Keep in mind that those boats were all released in the 80s when Soviet construction had already been on pair.
No one argues "obsolesce" of Rubis class subs or Trafalgars, do they
Yes, Rubis, Trafalgar, 688 Ohio are now obsolete submarine. Maybe I said it wrong. All these submarines are still dangerous bur they are all from the 1980s, so their life cycle of around 40 years for these submarines is ending. Many elements and subassemblies may already be heavily worn. Turbines, gears, bearings pomps etc. To replace this, a large repair is needed, cut the hull, etc. Many components lose their warranty, life, etc. when they are 40 years old. Some of them may not even be produced anymore. This is additional hassle and cost. Of course, Russia really knows better what a major renovation it has to do to make it worthwhile instead of a brand new submarine.
There is also the question of the hull itself, which also has a guaranteed lifetime? Titanium hulls can certainly last much longer, so the renovation of Sierra-class ships is recommended.
the Russkies can throw on them a salvo of several dozens of 1.5x faster, maneuvering missiles, flying few meters above the water, evading, and emitting ECMs, with one 885 sub only. wrote:
What kind of missile do you mean? Because of the modern ones, only the P 800 can fly a few meters above the sea