The Russian Navy refuses to upgrade the Dmitry Donskoy-class submarines

As reported by 10 in March ITAR-TASS, the Russian Navy refuses to modernize nuclear submarines of the “Dmitry Donskoy” type (project 941). With reference to ARMS-TASS, the weekly Jane's Defense Weekly reported this.

A British weekly newspaper quotes ARMS-TASS: "The deep modernization of the 1 boat of the 941 project is equivalent to the construction of the 2's newest submarines of the Yuri Dolgoruky type of the 955 project."

At the Sevmash (Severodvinsk) from 1981 to 1989. In total, they built six SSBNs of Project 941 with a displacement of 26952 tons. Each submarine was armed with twenty RSM-52 ballistic missiles. By early 2012, as part of the Naval fleet Only three of these boats remained in the Russian Federation: Dmitry Donskoy, Arkhangelsk and Severstal. The Navy put the second and third boats into reserve, and the Dmitry Donskoy submarine was modernized and then, until the end of 2009, was used as a shooting test platform for the Bulava ICBM, which was developed for the fourth-generation submarine Yuri Dolgoruky, project 955.

Severstal and Arkhangelsk were supposed to be modernized for subsequent arming of their Bulava missiles. As Jane's Defense Weekly explains, from 2009 onwards, information began to appear in the media about the possibility of converting these submarines into cruise missile carriers - like converting 4 former Ohio-class SSBNs into multi-purpose Tomahawk missile carriers to attack on land objects.

Thus, the Severstal and Arkhangelsk submarines will not be modernized, and the Dmitry Donskoy submarine will continue to be used as a platform for testing armaments and hydroacoustic complexes up to 2019 (information from Jane's Defense Weekly).

Comments

[Tersky]

If this is of course true, then the Navy plans to build a Project 955 submarine, even if only one. And "DD" will remain for testing new weapons, not to build submarines for these purposes. So every minus has a much bigger plus.

[domokl]

And I think that the whole thing is in armament ... So it’s worth changing missiles and not boats ..

[Tersky]

We are talking about modernization, and it implies just the use of the latest types of weapons on submarines, including missile ...

[Slayer]

Called elections are over)))

[450096]

The thought is sound. Lish would not work out so that both the old ones are broken and the new ones are not built.

[Regul]

“The deep modernization of the 1st boat of Project 941 is equivalent to the construction of 2 new-generation submarines of the Yury Dolgoruky type of Project 955.”

Well, if so, then it’s right, why change the awl for soap, they built two new ones, the main thing is to build. And the British glance, fear. Let fear, know ours.

[1tankist]

Quote: Regul

Why change the flea, we built two new ones, the main thing is to build.

I agree. There will be more different boats with different weapons to solve different tasks. Not all military facilities must be beaten with the most modern weapons, for someone it is enough and something simpler. For example: to destroy an aircraft carrier or some Georgian missile boat, different weapons are needed.

[ward]

Well, I don’t know ... Of course there is a certain reason for this ... But the boats are a pity ...

[Tersky]

So no one is going to remove the nuclear submarines of this project from service, as they were in the stand, they will remain so.

[Timoha]

But this is not a fact. It was on the eve of the infa that they were going to dispose of them, then they quickly refuted it.

[Eugene]

I don’t understand anything.
Before the election, 2 weeks ago, literally, we are modernizing, and missiles for them were found in stocks.
Now do not upgrade. And what to believe?

[Neighbor]

With old missiles and will walk. And so they would modernize - and where to put old rockets? Everything is correct.
Although most likely this is disinformation. So far, no one has officially announced anything - to believe in any scribble - it makes no sense.

[Anatoly]

Practical of course. But ... sorry for the boat. Such funds were invested during construction! And their potential, they clearly have not developed.

[Z.A.M.]

For me, the news is depressing ...

You can of course like Tersky (2) find "even greater pluses" in the minuses (?), or how Regul it is insignificant to hope that the British "let them be afraid, know ours", only this is some kind of childish position - a fool himself.
The article then says that they refuse to modernize, but NOTHING is said that new things will be laid.

In general, on this issue it is better to listen to those who follow the changes in the Navy.

[urzul]

The article is nonsense, they also wrote it on the ARMS-TASS website, that is, about themselves in the third person, as if it was not their news but “Jane's Defense Weekly”.
http://www.armstass.su/?page=article&aid=104524&cid=24
Please note that they were not published, but with a link to them.
And about what has already been written a lot has been written, the main thing is that they are not written off as metal, at least until 2019.

[Dmitry.V]

Can anyone tell the name of our military equipment according to NATO classification? It became interesting, could not find

[Per se.]

If the boat is project 941, then according to NATO classification it is "Typhoon". The boat was designed specifically for patrolling under the ice of the Arctic, the only water area now where there is no surface and air threat to our boats, and the noise is masked by the natural crackling of the ice. For NATO and the United States, it was sewn in the anus, it's not for nothing that there are so many threads about recycling and not modernization.

[coast]

There were no official applications !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Magadan]

Quote: Z.A.M.

The article then says that they refuse to modernize, but NOTHING is said that new things will be laid.

That's it, I don’t like all this, I need to dig Old wherever possible.
With air defense, too, some misunderstandings, they were planning to launch C-500 into operation, and now they are talking about some sort of Vityaz, who see you, the S-300 is superior!
Complete nonsense. What's happening? Can they disarm us in a quiet, and 20 trillion sawn?

[urzul]

Not nonsense, C-500 long-range air defense, And the average hero. Still soon Morpheus neighbor create.

[Eugene]

Gee. The s-300 has two modifications, and they are fundamentally different, one for the missile defense problem, and the second for covering the ground forces. So, the S-500, in theory, should replace 300ki of the missile defense system and supplement / replace the S-400, and the hero should provide air cover for the ground forces.

[MURANO]

Quote: Magadan

That's it, I don’t like all this, I need to dig Old wherever possible.

And what to dig her. The construction of the 955 series is underway.

[denkastro]

Our people are strange - when the Moscow Region decided to upgrade the T-72 and not to buy the T-90, it’s bad when it decided to build new submarines and not upgrade the old ones too. It seems that there are people for whom everything is always bad. I believe that if the modernization of T- 72 is cheaper than building the T-90, and without sacrificing performance characteristics, we need to modernize it, and in the 15th year we will build Armata and if the newest submarine is cheaper than modernization, then we need to build the latest ones.

[Eugene]

This is not the point ... The shark is one of the symbols of the Soviet naval power, the largest, unique, etc. ... It's hard to part with such a thing. And the main thing I really do not want.
A t-72, albeit a good tank, but not spectacular.
That is the whole point.

[plotnikov561956]

Quote: Eugene

This is not the point ... The shark is one of the symbols of the Soviet naval power, the largest, unique, etc. ... It's hard to part with such a thing. And the main thing I really do not want.
A t-72, albeit a good tank, but not spectacular.
That is the whole point.

Closely look who threw the article and draw a conclusion

[denkastro]

Eugene,
I understand your feelings, but no one is going to hide the symbol or even cut it. He continues to be in line. But from the T-72 after modernization it turns out almost the T-90, which by the way loses much to the new MBT Armata. So what's the point of buying 3 years of the T-90, if during this time it is possible to upgrade almost all T-72s to the same TTX level using the same money?

[Eugene]

Yes, the T-90 doesn’t work ... Look at the engine power info, Look at the photo for the number of dynamic protection units and the area covered by them. The cumulative screens are too small on the t-72. This is more for thorough repairs than for modernization.
Look online for photos of the t-72 of the latest modification and t-90MS. There are serious differences, but I agree that investing in the t-90 makes no sense now.

[Nymp]

I didn't understand something, the submarine-941 quite recently in a similar article for March 9 "The nuclear submarines of the Akula project will not be modernized" were called "Akula" now it turns out to be "Dmitry Donskoy"! Who prints the Matryoshka articles? They are one to one! Are the moderators watching this ?!

[Tersky]

The Project 941 Akula heavy missile submarine cruisers (SSBN Typhoon by NATO classification) are the world's largest nuclear-powered submarines, to which the Dmitry Donskoy belongs

[Nymp]

Thanks for the explanation. It was always easier for me to remember the name than the classification. But it remains unclear why to break the same topic into two publications. After all, we have already discussed this problem.

[Tersky]

No thanks, impossible to know

[denkastro]

Quote: Nymp

Thanks for the explanation.

Quote: Tersky

No thanks

It's nice to read when educated people talk.