Military Review

The oldest US nuclear submarine USS Ohio underwent a major overhaul with modernization

29
The oldest nuclear-powered missile submarine of the Ohio class ("Ohio") USA USS Ohio SSGN 726, which is already 38 years old, underwent repairs with modernization and left the repair docks. The introduction of the submarine into the forces of constant readiness and access to combat duty is planned for the first half of the 2020 of the year.


The oldest US nuclear submarine USS Ohio underwent a major overhaul with modernization


Reportedly, the submarine spent months in the dry dock 27, during which major repairs were carried out with the modernization of the submarine. What kind of work was carried out on its board is not reported, the total cost of the work amounted to 223 million dollars.

USS US submarine “Ohio” SSGN-726 is the lead in the 18 series of Ohio-class third-generation nuclear submarines. Initially, it was the carrier of the 24 Trident intercontinental ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads, but during the 2003-2005 years, it underwent a major overhaul with modernization, after which it became the carrier of the 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles.

The submarine was laid down on April 10 1976 of the year, launched on April 7 1979 of the year. It was transferred to the US Navy on 28 on October 1981 of the year and commissioned on November 11 of the same year. It has two crews: "Blue" and "Gold" to constantly patrol, changing the composition of the team.

Displacement: surface - 16746 tons, submarine - 18750 tons. Length 170 meters, width 13 meters, average draft 11 meters. Speed ​​above water 12 nodes, underwater 20 nodes. Working immersion depth 240 meters. Crew: 15 officers, 140 sailors and foremen. Food autonomy for 60 days.

Nuclear power plant - water-type reactor type GE PWR S8G. Two turbines of 30000 hp, 2 of a turbogenerator of 4 MW, a diesel generator of 1,4 MW, a backup propeller motor of 325 hp

In service: 4 torpedo tubes of 533 mm caliber, 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles (originally 24 Trident ICBMs with nuclear warheads).

The U.S. Navy currently has 18 Ohio-class strategic nuclear submarines, which will be phased out and replaced by Columbia-class nuclear submarines as they are put into service. The first of them should go into operation in the 2027 year, and with the 2031 year already go on combat duty.

The details of the new project are classified, it is known that the displacement and length with a diameter of Columbia is almost identical to submarines of the Ohio type. It is planned that each new submarine will be armed with 16 ballistic missiles Trident II D5. The service life is planned in 42 of the year, while recharging the reactor is not required.

The submarine of the new generation will receive X-shaped stern rudders, as well as horizontal depth rudders installed on the wheelhouse. Instead of a screw on the submarine install water jet. The new ship will receive a fully electric propulsion system with permanent magnets. This installation will be powered by nuclear power plant turbogenerators. This design will make the ship quieter compared to submarines such as "Ohio".
Photos used:
US.Navy
29 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Nycomed
    Nycomed 20 August 2019 18: 51
    -3
    I really thought that they were preparing a museum. recourse
    1. seregatara1969
      seregatara1969 20 August 2019 22: 16
      0
      veteran "ohio" is still in the ranks
  2. cniza
    cniza 20 August 2019 18: 53
    +7
    Initially, it was a carrier of 24 Trident ICBMs with nuclear warheads, but in the period 2003-2005 it underwent a major overhaul with modernization, after which it became a carrier of 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles.


    Serious potential.
    1. nafanal
      nafanal 21 August 2019 01: 08
      -4
      Yes, you sho..And how fast did you manage to launch these same trident Ohio at once? Without prejudice to itself .. I answer .. After each rocket launch, I went for repairs .. Each! (Karl !!!!) Type "Operation Behemoth" on YouTube
  3. Borik
    Borik 20 August 2019 18: 57
    +1
    the Americans shoved one and a half hundred missiles. And how much could be installed on the "Shark" if our naval commanders decided to upgrade it?
    1. kjhg
      kjhg 20 August 2019 19: 17
      +3
      This topic has been discussed more than once. Upgrading the Shark for the price would be comparable to building a new Ash. Here, even the modernization of 971 and 949 projects comes with a creak, and the number of boats planned for modernization has already been reduced. There is nothing to be done, these are today's realities. request. Instead of modernizing the already obsolete Sharks, the industry proposed building relatively inexpensive, already run-in Boreas as an arsenal of cruise missiles. Not approved. The reason is no money.
      1. Dikson
        Dikson 20 August 2019 20: 18
        +3
        that is, the 38-year-old Ohio is not outdated, and our Anthei is out of date ....
      2. bayard
        bayard 20 August 2019 20: 42
        +1
        Quote: kjhg
        Instead of modernizing the already obsolete Sharks, the industry proposed building relatively inexpensive, already run-in Boreas as an arsenal of cruise missiles. Not approved. The reason is no den

        Why not approved? There was an official announcement that two such nuclear submarines were included in the program (ordered) and two more in the option. Total will be 4 pcs. But I wouldn’t refuse six - three for the fleet (Northern Fleet and Pacific Fleet) - one on the campaign, one in the base, one in repair.
        Modernization of "Anteyev" under "Caliber" \ "Zircon" is in full swing - "Omsk" is already in service, three more are in the works.
    2. NEXUS
      NEXUS 20 August 2019 19: 24
      0
      Quote: Borik
      And how much could be installed on the "Shark" if our naval commanders decided to upgrade it?

      On Antei, if sclerosis doesn’t fail me, they thought to put the order of 70 KR. Another question is what is in the arsenal of Ohio for marine purposes. And then, the option of equipping the Boreev KR is considered. And at the expense of the Shark ... well, it's expensive to upgrade it. Another Borey with KR will be cheaper to build.
    3. Charik
      Charik 20 August 2019 19: 40
      +2
      Where did your boats go? They were cut
    4. Starover_Z
      Starover_Z 20 August 2019 19: 41
      0
      Quote: Borik
      And how much could be installed on the "Shark" if our naval commanders decided to upgrade it?

      The question is certainly interesting, considering that our missiles are larger and heavier than the American ones, and also the "Shark" contains 2 10-meter hulls standing next to it.
  4. armata_armata
    armata_armata 20 August 2019 19: 11
    +4
    Hmm, and we are sharks under the knife ...
  5. Lord of the Sith
    Lord of the Sith 20 August 2019 19: 32
    -4
    In service: 4 torpedo tubes of 533 mm caliber, 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles


    It is solid. Who can know how many cruise missiles on our submarines?
    1. Charik
      Charik 20 August 2019 19: 44
      -1
      one or three or not at all
  6. ShM05
    ShM05 20 August 2019 20: 06
    +2
    If all boats are subsequently redone for Tomahawk carriers, which is quite likely that 18 * 154 = 2772, a serious force, air defense missile defense will break through if you do not destroy the carriers, in general, a headache
    1. nafanal
      nafanal 21 August 2019 01: 21
      -4
      It’s not funny for yourself? Where did the missiles go after the first attack on the Syrian airfield .. They were just shot dry. After producing kerosene and ammunition, they landed and the Americans fired a salvo from the second frigate ... What is this force?
      1. Greenwood
        Greenwood 21 August 2019 04: 08
        +3
        With their caps, their caps ...
  7. E.S.
    E.S. 20 August 2019 21: 48
    -3
    Quote: cniza
    Initially, it was a carrier of 24 Trident ICBMs with nuclear warheads, but in the period 2003-2005 it underwent a major overhaul with modernization, after which it became a carrier of 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles.


    Serious potential.

    Anti-Barmalei drank.
    Trident-2 has a range of about 10 thousand km, separated by individual warheads of individual guidance, the maximum number of warheads than in Ohio crammed tomahawks.
    It’s better not to remember about the probability of an intercepted warhead of the BR and Tomogavka.
    1. NordOst16
      NordOst16 20 August 2019 22: 24
      +1
      Those. all cruise missiles of the Caliber family (except torpedoes) also build against the Chuchmeks?)))
    2. Avior
      Avior 21 August 2019 00: 25
      +1
      They were converted in accordance with the strategic arms treaty.
  8. SHIPS
    SHIPS 20 August 2019 22: 17
    +2
    A strong machine, I drank a lot of blood since its first exit to the BS in October 1982.
    The division stood on the ears. The first attempt was K-492 Dudko.
    1. NordOst16
      NordOst16 20 August 2019 22: 24
      0
      Have you tried to track down?
      1. SHIPS
        SHIPS 21 August 2019 07: 39
        0
        If you are interested in a topic.
        Dudko's book "Heroes of Bangor" is available online
        And here
        http://samlib.ru/comment/s/semenow_aleksandr_sergeewich333/protivolodochnaioborona-2019?PAGE=3

        Comments by experts that he wrote in the book.
        1. SHIPS
          SHIPS 21 August 2019 09: 12
          0
          Dudko Book
  9. The comment was deleted.
    1. Cottodraton
      Cottodraton 21 August 2019 01: 59
      0
      What a wonderful training manual, just like the plot for the film ... Excuse me, at what point will Willis or Will Smith appear?
  10. E.S.
    E.S. 21 August 2019 00: 42
    -2
    Quote: NordOst16
    Those. all cruise missiles of the Caliber family (except torpedoes) also build against the Chuchmeks?)))

    Yes. Against those chuchmeks who make air defense systems that cannot protect themselves from the attack of drones launched by barefoot men in dresses
  11. E.S.
    E.S. 21 August 2019 00: 43
    -1
    Quote: Avior
    They were converted in accordance with the strategic arms treaty.

    So exactly
  12. Adimius38
    Adimius38 21 August 2019 06: 21
    0
    in this regard, they are great, Russian submarines are usually cut into nails. Take the same nuclear submarine 941 of the project it was decided to dismantle. But these submarines after rework could become whole arsenals of cruise missiles
  13. Radikal
    Radikal 21 August 2019 14: 03
    0
    The submarine was laid down on April 10, 1976, launched on April 7, 1979. It was transferred to the US Navy on October 28, 1981 and put into operation on November 11 of the same year.
    It is curious, but how many ships in our system are of this year of release? winked