Navy may receive two submarines of the new project "Borey-K"

The Russian Ministry of Defense does not exclude the possibility of building two more nuclear submarines. At present, the defense ministry is considering the issue of laying a new submarine of the new Borey-K project. It is reported by TASS, citing a source in the military-industrial complex.

According to an agency source, the Ministry of Defense is considering the possibility of laying two more nuclear submarines of the Borey project, not as carriers of ballistic missiles, but as carriers of long-range cruise missiles. In the case of a positive decision, two nuclear submarines will be laid on the new project "Borey-K". It is assumed that they will be put into operation after the 2027 year. Moreover, the technical characteristics of the new submarines are not disclosed.

It was previously announced that Russia will no longer lay the submarines of the Borey and Borey-A projects. Currently, the Russian Navy has three nuclear missile submarines of the 955 project (Borey) of the 4 generation - the strategic missile cruisers Yuri Dolgoruky, Alexander Nevsky and Vladimir Monomakh, one submarine cruiser Prince Vladimir of the project 955A (Borey-A) is undergoing state tests and will become part of the Russian Navy by the end of this year. Four submarines of the XNUMHA project (Borey-A) are at various stages of construction. They are APNKSN Prince Oleg, Generalissimo Suvorov, Emperor Alexander III and Prince Pozharsky.

As of today, the Russian Navy has two types of cruise missile carriers: the submarines of the 949A Antey project and the submarines of the 885 Yasen and 885M Yasen-M submarines. On each of the six "Anteyev" are located on 24 cruise missiles "Granit". On submarines of the project "Yasen" and "Yasen-M" stand on 32 launchers under the KR "Caliber or" Onyx. "The submarine Severodvinsk - as part of the Navy," Kazan "passes state tests, another five" Ash "are in various stages of construction .

Meanwhile, in Russia, it was proposed to use the world's largest nuclear submarines of the Shark project as carriers of cruise missiles. Instead of recycling, two submarines of this project were proposed to be upgraded into the carriers of the Kyrgyz Republic “Kalibr”, “Onyx” and “Zircon” following the example of the American strategic Ohio-class submarines converted into cruise missile carriers. The US Navy has four submarines capable of carrying up to 154 cruise missiles each.

Comments

[Aristarkh Lyudvigovich]

Sevmash modernize in recent years. 50 workshop of Sevmash Production Center (built by 1940 - reconstruction began several years ago). Here is a photo of 3's years ago. The 50 workshop is currently at the final stage of reconstruction, after which it will be used for the construction of promising nuclear submarines. The battleships “Soviet Russia” and “Soviet Belarus” began to build in it.

http://www.sevmash.ru/rus/news/2197-2018-01-19-06-02-31.html

[Aristarkh Lyudvigovich]

And this was shot last year - new equipment is being installed:

[Ⅴ - vendetta]

I read the other day that 6 nuclear-powered ships will be scrapped. I don’t remember them now, but it is written that their service life is more than 30 years and it makes no sense to upgrade them. Although previously it was claimed that they would be sent for deep modernization. These are two submarines, two cruisers and something else two.

Oh, quickly found

6 Russian nuclear powered ships will be sent for scrap instead of modernization
zelv.ru ›v ... 109166-6 ... na-metallolom ...
the day before yesterday
6 Russian nuclear cruisers and submarines will be disposed of, despite the previously planned modernization. This is reported by Izvestia, citing sources in the Russian Ministry of Defense. On the. ... Two heavy nuclear missile cruisers “Admiral Ushakov” and “Admiral Lazarev”, as well as four nuclear submarines K-448 “Daniil of Moscow”, K-221 “Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky”, K-433 “St. George Victorious "and K-232" Podolsk ". 2,7 billion rubles will be spent on ship recycling

[Aristarkh Lyudvigovich]

The fact that the cruiser "Kirov" would be cut, in principle, was understandable, the three Kalamars also have to retire, 40 years after all. The cut-up of 671RMTK "Daniil Moskovsky" is also understandable, if the turn of modernization had reached it, it would have been 35 years old, and when they finish it at all under 40. The cruiser "Admiral Lazarev", as I expected, was not going to be repaired. Especially when he was put in line as the last of the nuclear cruisers. In 2014, the cruiser "Admiral Lazarev" was docked in order to maintain buoyancy, so that the hull would last for another 10 years and it would not sink before disposal began. All the same, it is cheaper to dock the hull than to lift a drowned cruiser from the YSU from the ground.

[VSrostagro]

And do not know how the modernization of Anteyev?
“Omsk” seems to be ready.

[Aristarkh Lyudvigovich]

"Omsk" has only been restored to technical readiness. This was a routine renovation. From APRK project 949A the first will receive calibers "Irkutsk", and then no earlier than 2021. APRK K-132 "Irkutsk" 24 "Granita" will be changed to 72 "Caliber". Such will be the "bestial grin of Orthodox imperialism" By the way, after the launch of the Omsk, a place was vacated in the boathouse for the Chelyabinsk, where they also plan to replace the Granites with the Caliber.

[VSrostagro]

Thank you.
I do not find information in the public domain.
If there are links during the upgrade, drop it.

[Aristarkh Lyudvigovich]

If only to rummage in social networks. Here is a photo of K-186 "Omsk" at the "Zvezda" DVZ vk.com/bolshayaigra_war
https://navy-korabel.livejournal.com/178432.html

[siemens7774]

VSrostagro. Search this forum- http://forums.airbase.ru/viewforum.php?id=25&p=1

[t-4]

Boreika is good. But all these Ash and Boreis are offensive weapons with ICBMs and cruise missiles. But as a layman, I don't quite understand this. Everywhere they write that as soon as our boat leaves the base, it is immediately taken to escort by American submarines by hunters who graze near our bases. And their task is to let our strategists sink to the bottom before the hatches of the mines open.
Hence the question. And who will drive the hunters away? Is it necessary to first build torpedo boats or restore naval aviation, otherwise there is no point in the Boreiks, they count already drowned.
I do not say this. I am interested.

[Aristarkh Lyudvigovich]

There are already more than 4 newest American multipurpose nuclear submarines of the 20th generation (17 Virginias and 3 Seawulfs). The situation is aggravated by the fact that the US Navy has reduced the time it takes to commission submarines. In the United States, they traditionally rely on the model of laying, building and commissioning a fleet of submarines with a gradual reduction in the time and cost for each subsequent unit in the series. At the same time, the SSNS and SSGNs of the Russian fleet were mostly built back in the USSR, the same Shuki-Bs are almost all worn out and require repair (Gepard and Kuzbass, Tiger and Panther remained in service), and the arrival of new nuclear submarines does not cover the write-off of old ones. The Pacific Fleet has only one multipurpose nuclear submarine of the 3rd generation Kuzbass (the same type Magadan and Kashalot are already corpses, Bratsk and Samara are awaiting repairs at Zvezdochka, and Samara will most likely wait Hindus). The repair and modernization of Shchuk-B and Anteev is proceeding slowly. K-328 "Leopard" arrived at "Zvezdochka" in the summer of 2011, the transfer of the Navy after modernization is planned at the end of 2019. K-461 "Wolf" came to "Zvezdochka" in the summer of 2014, at the end of 2015 it was delivered to the boathouse. K-391 "Bratsk" and K-295 "Samara" on "Zvezdochka" since September 2014, while waiting for their turn. APRK K-132 "Irkutsk" in Bolshoy Kamen since 2001, repairs began in 2014. Irkutsk will be returned to service no earlier than 2021. The lead Ash-M SSGN "Kazan" 10 years after the laying was not yet accepted by the fleet.

[VSrostagro]

Soon Varshavyanka will begin to enter the Pacific Fleet, a little better.

[VALERIK_097]

Aristarchus, you about "Vepr", forgot to mention, which is 99% ready for operation, put the power start + VSK. But the longest stage is the removal of waste paper from the order (notifications, PUE kits, certificates, invoices), which was methodically accumulated l / with for the entire period of repair.

[VALERIK_097]

I wanted to insert a photo of the invoice for the transfer of a l / s copy of the certificate for a batch of nitrogen cylinders. The original was lost on the ship, certified copies in a quantity of 6 pcs., Too. L / s made round eyes during testing (you did not pass anything to us) . I remembered the number of cylinders by heart.
The photo was not inserted for a simple reason, the officer’s data is indicated.

[Yarhann]

you are more nonsense Internet experts listen. among Americans, the number of submarines is approximately the same as in the Russian Federation. Only Americans do not have diesel. Most of the boats assigned to the AUG 2-3 boats assigned to each group. There are also Ohio strategists - who, like our strategists, simply skerch under the ice of the Arctic, who in the Pacific Ocean. And in the end, we get conditionally free boats whose task, like our multi-purpose ones, is to protect areas where strategists are skerving, and to protect the Navy and etc. bases and there are not many of them.
Ash is a multi-purpose submarine with the 4th generation, which is no worse than the American ones. And most importantly, do not forget that the Americans have most of the boats moored to the AUG.

[donavi49]

Yes, it is already on public procurement

Squids are all dead. This is official. For the plans are only 2 carrier marine components of the SSBN - Borey and Dolphin (BDRM).

Podolsk - not sawn, only because of a lack of cutting power. Queue in general. The boat is already 3 year as decommissioned.
Petropalovsk - similarly, only it has 9 years decayed decommissioned.
Zhorik - also died at the turn of the year 17.

There remains the only cruiser of this project - Ryazan, this is the youngest, most advanced and only representative who underwent repairs in the 10's. But his term is also predetermined. 17 year out of repair. There will be no more repairs with an extension. Only ongoing work, and after the expiration date - cancellation (until 25 of the year).

Daniil of Moscow - similarly, for cancellation because the repair failed. Now, in fact, one enterprise carries out an average repair with modernization elements and extension of terms, which is why Shchuk-B is there.
Following the way, the same type of Obninsk will be decommissioned - 14 year out of repair + 7 years life.

Well, 1144 are dead. Lazarev was not cut, because there is nowhere. The Urals will be finished and delivered by Lazarev.

[Aristarkh Lyudvigovich]

Quote: donavi49

The Urals will be finished and delivered by Lazarev.

Last year, the Urals were completed in PD-41. In it, Admiral Lazarev is most likely to be disposed of.

[Aqr009]

This option is still good.

Bad shark is still a rattle

[Observer2014]

Quote: Kolun

May receive, may not receive ... The titles of the articles are purely liberal., Ugh ..
Oh Russia, Stalin we need ..

But what about Putin, Medvedev, Matvienko, Volodin and the whole party of United Russia? If there is such as Stalin, they and their friends will not be in Russia in 24 hours. What then?

[Nastia makarova]

Or they won’t let the new Stalin come to power

[KOCMOC]

Quote: Nastia Makarova

Or they won’t let the new Stalin come to power

About what Stalin is, the people realized 50 years later. Today, perhaps, a new, future, innovative one to match the time of Stalin has come to power, but the people will understand this much later ...
According to the article, each and every submarine should have both torpedoes and cruise missiles, and in the menacing period, including with Yabloki. Well, a couple of universal democratizers come in handy in the military economy in any case, America is not eternal

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: KOCMOC

About the fact who is Stalin, people understood 50 years later.

Come on! The people who knew Stalin very well were the very people who then lived. My maternal grandfather, an entire sapper, was terribly worried when Joseph Vissarionovich died, and when Khrushchev made a revelation of the personality cult, he almost went for a month for a bout that was not typical for him. And he was not the only one

[KOCMOC]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Come on! About who such a Stalin people knew very well-it is the people

If he knew, the Union would not fall apart.

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

My maternal grandfather, the sapper, worried terribly all over when Joseph Vissarionovich died, and when Khrushchev came forward exposing the cult of personality, he went into a binge for almost a month, which was completely unusual for him. And he was not the only one

One of my grandfathers, who came back from a Finnish cripple, did not see Stalin until the end of his life. They dispossessed the second voluntarily and had to send him to Chelyabinsk because of poverty))) to earn money, as a purveyor of one of the small bosses, but they wanted the enemy of the people to the wall and grandfather as an accomplice, but then to exile to Kazakhstan, bare back to bare ground with children, if not for the Kazakhs, we would not communicate with you. So, he, too, in spite of everything, idolized Stalin, and by the way told how some of the prejudiceous people from the Uk and the Communists and the heads of collective farms had lurked around and how quietly the local men strangled these creatures.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: KOCMOC

If he knew, the Union would not fall apart.

Sorry, but the Union collapsed with people who lived later. Those who at the time of Stalin's death were at least 20 years old at the time of the collapse of the Union were under 60. Not that age anymore, and even then, the Union 80's and the Stalinist Union are two huge differences.

[KOCMOC]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Sorry, but the Union fell apart with people who lived later. Those who were at least 20 years old at the time of Stalin's death by the time of the collapse of the Union were under 60

But are these not the direct descendants of the Stalinists raised by glorious fathers in the schools of true communism?

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

and then, the Union of the 80s and the Stalinist Union are two huge differences.

And what is the enormity of this difference? But what about the succession of generations and the traditions of communism? Best and correct ideology? Eternal, for all people and for all time! How is it that why she was confused in people on the way at only 40 years old?
And I explained to you above, the people did not yet understand Stalin, and some, judging by you, still misunderstand him today. For you today, Stalin is simply a fashionable avatar of a protest trend, ossified conservatives and young revisionists. It’s even funnier to hear your calls from Stalin, who, if he came, would make a good half of the revolutionary loafers work for the good of the country.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: KOCMOC

And what is the enormity of this difference?

Demian, if you do not know this, then why bother to judge those and those times at all? I could tell you a lot about the degeneration of the same CPSU, which at the end of 60 was completely different from what it was in 80, about the difference in economic structures ... But is it worth it? In my opinion, for you in this matter there are 2 points of view: yours and the wrong one.

Quote: KOCMOC

How is that why she got lost in the people on the way only in 40 years?

Alas, a whole series of global mistakes of the country's leadership in the field of economics, domestic politics and ideology - made, by the way, in the post-Stalin times.

Quote: KOCMOC

And I explained to you above, the people did not understand Stalin then, and some, judging by you and today, they misunderstand him. For you today, Stalin, this is just a trendy, avatar protest trend

How do you know? :))) You do not understand that you are now stuffing me into the Procrustean bed of your perception of the Stalinists? You see me not as I am, but as I see it convenient for you

[KOCMOC]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

But is it worth it?

Not worth it, and so everything is clear.

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Alas, a number of global mistakes

Although you have understood these mistakes, before jumping back into the same water?

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

You see me not as I am, but as it is convenient for you to see me

No, you do not understand, you do not see yourself, who you really are, it only seems to you.

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

How do you know? :))) You do not understand that you are now pushing me into the Procrustean bed of your perception of the Stalinists?

C'mon, just bombarding you with heavy particles, and you’ll see what has returned, you can determine what your gut is from the result ...
... good memory is not the first

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: KOCMOC

No, you do not understand, you do not see yourself, who you really are, it only seems to you.

Yeah, and you, in three lines on the internet of everyone, see right through that your X-ray :)))) No, Demyan, this is a very primitive excuse, so that all Stalinists can be combed with one comb - and that’s all.

Quote: KOCMOC

Although you have understood these mistakes, before jumping back into the same water?

The water is not the same, and you even could not understand it. The fact is that Stalin had certain management approaches that allowed the USSR to respond to certain threats, to overcome certain difficulties - and it turned out, quite typically, very well. The USSR became a superpower, and our tremendous achievements in science and technology in the 70-x are essentially the deferred result of education systems, etc., built under Stalin.
But Khrushchev broke this system, as a result, the country began to quickly lose the ability to effectively distinguish between new challenges. But for you, as I see it, everything is one. You are even unable to understand that the same ideological slogan under Stalin and Brezhnev sounded and was perceived completely differently ... However, you are right -

Quote: KOCMOC

Not worth it, and so everything is clear.

[KOCMOC]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

it is a very primitive excuse to comb all the Stalinists under one comb - and nothing more.

As someone said, before examining wrinkles, it is necessary to determine what you are examining, on the pope or on the face.

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

The water is not the same, and you could not even understand this.

Well, now you can see the face, this is progress, is not it? Question, whose?)))

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

The fact is that Stalin had certain management approaches

These approaches have been known since time immemorial, to any successful manager, kings, commanders, businessmen, where there is a concentration of power in one hand.

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

But Khrushchev broke this system, as a result, the country began to quickly lose its ability to effectively distinguish between new challenges

But is such a system good as a whole if it depends on one person and is capable of breaking so quickly?
Answer this question for yourself, and there is no reason to argue further.

[spektr9]

If there is such as Stalin, they and their friends will not be in Russia in 24 hours. What then?

Earth will be fertilized for the good of the homeland, at least something useful

[Non liberoid Russian]

what difference does it make to you, "refugee" .... look for your country, not Russia

[AU Ivanov.]

Take an interest in how tightly the shipbuilding program went before the war, at the end of the 30's. How the deadlines were, with what imperfections the products were handed over to the fleet. Under Stalin, by the way. Discover a lot of interesting things for yourself.

[Fizik M]

Quote: AS Ivanov.

Take an interest in how tightly the shipbuilding program went before the war, at the end of the 30's. How the deadlines were, with what imperfections the products were handed over to the fleet. Under Stalin, by the way. Discover a lot of interesting things for yourself.

the difference is that then MEASURES REALLY TAKEN
as a result, after the war, the series 613, 611 were issued automatically
but now the problems are often "swept under the plinth"

[APASUS]

Russian Navy may receive two more nuclear submarines of a new project

Or maybe not! So the information for consideration and no more, what kind of material I do not understand

[kjhg]

There will be no other way out, because by then, the age of Anteyev will exceed 40 years and in any case they will have to be written off.

[rocket757]

Maybe not ???
Do it! and tryndit to no avail, tired.

[sabotage]

But what not to lay something? Mortgage - do not let it go. Out of the old Boreans, 8 were laid, three surrendered, what about the remaining 5 pieces? Yes, who knows.

[Romario_Argo]

intrigue dispelled.
then abandoned the further construction of projects:
Borey, Borey-A, Borey-B - it is more expensive and unified with Ash-M
and now Borey-K Ave emerged from somewhere

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Romario_Argo

from where it emerged pr. Borey-K

Suddenly, like a fairy tale, the door creaked
Everything became clear to me now ... (c)
Yes, everything is simple: look how the Iskanders went to their "two-horned" and "winged" version ... When arming the Boreyevs, the heating engineer defeated everyone, even Mias did not dare to blather. And what the "maskvachi" could not cope with (UKSK 3S14) so ​​they stole from Chelyabinsk residents ...
Similarly, in this situevina: the hull (of course, the Krylovites have modernized!) Will remain from Borik, and 7 Zircons will be stuck in the silo (like the Yankees on Gayki). In the matter of microminiaturization and the element base of the avionics of missile weapons, we have made great progress lately. Therefore, 112 pieces of "winged sausages" should fit into 2,10! (when canned sausages were opened in the autonomous system under an awl, could they really have thought that this was a prototype of the future VPU KRBD!)
And if they have a range, like AMU puzzled Pu, to 1000km (some Wang, as to 1,5 thousand km from 3М22 will be over time!), Then their salvo will be more terrible than SLBM. Ballistics are immediately cut off on OUT (approximately from 3,7-6,0 thousand km) when going beyond the radio horizon, but on 40km you will see aeroballing on hypersound just before BABAKH! and stationary radar systems of anti-missile systems can not get away from such a development of events - they cannot! Well, if only the surface wave HHRF ...
So, this is extremely exciting news for our "partners". They are sincere and don't know what else to expect from these unpredictable Russians!

[Beregovic_1]

in the silos of 7 pieces (like the Yankees on the Nuts) 112 Zircons are stuck. AT

7 pieces of Zircon are unlikely to enter. If you count on 3m14, then yes. Their diameter is 53 cm, and if 3m55 ... They are only 4 in the mine. I think Zircon will be in Onyx dimensions, not Caliber. So 16x4 = 64 Zircon or Onyx. Well and accordingly Caliber.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Beregovyhok_1

They enter the mine just 4. I think Zircon will be in the dimensions of Onyx, not Caliber. So 16x4 = 64 Zircon or Onyx.

Maybe the way you write ...
But everything flows, everything changes. Maybe over time, and with new technologies, the 3M22 will "dry up". The Yankees managed to pack 7 axes in silos. Why can't we do this if we lighten the filling of Cyric and bungle more energy-intensive fuel. Again, the body materials are based on graphite-graphite composites and not ceramic-graphite composites .... Maybe our keldyshs and kulibins will organize the flight of the product in a "plasma cocoon" ... and at the same time, the speed and range increase sharply ... No limit for improvement!
"If you suffer for a long time, something will work out!" (from)

[Pushkowed]

Did the Yankees 7 axes pack in silos

They managed to do something, only they didn't seem to like the result. When they made the VPU for Virginia Block-3, the diameter of the shaft and its lid turned out to be suspiciously similar to the "Ohio" ones, but there are not 7 missiles inside, but only 6. Maybe during the operation of 7-rocket launchers there were difficulties with the central missile, from here and refused. At block 5, they are going to return 7-missile VPUs (4 mines in addition to 2 bow ones, and it is not said whether the bow 7-missile mines or will remain 6-missile ones), but this is still written with a pitchfork on the water. (By the way, what if it will be possible to install 5 Tridents instead of 28 "axes" in Virginia Block-4? This will be a mini-SSBN. Insurance in case of failure with "Columbia"? And what about mutual control of offensive weapons?) ...

Ammunition hypothetical Borea-K can only be tried to guess. Let's try it.
The diameter of TPK Onyx is about 720 mm. Zircon must also fit into the same TPK (otherwise it will be impossible to shoot it from the UKSK, and this is stated). Calibers have a "naked" rocket diameter of about 520 mm (due to the need to shoot from 533-mm torpedo tubes), but for vertical launches they are loaded into a TPK, and the same as Onyx / Zircons (i.e. 720 mm) for interchangeability with UKSK. The diameter of the TPK Bulava is about 2100 mm. The calculation shows that 5 (five) TPKs with Caliber, Onyx, Zircon missiles will be able to fit into the shaft (if its diameter is not changed), but almost end-to-end. If there are 16 mines left, then we get 80 missiles. If there are 20 mines - 100 missiles. More is possible only if you make some "skinny" TPK, and only for Caliber.

[sabotage]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Similarly, in this situevina: the corps (of course, the Krylovites modernized!) Will remain from Borik, and in the silos 7 pieces (like that of the Yankees on the Nuts) 112 Zirconov will be stuck

Of course stuck))) Where so many rockets to take? They are not cheap, they are complex, the release dates will be awful, prices will have no analogues in the world.

[siemens7774]

sabotage.pro Boreev can be found here - http://forums.airbase.ru/2019/04/t70313_150--podvodnye-lodki-proekta-955-i-955a.4096.html

[JD1979]

The whole article in one phrase:

Currently, the defense department is considering the issue of laying new submarines of the new Borey-K project.

[for]

Quote: Nastia Makarova

Or they won’t let the new Stalin come to power

These do not ask (1917) come and put things in order.

[NEXUS]

According to a source of the agency, the Ministry of Defense is considering the possibility of laying two more nuclear submarines of the Borey project, but not as carriers of ballistic missiles, but carriers of long-range cruise missiles.

Interesting ... that is, in fact, it will be a multi-purpose submarine. Then two questions arise ... first, if it is a CD carrier, then why do we need a Husky, who will also be a CD carrier. The second question is what kind of sea-based long-range missile defense system is this? Does Caliber-M mean? But he claims a range of 4,5 thousands of kilometers on ground targets. Or, this is the modernization of the X-101 for a mine launch, and then in this case, the range may be greater.

[g1v2]

In theory, zircons and calibers will be launched from one uksk. PM most likely the filling can be mixed. If necessary - load the "setup" under the impacts on the shore, if necessary, then dc. In general, the loading of such a submarine with calibers will be - all calibers produced in 3 quarters. That is, it will take a year and a half to load with calibers of two pl. At what speed will zircons be built - xs. In principle, the idea of ​​Borey with the CD was sucked here more than once. You can build a couple of pieces. Moreover, the husky-husky will be laid only in the late 20s, and space for construction at Sevmash will be vacated in a couple of years. Of course, I would have ordered 2-3 Ashkeys in order to at least bring to ten, but you can also try the idea with Borey-k.
By the way, in mattresses, their 4 Ohio with cr should be written off already in the first half of the 20s, since you can well reduce the gap in the density of the volley of cr.

[Beregovic_1]

By the way, in mattresses, their 4 Ohio with cr should be written off already in the first half of the 20s, since you can well reduce the gap in the density of the volley of cr.

Why do you need volley density? Tomahawks are good against the Papuans. When you bullet bursts under cover of a huge fleet, confident in its safety. These Boreas-k will not even pass the Faroe-Icelandic border. They will not be allowed to go to the shores of the United States. And in Europe it is possible under conditions of the cancellation of the INF Treaty and land missiles to shoot. Why spend 2 billion dollars? Stupid waste of money. It would be better if the ICAPL were laid ...

[g1v2]

Just to help break the line in the North Atlantic. Maintaining your squadron with hundreds of zircons from a distance might well be nice. The only thing you need to understand is that they will be dependent pl. They won’t walk alone.

[Beregovic_1]

We have a satellite constellation that allows you to direct Zircons ??? She is not. This means that this is a stupid carrier of Caliber, that is, analogues of the Tomahawks, that is, weapons against the Papuans. In principle, against Igil ..... So as not to keep a caliber with calibers there

[shahor]

Quote: g1v2

for mattresses 4 of them, Ohio with cr should be written off already in the first half of the 20s, since you can well reduce the gap in the density of the volley of cr.

Ohio will be removed as Virginia Bl5 enters service. They will carry 40 cr. The question is what. Perhaps those that are currently being developed. According to the terms of reference, the range is 3500-4000 km, KVO -0,3-0,5 m.

[g1v2]

Virginia's changing moose. They will be built as those are decommissioned. 4 refitted Ohio just write off. Boats of this type (carriers of a large number of cr) do not plan to build.

[shahor]

Quote: g1v2

Boats of this type (carriers of a large number of cr) do not plan to build.
Reply

Virginia Block 5 will carry 40 missiles. For this, a missile compartment has already been created. They wanted to complete block 4 in 3 years (6 ships), but apparently they’ll finish earlier — they will also build on facilities designed for Colombia and so far free. The first boat of Bl.4 will be ready in October. If, as they plan, 3 boats will be laid next year, then block 21 will be laid in 5. Series - 6 pieces. Then, the next block. Everything is clear and clear. Enviously.

[maximum 8]

Does Caliber-M mean? But he claimed a range of 4,5 thousand km on ground targets. Or, this is the modernization of the X-101 for a mine launch, and then in this case, the range may be greater.

Well, it’s definitely not a modernization of the X-101, since why reinvent the wheel when there is already a sea-based KR? Or Caliber-M or Zircon. And maybe both in different proportions.

[NEXUS]

Quote: maximum 8

Well, it’s definitely not a modernization of the X-101, since why reinvent the wheel when there is already a sea-based KR? Or Caliber-M or Zircon. And maybe both in different proportions.

The question, or rather the emphasis on expression, is

long-range cruise missiles

.That is, it is definitely not Zircon with a range of 1000 km. And most likely it’s not Caliber-M with a range of 4,5 thousands of kilometers ... I think it’s still something derived from the X-101. Besides, there were talk that the X-101 was messy.

[maximum 8]

it’s definitely not Zircon with a range of 1000 km.

They said about the Zircon range MORE THAN 1000 km and there may be 2000 km and 3000 km. Moreover, at a speed of 8-9 max 3000 km Zircon will fly in 20 minutes.

rather, it is not Caliber-M with a range of 4,5 thousand km.

Excuse me, why then do Caliber-M if they are not equipped with submarines? The idea with the X-101 is original and implausible. Why pull an owl on a globe? This is an air-based missile.

[NEXUS]

Quote: maximum 8

They said about the Zircon range MORE THAN 1000 km and there may be 2000 km and 3000 km.

And why not 10 thousand kilometers? It’s more than 1000 km.

Quote: maximum 8

Excuse me, why then do Caliber-M if they will not be equipped with submarines?

In order to "ground" it and equip the same Iskander with them.

Quote: maximum 8

Why pull an owl on a globe?

But what is it to do from a strategist? It’s not like they pulled an owl onto the globe, but they try to pull this owl onto two globes, and two at once ..

[maximum 8]

And why not 10 thousand kilometers? It’s more than 1000 km.

Believe me, the range of the Zircon will be no less than the range of the Caliber, since the engine resource is enough for 15 minutes of operation, and this gives a range of about 2 km at a speed of 500 max. Why are you so surprised by the range of 9 km at Zircon? What is so extraordinary at speed 2 max?

In order to "ground" it and equip the same Iskander with them.

Americans believe that we have already landed Caliber.

And from a strategist to fight a multipurpose is what?

Well, you can go along the American path, so that, if necessary, these submarines can be used both under Caliber-M with Zircons and under Mace-M. As they did in Ohio.

[NEXUS]

Quote: maximum 8

Believe me, the range of the Zircon will be no less than the range of the Caliber, since there will be enough engine life for 15 minutes.

Nothing that Zircon is RCC? In the RCC variation, Caliber hits only on 350 km.

Quote: maximum 8

Well, you can go along the American path, so that, if necessary, these submarines can be used both under Caliber-M with Zircons and under Mace-M. As they did in Ohio.

The question is, why? You don’t understand one strategist to remake us and make him a multi-purpose person, this is to drive a bald man, and in the most perverse form. In your opinion, why do multi-purpose nuclear submarines and SSBNs generally build, but do not make a universal nuclear submarine for all needs? And why then from Yasen not to make the SSBN?

[maximum 8]

Nothing that Zircon is RCC? In the RCC variation, Caliber hits only on 350 km.

American LRASM, which is an anti-ship option
JAASM-ER, has a range of 1200 km, although it is also RCC. Our RCC Volcano, when equipped with special launch vehicles, has a range of 1000 km at supersonic sound. So, does the fact that Zircon is RCC change Syria? Onyx was shot at ground targets in Syria, just like and X-35U and also in Syria.

The question is, why?

In order not to remake the strategist to temporarily redo his launchers for Caliber so that at any time it would be possible to quickly load Bulava-M there, like the American Ohio with the KR Tomahawk, where pulling out devices for Tomahawks can be loaded into the same Trident-2 launchers.

[NEXUS]

Quote: maximum 8

American LRASM, which is an anti-ship option
JAASM-ER, has a range of 1200 km

She RCC but what basing? M. Sea or air? Air ... hence the range ...

Quote: maximum 8

Our RCC Volcano, when equipped with special launch vehicles, has a range of 1000 km at supersonic.

Do not fantasize ... Volcanoes with such a range are ONLY on Ustinov, since the PUs have been made heat-resistant. Volcanoes fly at 700 km for all the rest. The question is, that the Volcano flew to 1000 km, where will you take the TsU in real time?

Quote: maximum 8

So what changes the fact that Zircon is RCC?

A lot changes ... starting from the range, ending with the cost of RCC in comparison with the Kyrgyz Republic.

Quote: maximum 8

In Syria, Onyx shot at ground targets, as did X-35 and also in Syria.

I will tell you a big secret - ALL the Soviet and Russian anti-ship missiles "are able" to work on the ground ...

Quote: maximum 8

In order not to remake the strategist to temporarily redo his launchers for Caliber so that at any time it would be possible to quickly load Bulava-M there, like the American Ohio with the KR Tomahawk, where pulling out devices for Tomahawks can be loaded into the same Trident-2 launchers.

In the event of a conflict, there will be no time to play with overloading the ICBMs and loading the CD.

[maximum 8]

Volcanoes with such a range are ONLY on Ustinov, since the PUs were made heat-resistant. Volcanoes fly 700 km on all the rest.

so that the volcano flew 1000 km, where will you take the control center in real time?

You contradict yourself. First, say that the RCC Vulcan standing on Ustinov can fly up to 1000 km and then ask the question how it is possible, where the TsU can take in real time. Here take an interest in launching the Caliber in 2015 and how many times during the flight these missiles changed the direction of flight and where did they get target designation. By the way, after that launch, the Americans removed their aircraft carrier hastily from the Persian Gulf.

She RCC but what basing? M. Sea or air? Air ... hence the range ...

Bred.Caliber-A has the same range as its marine version.

[NEXUS]

Quote: maximum 8

First, say that the RCC Volcano standing on Ustinovo can fly on 1000 km and then ask the question how this is possible, where to get the real-time control system from

On 1000 km you can throw a rocket only where it gets. Volcanoes are not new anti-ship missiles. So you can abandon it, only where this RCC will fly ...

Quote: maximum 8

Bred.Caliber-A has the same range as its marine version.

Are you serious? I'm telling you about the version of Caliber anti-ship ... he has a range of 350 km.

[maximum 8]

You can throw a missile at 1000 km, only where it gets. Volcanoes are not new anti-ship missiles.

Volcanoes are certainly newer than Mosquitoes, which Granitov successfully shoot at both sea and ground targets during exercises. That is, Ustinov thinks that there are missiles that can be thrown for 1000 km, it’s not known where they will go? Are you serious ??? !!!

about the Caliber version of the anti-ship ... he has a range of 350 km.

Do you not believe that the sea version of the same rocket will fly as much as its air version? That you are so obsessed with one rocket from the Caliber family of 350 km missiles? The same Volcano, Zircon fly much further 350 km, than refute your statement. Yes the same Onyx flies further. And what does the fact that the Caliber missile family has 350 km of anti-ship missiles? What does this prove?

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

I have no words. Tryndez easy.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

I have no words. Tryndez easy.

"I DO NOT BELIEVE !!!" (from) K.S. Stanislavsky.
Andrew, do not intrigue: explain your ... eeee ... THOUGHT!

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Andrew, do not intrigue: explain your ... eeee ... THOUGHT!

Alexander, my thought is short and clear.
While we desperately need MAPLs, and first of all - for PLO, but Ash trees are expensive, and Husky is only dreaming, and we cannot lay them, we do what? We transform the "Borey", which is a strategist and never a tactician, into an MAPL unusual for its tasks, as a result of which we spend money on relatively ineffective ships, which we build to solve relatively unimportant tasks for us

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

At that time, as we desperately need MAPL, and in the first place - for PLO, but Ash is expensive, and Husky only dreams,

Andrey, we are compensating for the lack of attack submarines for Lada-Kalina type submarines. These are BMZ boats - up to 500 miles. Further only nuclear-powered ships. They are cheaper than PLA and build faster. BMZ for Yankees can be closed with them. But the hooligan in the DMZ should be 885M. The Husky is a reborn dream of Lear on a new technology base ... not coming soon. And the Yankees need to resist "yesterday". Therefore - this is a real way out of the anus, where our Fleet was driven.

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

We transform "Borey", which is a strategist and never a tactician, into an MPSL unusual for its tasks,

Borei will remain a "strategist" anyway, since The amam do not care what a vigorous gift will be delivered to them: an SLBM or a KRBD from Borik. But the launch distance / approach time to the target / trajectory / detection distance of the hypersonic KRBD - critically affect the response time of the SPRN-PRO! In addition, this is a huge strain on the PLO forces. It's one thing to organize a sea missile defense line from Arlikin, and quite another to catch Poseidon or look for Borik with the GZKRBD !!!
And then, the fortresses were taken not only by breaking the walls by the bialists, but also by blasting them with tunnels! So Borei-K is the undermining of the Amsk echelon missile defense / air defense.
IMHO.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Andrey, we compensate for the lack of strike submarines by a submarine of the Lada-Kalina type

Hush, Sasha. We don’t have Lada with VNEU, let alone Kalina ... There is no SOFSEM. And when there will be a big question. Now remember that almost all projects for the fleet are turning into long-term construction. And at the output of what were you going to compensate there?

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Husky - a revived dream of Lyra on a new technological base ... will not appear soon.

Remember, Sasha, 2 years ago, he said, SHOULD REVIVE LYRA. Modernized and in construction it is all one faster than Ash. They told me that this is all a dream and technologically very difficult in general. And I'm sorry, the Ashen project is not complicated and not expensive?

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

So Borey-K - this is undermining under the AMS layered missile defense / air defense.

Very doubtful statement. To begin with, the Boreas are already being built for a long time (relatively), and the head Borey-K will be built for sure even longer. Next, the question on the arsenal of such a nuclear submarine ... Caliber-M? Is the range in 4,5 not thousands of kilometers for a platform like Borey? And then ... let’s say they built ... how many KP will such a nuclear submarine be capable of carrying? 100-200? And the production of the Kyrgyz Republic is so fast that we can provide such a carrier with such missiles, together with other carriers?
For me, making a multipurpose strategist is like riding a tank for bread.
I will say more, we need to reanimate Lear’s project ... in short, a small submarine with multipurpose functions that would be able to fulfill the tasks of the fleet in full on this issue.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Dear Alexander, let's understand the points :))))) This is how I see the whole picture
1. The US missile defense / air defense system in the case of Armageddon from our ICBMs will help them in much the same way as an umbrella from a tsunami in 25 meters in height. Well, they don’t have the ability to intercept a few reliably even single ICBMs with separable parts, there’s nothing to say about a massive salvo
2. Common sense suggests that we need to minimize the range of strategic means of delivering nuclear weapons, focusing on ICBMs. Just because they are already quite effective, and from the good look for a beaver (or a raccoon in moss, if you like :))) you can only with a large excess of money, which we have not observed.
3. Instead, we, who already have a mace / liner in the underwater parallel, still fantasize Poseidon and strategic hypersonic zircons. Well, why? Zircon as PKR - fine. Zircon as a tactical CD for shooting our European brothers is wonderful. Zircon like an ICBM ... why ?! Load on missile defense? And the meaning of its load, when a dozen ICBMs, and so it will enter into a state of complete amazement?
4. We have a problem - due to lack of funds, we are not ensuring the deployment of SSBNs by surface / submarine / air forces. In this situation, if we cannot afford enough MAPL / DEPL, and START-3 is bursting at the seams, and we do not want to abandon the SSBN, it makes sense to increase their number and quality - perhaps at least someone will survive and still break in the US when the time comes
5. But instead, we give the newest SSBNs a "short hand" in the person of Zircon (well, not his intercontinental range!) That is, in order to work out the same for the United States, he needs to trudge far beyond the land. That is, we introduce an excessive variety in missile armament, complicate the work of our strategists, and ... get practically nothing in return.
Somehow like this. IMHO, of course.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

In this situation, if we can’t afford enough MAPL / DEPL

And I have very big doubts that our fleet will receive 7 pieces of ash in the number of 4-5 pieces this year until 25 ... and then cover the strategists with oars, at least obscenities ... And what's interesting , let’s know at the design stage, and so it was clear that Ash trees are expensive and difficult to build. Why not develop a submarine project with a displacement of 3000 tons, with characteristics comparable to Lira? And at the exit we would get an excellent Hunter with good makings of a multi-purpose man. At the same time, it would be all at times cheaper, in time it would be faster to build and transfer to the fleet.

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: NEXUS

Why not to develop a project of a submarine with a displacement of 3000 tons, with characteristics that are compared with Lyra?

Andrew, with all due respect to your argumentation and position - well, what is the submarine hunter from Lyra? That is, I agree with you on everything, except that it was worth taking Lira as a sample. It is a pity that here our points of view do not coincide, but, on the other hand, if they coincided in everything, it would probably be uninteresting?
Yours faithfully,

[NEXUS]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Well, what kind of submarine hunter from Lyra?

You namesake did not understand me. I am not saying to completely tear Lira with all her outstanding performance characteristics in the past. Assume that its immersion depth will be around 600 meters, say. Speed ​​to 40 nodes. Arsenal, the same ZNC 12-16 anti-ship missiles, plus torpedoes. It is clear that such a nuclear submarine will not carry a huge arsenal, but this is not necessary. In an underwater duel and a couple of torpedoes can decide the outcome. And I don’t understand why Lira (modernized) cannot be a hunter of her kind? Noisiness? So I emphasized, MODERN. That is, it is quieter. No one says that such a submarine should like a saiga headlong to drive 40 nodes. Ashen’s indicator is also not for children, up to 35 nodes then ... however, it is one of the quietest nuclear submarines in the world.

[Fizik M]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Well, what kind of submarine hunter from Lyra?

could turn out good
very good sonar subsystem + anti-submarine missiles = 705 division could tear everything that moves in the Barents
(in the "underwater BOD pr. 1155" mode)

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: Fizik M

could turn out good
very good subsonic sonar + anti-submarine missiles = division

Greetings, Maxim! And with noise, how? as far as I understand, at one time, Lyra was created as an element of a PLO (quickly loaded onto a detected submarine, fired a volley - and on the opposite course, since torpedoes did not catch up), but for this, it is necessary that someone should find the enemy's submarine, but with this we have a little problem.
What am I wrong about?

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

let's understand the points :))))) This is how I see the whole picture

I agree, let's go!
1. We are not going to attack first. Is it logical Then what awaits us ahead if, as you say, Armageddon is on the nose? And we are waiting for a massive blow to the strategic nuclear forces, command and control and communications. It is calculated that the ICBM units for an otvetka remain after the strike, which Ama expect to intercept a deeply echelon-based missile defense system at the AUT, including the space barrier.
2. Who can escape to where outside the territory of the Russian Federation (fortunately, it is great, for which thanks to the ancestors and ancestors!) From the triad? Only rpkSNy ... But they have a mobile missile defense sea area. But those who crawl closer ("to throw a grenade", to make it clear), they will be able to perform BZ by sticking a stiletto into Uncle Sam's visor. And the naval missile defense will not stop them ... And the continental, too, for the reasons I described earlier.
3. On minimizing delivery vehicles. And nothing to invent and will not need. Only change the head, but the power necessary to put in the BB. The carriers are the same as the convention!
4. Poseidon and strategic Zircon. GZKR DB Zircon-M is not an ICBM! But the threat is the same. At the same time, it strains not only the missile defense, but also the Yankee PLO! Imagine the area of ​​the Oceans with the removal of water on 1000 km from the coast, which the PLO forces will have to explore! Here, even the States with their capabilities will be tormented. And somewhere else rpksn with SLBMs in the holder are hanging around ... No, not ICE !!!
5. About multipurpose submarines and protection of strategists. Well, I didn't want to say, I'll have to. The tactics of using both have changed long ago. MAPLs do not graze cows, they guard the "fields", "borders", "paths" ... And the cows graze by themselves, very quietly and away from the "carriageway" of the road ... So understandable !?
6. Next. 955-K is not a rpkSN, but a plarkSN, and he is holding a "stiletto", not a rapier! or a two-handed sword! This is both good and bad. Good, because the blow is irresistible. Not a single missile defense system will have time to react. Bad - dangerous to the wearer. They can be caught by the tail. Then - fight.
Here, briefly, my arguments.
Only, there is no need to sing to the tune anymore: the "cow" needs a shepherd, otherwise the wolves will gnaw it. You are naval, and you must understand that the presence of MAPLs in the alleged RBD rpkSN is a clear unmasking sign. And the maneuverable forces of the PLO, catching on the MAPL, will sow water through a sieve to find a strategist. Because "cows" graze where there is no shipping, but what is MAPL doing there then !?

[NEXUS]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

MAPL in the alleged RBD rpkSN is a clear unmasking feature. And the maneuvering forces of the PLO, catching on to the MAPL, will sow water through a sieve in order to find a strategist. Because "cows" graze where there is no shipping, but what is MAPL doing there then !?

That is, Sasha, you are saying that our SSBN should become a universal, in other words, a cross between a multi-purpose and a SSBN. I will explain why such a conclusion was drawn ...
The United States has multipurpose nuclear submarines, which are also sharpened for the search and destruction of our SSBNs. And in case our strategist (without cover) meets with the MAPL mattresses, there are not very many chances for our nuclear submarines, since although the same Boreya has more than a chance to fight back, the MAPL still has more tools to destroy its own kind.
And by the end, if you say that the SSBNs should go alone, without MAPL in pairs, so that the latter do not unmask them, the conclusion suggests itself, our SSBNs should be able to oppose the multi-purpose ships on an equal footing, as well as bear the ballistic missiles.
Now Sasha is asking you a question ... what do you think, is the same Ash tree so easy to find?

[Boa kaa]

Quote: NEXUS

that our SSBN should become a universal, in other words, a mixture of multipurpose and SSBN.

Andrew, hello!
Ohio, converted from SSBNs to SSGNs, is no longer a strategist. Although, with nuclear weapons in the head of the RCD, the same dangerous thing as SLBMs.
The 955-K is an icebreaker already optimized for ZGKR DB, and not a converted SSBN under the CRBD. He will penetrate the AUG or strike a BC - this will depend on the load and the task assigned to him.
Well, what kind of "strategist" he is after that in the current sense of the word? It will just be easier for him to solve the problems previously lying on the 949A. In fact, it is the same fight against the adversary's AUG. But if necessary, it can easily process the BC, and if something more "long-armed and vigorous" is on board, it will be able to "upset" ground objects in the interior of the continent.
It seems to me, somehow, however.

[NEXUS]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

It will simply be easier for him to solve problems that previously lie on 949A.

Hi Sasha!
949A is a very specific submarine with the main task of thinning out the adversary’s AUG. I don’t think that Borey needs to be sharpened for this ... Sharks would be more logical for that. There the salvo is more impressive and the fleet would have seen such a nuclear submarine.

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

But if necessary, he easily processes the BC,

There is Varshavyanka for the business center ... since we are building them for at least not long. Yes, one volley is small, but if in a pack, then you can iron the shore, especially if it is Caliber-M, which have a deeper penetration depth than Caliber.
I don’t know, for me, sharpening Boreas under the Kyrgyz Republic is stupid. The submarines have been standing in tanks and rusting for years ... what prevents them from being remade for this task? But they stand, rust and wait for the grinders ...

[Boa kaa]

Quote: NEXUS

For BC there are Varshavyanka ...

636.3 is the scourge of Europe! And to the shores of Columbus you need to send the PLA, that's the problem! The fact that she managed to get out of Norfolk would have to be received at the sea crossing (when deployed in the RBD), and that if she did not have time, she would take a gift to the naval base without departing from the pier! (ticket office). But either 885M or 955K can do this ... Well, if they stay, 971 will be happy to take part ...
That's the whole short stay!

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

You navy

Yes, what a navy I am, one name :)))) But anyway - thanks!

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Well, I didn't want to say, I'll have to. The tactics of using both have changed long ago. MAPLs do not graze cows, they guard the "fields", "borders", "paths" ... And the cows graze by themselves, very quietly and away from the "carriageway" of the road ... So understandable !?

Of course it's understandable. So it was clear, this is the structure of the "Bastions" of the USSR, then, as I understand it, at least in the later stages, no one tied the "shepherds" to the "cows". They did so - that there are areas in which the actions of enemy MAPLs are extremely hampered by powerful submarines - air, surface, underwater, the very "curtains" and "paths" of which you speak, but the result was obvious - the actions of not our MAPLs in that the Barents Sea was complicated to the extreme, it was extremely difficult to hunt SSBNs, and in order to somehow equalize the capabilities of the Yankees, they took up the monstrous sivulfs.
Just now we have no such opportunities, and the SSBN has to rely only on itself.
What am I mistaken?

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Poseidon and strategic Zircon. GZKR DB Zircon-M is not an ICBM! But the threat is the same. At the same time, it strains not only the missile defense, but also the Yankee PLO! Imagine the area of ​​the Oceans with the removal of water on 1000 km from the coast, which the PLO forces will have to explore!

And why? :)))) Alexander, the fact that we have 955-8 maces with 9-1000 range, thousand kemes, does it somehow limit the areas of their deployment? :))) That is, formally, at the boat with calibers there is a need to go to 6,5 km to the US coast, then the boat with the Bulava - to XNUMX thousand km, and it can even fire back from the Atlantic, even from where.
The issue with the complexity of deployment. Well, it will not be easy for us to turn around in the oceans in a threatening period, much more difficult than in the north. And if we are now returning to short missiles, we need to think how to bring such SNGMs into the Atlantic and Silent, but with what? We in the Barents and Okhotsk do not have enough forces!
That is, I mean, if you see a way to deploy the SSGM CH off the coast of the United States, then who's stopping to do the same with SSBN? You understand that in this case, the area of ​​possible searches expands multiply in comparison with the SSGMC :)))

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

On minimizing the means of delivery. And nothing to invent and will not need. Only change the head, but the power necessary to put in the BB. The carriers are the same as the convention!

Here I agree with you, I did not think about it!
ZY Ehhh nice for once, to have a constructive discussion with a good person! Now on BO is a rarity.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

If you see a way to deploy the SSGNS off the coast of the United States, then who's stopping to do the same with SSBNs?

Andrey, you wrote a lot correctly.
The thing is that according to BG VO / P all tracked boats will go under the knife. There is no time for sentiment. Forces are few (for the time being), but even they will be able to push the enemy out of the area, and then (as an option) put MZM-A and cover it with an RGAB barrier ... with PLO aircraft on top in patrol mode.
Next... The aeroballistic thing is so good that it is more difficult to knock it down than a "stone". I remember how the Yankees flashed when the R-29s appeared on the "beeches" with three options for trajectories (normal, inclined and high ballistic) ... And then the product can also wag along the course! not to mention the inconvenient echelon of 40-50 km!
But, rpkSNam do not need to "warm up the sides" of the amam, their ranges allow them to solve problems from the air defense missile system. And today it is not necessary, as before, to be in the firing sector, within reach in range ...
But 955-K will solve the tasks that they put in, in terms of the reach of their weapons ... Therefore, they will be cut by the RDB in accordance with this. But it seems to me that they will be left on the Federation Council, and 949A will be given to the Pacific Fleet, after repairs and, perhaps, modern ... Still, the Atlantic is more restless in terms of hot heads and adventure lovers ...
Much more could be looked at with a squint, but so far there is no time ...
Sincerely, Boa.

[Fizik M]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

the presence of MAPL in the alleged rbcn rsd -

yes, and unfortunately many do not understand this

BUT - multi-purpose does not have to be in RBD
there are many other tasty places

[Olezhek]

Who can escape to the territory of the Russian Federation (it is great, thanks to the great ancestors and ancestors!) From the triad? Only rpksny ...

Guaranteed to cover at least 50 percent of ground-based SNF?
An interesting thought, but hardly.

The probability of survival of SSBN is highly probable.
But few of them, even less at sea
In principle, they can all and fill up to "fun starts".

But they have a mobile sea missile defense area. But those who crawl closer ("to throw a grenade", to make it clear), they will be able to perform BZ by sticking a stiletto into Uncle Sam's visor. And the naval missile defense will not stop them ...

Closer - the probability of survival is extremely low. It's all closest to the Hollywood exploits.
Here we would have their 20 pieces in the sea - it would be possible to try something ...
And so - not serious.

[Olezhek]

and we don’t want to abandon the SSBN it makes sense to increase their number and quality - maybe at least someone will survive

Very interesting thought, and very controversial.

The rest is clear.

[Xscorpion]

The United States has military bases not only in the United States. In the Far East, for example, they have deployed quite good forces in Japan and South Korea, and there will also come a threat and possible attacks on our territory. And the SSGN will not need to drag itself along the coast of the United States strike. It is enough to shoot at the American bases in Japan and South Korea from the Sea of ​​Okhotsk. There will be nothing bad in adopting SSGNs.

[Fizik M]

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Andrey, we compensate for the lack of strike submarines by a submarine of the Lada-Kalina type. These are BMZ boats - up to 500 miles. Next only nuclear powered

in the north and the Pacific Fleet diesel-electric submarines are just insanity (you need at least a "dollezhal egg" for them)
and 677 for the north is optimal in general in the form of "Ruby";)

[Shopping Mall]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

Andrew, do not intrigue: explain your ... eeee ... THOUGHT!

Alexander, my thought is short and clear.
While we desperately need MAPLs, and first of all - for PLO, but Ash trees are expensive, and Husky is only dreaming, and we cannot lay them, we do what? We transform the "Borey", which is a strategist and never a tactician, into an MAPL unusual for its tasks, as a result of which we spend money on relatively ineffective ships, which we build to solve relatively unimportant tasks for us

Andrey, what about project 949A? I doubt that Borey is worse than Project 949A in terms of noise and maneuverability. And from Borey, no one makes an MAPL, this is a missile attack ship for delivering massive strikes against enemy fleet groupings or along the coast in a non-nuclear conflict. And if there is a "Caliber" with SBCH, then in the nuclear one.

Do we need MAPL? Yes, of course, but Ash is extremely expensive, you yourself wrote that you need a simpler boat hunter, but for now it is not there, what is the point of the shipyards to stand idle?

[Andrei from Chelyabinsk]

Quote: AVM

Andrew, what about the 949 project?

And what happened to him?:)))

Quote: AVM

I doubt that Boreas noise and maneuverability are worse than the 949 project.

Maybe better, at least for noise better for sure.

Quote: AVM

And no one from Boreas makes the MAPL, it is a rocket attack ship, for delivering massive strikes against enemy fleets or coastal groups in a non-nuclear conflict

Andrew, the 949А project can hardly be called successful for a number of reasons. Litmus test - the frequency of entering combat services. In general ... this is not a simple thing, it can do a lot, but it can not do much, just like any specialized ship.
The bottom line is that we have a number of tasks that the fleet must solve. And a highly specialized boat with a large number of non-strategic vessels on board in terms of these tasks, today we will have somewhere in the third priority. Of course, there are some tasks that she can solve, but building such ships now is the same as glueing wallpapers in a house whose roof has fallen off. It seems to be the case and necessary, but ...

[Shopping Mall]

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Quote: AVM

Andrew, what about the 949 project?

And what happened to him?:)))

Grows old (((

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

Andrew, the 949А project can hardly be called successful for a number of reasons. Litmus test - the frequency of entering combat services. In general ... this is not a simple thing, it can do a lot, but it can not do much, just like any specialized ship.

The frequency of exits can be due not to a ship-type problem (SSGN) but a lack of a specific project.

Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk

The bottom line is that we have a number of tasks that the fleet must solve. And a highly specialized boat with a large number of non-strategic vessels on board in terms of these tasks, today we will have somewhere in the third priority. Of course, there are some tasks that she can solve, but building such ships now is the same as glueing wallpapers in a house whose roof has fallen off. It seems to be the case and necessary, but ...

I agree with you on many points, including the fact that we have problems with the ASW, but the enemy's surface fleet also needs to be handled somehow, and the SSGN, in my opinion, is a completely adequate solution. As I see it, if we do not continue the construction of Boreyev in the form of Borey-K, then most likely we will no longer have a submarine submarine. We need another boat, easier and cheaper than Ash. Something like Virginia Light.

I hope to write further articles on the problem of cheap submarines and on countering the enemy’s surface fleet, and I count on your comments.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: AVM

The enemy’s surface fleet must somehow be processed, and the SSGN, in my opinion, is quite an adequate solution.

Moreover, this is our only opportunity to upset NK Yankees at DMZ. MRA was stolen from us by the Aerospace Forces (all TU-22M3s went to the Air Force), our NKs ... "can, but not really, like impotent in the middle of the night." And not because they don't want to, but because they cannot ... Only SSGNs remain. 885 - good, but expensive cars and anti-ship missiles they have only 32 - by the number of "holes on the shoulder straps."
At cost Ash is more expensive than Boreas. So it turns out that it is better to make a car on 64-112 beaters, not particularly expensive, to combat the adversary's AUG, than to contain the elderly 949A ... which is time to retire.

Quote: AVM

I hope to write further articles on the issue of cheap submarines and on countering the enemy’s surface fleet,

The aspiration is commendable ... Is there any personal experience? Or the analysis of literary sources will be ... But in any case - success in the field of analysis and forecasts!
GOOD LUCK!

[Alexvv]

It would be nice to stuff them with Caliber 2.0 with a range of 4500km, as well as Zircons

[Disant]

AlexVV, and what’s not bad, or rather I’ll put the question - Who is it good ??
to swell money into something that does not provide the main task of the Navy - the withdrawal of submarines with intercontinental missiles to launch areas? As I understand it, calibers and zircons can be pulled from an inexpensive ship, or from an airplane, and these boats are left once or twice and miscalculated.

[Sergei 777]

Well, more than two we do not need. One unit for each of the two key fleets. At least one cruiser will always be combat ready. It is better to let Ash continue to lay

[Shopping Mall]

Quote: Sergey 777

Well, more than two we do not need. One unit for each of the two key fleets. At least one cruiser will always be combat ready. It is better to let Ash continue to lay

If they are considered in the niche of the 949 / 949 project, then you need 4 units. From the 949 project, they are going to upgrade 949 boats to 4AM, and write off 4. And then, when 949AM is removed from service, you can consider building more 4 units (if something new does not appear).

[Megamarcel]

There is no economy and there is no army with a fleet. The economy is not included in the top ten and can not afford the composition of the fleet at the level of the USA and China. Therefore, at sea, we have had and remain in essence a defense doctrine. So even one can only dream of past greatness. What to do? To develop the economy, civil society, etc. But unfortunately this is not and will not be. There is a gradual economic occupation of the Russian Federation by foreign corporations.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: MegaMarcel

There is no economy and no army with a fleet.

Oleg, BRAVO!
You are straight, Kozma Prutkov: - "Behold at the root!"
Damn, by and large there is nothing more to add ...
RESPECT!

[military pensioner]

How tired of this: they will lay it, build it, develop it, launch it, launch it on the water .... having no analogues in the world.
"If my grandmother had me ... ah, she would be a grandfather."

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

How tired of this: they will lay it, build it, develop it, launch it, launch it on the water .... having no analogues in the world.
"If my grandmother had me ... ah, she would be a grandfather."

Read only those news where - launched, included in the system.

[Shopping Mall]

Nuclear submarines - carriers of cruise missiles: reality and prospects

https://topwar.ru/153714-atomnye-podvodnye-lodki-nositeli-krylatyh-raket-realnost-i-perspektivy.html

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

A good move, as if we are doing Borey-K, and if something happens to turn it into Borey-A))).

And what, the Americans gave that they are the smartest with their Ohio smartest ?! No guys by your rules, we will not play.

[Shopping Mall]

Quote: Ratmir_Ryazan

A good move, as if we are doing Borey-K, and if something happens to turn it into Borey-A))).

And what, the Americans gave that they are the smartest with their Ohio smartest ?! No guys by your rules, we will not play.

I do not think that it can be turned into Borey-A, at least quickly. But even if he will carry 100-120 KR, and they will be with SBCh, it will be a serious strengthening of the nuclear shield.

[Dzafdet]

And where are the boats with the indexes "B, D, d, E, E"?

[Alexey B.]

The news about the construction of 2 SSGN "Borey-K" is most likely a response to the proposal to upgrade the remaining 3 TRPK SN pr. 941 "Typhoon" into cruise missile carriers.
Those. Arkhangelsk and Severstal will go under the knife in the near future, and Dmitry Donskoy will follow.

[Vladimir1155]

Sharks are a crime, it’s necessary to modernize, there aren’t enough nuclear submarines, we’re building too little and we need to protect them,

[lBEARl]

Explain why we need Borey-k if there is Ash-tree .. Well, or vice versa.

[Shopping Mall]

Quote: lBEARl

Explain why we need Borey-k if there is Ash-tree .. Well, or vice versa.

Ash is more expensive than Boreas.
Ash can do something that Borey cannot - quieter, better GAK, most likely the speed of a low-noise course is higher.
On Yasen 32 KR / PKR, on Borey you can put 100-120 KR / PKR.

[Disant]

AVM Andrey, knowledgeable people - how is it planned to use Boreas and Ash-trees in the threatened period and during?
what should they do?

[Shopping Mall]

It is difficult to say what the plans of the Navy. The only thing that can be assumed that during the endangered period, the software must leave the base in order to avoid destruction at the pier. And where they will be sent further, I do not know.

[Disant]

AVM, on your link

The task “Ensuring the deployment and combat stability of strategic missile submarines” will also be indirectly addressed. Almost identical appearance and acoustic signatures of the SSGN and Borey-type SSBNs can mislead the enemy's forces by redirecting them to tracking SSGNs instead of SSBNs.

is it the essence of the submarines with non-continental missiles in the event of war - to be a false target? how can they fight back (I’m not even talking about driving them away from boats with intercontinental missiles) from enemy submarine hunters, at least?
Best regards

[Shopping Mall]

Quote: Disant

AVM, on your link

The task “Ensuring the deployment and combat stability of strategic missile submarines” will also be indirectly addressed. Almost identical appearance and acoustic signatures of the SSGN and Borey-type SSBNs can mislead the enemy's forces by redirecting them to tracking SSGNs instead of SSBNs.

is it the essence of the submarines with non-continental missiles in the event of war - to be a false target? how can they fight back (I’m not even talking about driving them away from boats with intercontinental missiles) from enemy submarine hunters, at least?
Best regards

It is not exactly their task. It is rather a consequence of the fact that they are executed on the basis of a single project. One way or another, but enemy submarines will look for our SSBNs, which they, too, will be called targets? If we had 8 SSBNs, and then 8 SSGNs were added, with the same acoustic signature, then the enemy needs to increase 2 times the strength to hunt SSBNs, 2 has less chance of hitting all SSBNs, and therefore more the risk of our guaranteed retaliation and less chance that the enemy will strike the first blow.

And fight them from the hunters as well as SSBNs, secrecy and their own TA.

[Vladimir1155]

I think Borey K unified with Borey A replaces the ash

[Vladimir1155]

good news ! more good submarines, this is the basis of the fleet, the long arm of Russia

[Lapunevsky]

That's how these submarines of the Navy of the Russian Federation get it, and then I will be sincerely happy for that. I’ll be happy to drink a glass of brandy for their trouble-free swimming and valiant service in the name of protecting Russia from adversaries. In the meantime, I don’t believe it. So much has been promised. Now you need to judge for fulfilled bravado promises, and not for themselves.

[Madjestik85]

I have only one question, when will they start building modern titanium nuclear submarines? And Boreas and Ash are all steel boats with all the minuses flowing from here. We have only Soviet titanium boats ...

[Shopping Mall]

Quote: Madjestik85

I have only one question, when will they start building modern titanium nuclear submarines? And Boreas and Ash are all steel boats with all the minuses flowing from here. We have only Soviet titanium boats ...

Most likely never. They are very expensive. Most likely, titanium does not provide such advantages that will justify the cost of the submarine hull from it.

[Madjestik85]

What do you mean does not give? The quietest, deepest, fastest and most durable boats were just titanium. After all, if titanium does not offer such advantages, why would they be built in the Soviet Union?