic missiles. The only way westerners can still claim "superiority" is by unproven measures like "quieter" and "sonar better".

Russia leads the world in things like nuclear reactors/propulsion, there rocket engines are unmatched, metalurgy and welding capacities are world leaders, but still some people try to tell us that somehow russian engineers are unable to build quiet subs.

Well tbh the soviets were like 30 years behind in CNC machinery compared to Japan and the US until they allegedly bought it from Toshiba in 1988 I think. Before that their screws were very primitive and caused a lot more noise from cavitation and vortices, due to extreme backwardness in precision manufacturing compared to western SSN screws. Idk how much they've bridged the gap by now,but I believe it's safe to assume their Victor 3s and sierras, have garbage screws unless they were replaced.

limb wrote:Well tbh the soviets were like 30 years behind in CNC machinery compared to Japan and the US until they allegedly bought it from Toshiba in 1988 I think. Before that their screws were very primitive and caused a lot more noise from cavitation and vortices, due to extreme backwardness in precision manufacturing compared to western SSN screws. Idk how much they've bridged the gap by now,but I believe it's safe to assume their Victor 3s and sierras, have garbage screws unless they were replaced.

Didn't kvs already address this to be a fraud? BTW I like the logic behind the idea that the Soviets could create a space station but couldn't create a CNC machine....it's like saying Aquaman has drowned in a bathtub.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

limb wrote:Well tbh the soviets were like 30 years behind in CNC machinery compared to Japan and the US until they allegedly bought it from Toshiba in 1988 I think. Before that their screws were very primitive and caused a lot more noise from cavitation and vortices, due to extreme backwardness in precision manufacturing compared to western SSN screws. Idk how much they've bridged the gap by now,but I believe it's safe to assume their Victor 3s and sierras, have garbage screws unless they were replaced.

Didn't kvs already address this to be a fraud? BTW I like the logic behind the idea that the Soviets could create a space station but couldn't create a CNC machine....it's like saying Aquaman has drowned in a bathtub.

I cant find any english info about the claim that soviets had to pruchase japanese CNC machinery for their screws being a fraud

Hole wrote:Russia leads the world in things like nuclear reactors/propulsion, there rocket engines are unmatched, metalurgy and welding capacities are world leaders, but still some people try to tell us that somehow russian engineers are unable to build quiet subs.

The exceptionalists continue to sing this idiot song even while NATOstani ASW forces fly around in ever-increasing circles trying in vain to find a Ruskie 636 in the eastern med.