NI predicts: Russia's submarine fleet will decline


The United States is waiting for a reduction in Russian underwater fleet. At least, such a development of events is predicted by the famous publication The National Interest. The authors of the journal associate the upcoming reduction with the fact that obsolete submarines prevail in the Russian Navy.


The submarine fleet is the pride of the Russian state and one of the most important components in ensuring the country's defense capability. Submariners are considered the elite of the armed forces, and submarines perform the most diverse and often very secret tasks in the bowels of the oceans.

Therefore, the Russian leadership treats the submarine fleet very carefully, but it is not without numerous problems, one of the main among which is the age of most submarines. Indeed, now Russia, in fact, uses the legacy of the Soviet Union, which ceased to exist almost thirty years ago.

According to The National Interest, the Russian Navy currently includes 62 submarines, including 10 atomic submarines with ballistic missiles, 9 nuclear submarines with cruise missiles and 14 nuclear submarines. But many of these submarines were built in Soviet times. Now, many decades after launching, they are technically outdated. Ian Ballantyne, editor of Warships International Fleet Review, says only three Russian Delta-class ballistic missiles are under 30 years old.

Submarines, especially nuclear ones, are very expensive, but they cannot serve the Russian state forever. Sooner or later, ships of this class are also decommissioned from the fleet. American experts are wondering how long Russian submarines can last, and give the answer: by the 2030s, the number of submarines in the Russian Navy may be reduced to 12 pieces. All Soviet-built submarines will have to be decommissioned due to their age.

The only way out of the situation if Russia wants to maintain the potential of its submarine fleet and continue to compete with the United States is only to build new submarines. But this question rests on financing. To create several dozens of new submarines that meet modern requirements, huge investments are required. Vladimir Putin pays great attention to improving the country's defense capability and does not skimp on financing the armed forces, but even with such budgetary generosity, it will be impossible to build such a number of submarines in a short time.

The situation that has developed in the submarine fleet is a consequence of the economic problems that Russia faced in the 1990s, when even the military industry, which was always one of the leading sectors of the Russian industry, was experiencing far from good times.

In fairness, it should be noted that the United States, Russia's main military and political rival and its rival in submarines, also faced a similar problem. So, the command of the US Navy announced that it needs to put into service the submarine fleet 66 submarines with strike and cruise missiles. But there are only 4 such boats in the Navy, and they are also obsolete. And Washington, like Moscow, does not have the financial and organizational capabilities to build dozens of new submarines in a matter of years.

Therefore, the competition of great powers under water will continue on an equal footing: the potential of the submarine fleets of the United States and Russia is approximately the same, but both submarine fleets face the same problems.

It can be predicted that in the future the number of submarines used by the naval forces of the leading powers of the world will be significantly reduced. And this applies not only to Russia and the United States, but also to the ex-“Queen of the Seas” of Great Britain, which also carries out a reduction in the number of submarines.
Ctrl Enter

Noticed a mistake Highlight text and press. Ctrl + Enter

20 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. knn54 22 January 2020 09: 50 New
    • 10
    • 4
    +6
    The fact is that there is nowhere to repair.
    Nuclear submarines have been idle for years, waiting for repair / modernization. And then they are decommissioned. Ship repair plants turned into shipyards.
    1. kjhg 22 January 2020 10: 04 New
      • 23
      • 2
      +21
      Quote: knn54
      The fact is that there is nowhere to repair.

      I do not agree. There are shipyards for the repair of nuclear submarines and they are underloaded. The main problem is the lack of funds for repairs. There are other problems - this is a lack of personnel, depreciation of equipment, etc. But these problems, basically, rest against the first problem and, with timely financing, would be gradually solved.
      Further, according to the content of the article, about the imminent reduction in the number of nuclear submarines. I do not agree either. This is a reduction de factohas happened a long time ago. Likely opponents know this very well. Only some of our "patriots" do not know. The fact that all these nuclear submarines are still listed in the fleet is just an illusion of availability. For example, in the Pacific Fleet there is only one operational multipurpose nuclear submarine, pr.971 Shchuka B (one more for real repair) and one shock nuclear submarine, pr.949A Antey (another for repair). In the North, a little more, but not by much. The rest, according to the documents, is being repaired, but actually - in storage. Submarines pr.885 Yasen M. will soon come to replace them. Therefore, the nuclear submarine fleet is already at its bottom. Then the situation should gradually improve.
      1. Sailor 22 January 2020 11: 10 New
        • 6
        • 0
        +6
        Yes, I really would like to hope that now the "BOTTOM" of the once mighty Navy of the USSR, I would like not only the obsolete pr.636.3, but pr.677 and nuclear submarines to be built, and not for 10-15 years, but at least up to 5.
        1. NEOZ 22 January 2020 11: 37 New
          • 3
          • 2
          +1
          Quote: Sailor
          Yes, I really would like to hope that now the "BOTTOM"

          Of course not! the bottom is still ahead !!! this is objective, no one can prevent a further fall ... NOBODY!
        2. Chaldon48 22 January 2020 16: 35 New
          • 0
          • 0
          0
          In my opinion, it is not only money, but also extremely worn out equipment. A good example is the case with our aircraft carrier.
      2. Sergey1987 22 January 2020 13: 33 New
        • 2
        • 0
        +2
        Quote: kjhg
        For example, in the Pacific Fleet there is only one operational multipurpose nuclear submarine, pr.971 Shchuka B (one more for real repair) and one shock nuclear submarine, pr.949A Antey (another for repair).

        Actually, in the Pacific Fleet in the ranks of 3 Antei and two and one Pike-B. This year also Ash will be added.
  2. Operator 22 January 2020 10: 09 New
    • 3
    • 15
    -12
    It's time to switch to the large-scale 1-kiloton ICAPL Laika with Zircons and Shkvalami-2 on board.
    1. Alexey RA 22 January 2020 11: 29 New
      • 6
      • 3
      +3
      Quote: Operator
      It's time to switch to the large-scale 1-kiloton ICAPL Laika with Zircons and Shkvalami-2 on board.

      Why are these interim solutions? Let’s go straight to “Kaiten” and “Oka” - the efficiency will be even higher, and the loss of l / s is less.
      1. Operator 22 January 2020 11: 39 New
        • 5
        • 5
        0
        The 1-ctn displacement of the ICCM Laika is determined by the speed of the strike nuclear submarines of the Virginia type (34 knots) and the electric power of a nuclear reactor of the same type as the Poseidon NPA reactor (10 MW) - to reduce the cost of large-scale construction of the ICAPL (from 100 units) and more).

        PS The strategic NPA "Poseidon" - this is the "Oka", "Kaitan" and the Tsar bomb in one bottle laughing
  3. rocket757 22 January 2020 10: 11 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    The only way out of the situation if Russia wants to maintain the potential of its submarine fleet and continue to compete with the United States is only to build new submarines.

    Is not it so? this is exactly what is happening. Catch up and overtake will not work, but is it necessary .... let's see how it will be.
    1. Boa kaa 23 January 2020 16: 53 New
      • 2
      • 1
      +1
      Quote: rocket757
      The only way out of the situation if Russia wants to maintain the potential of its submarine fleet and continue to compete with the United States is only to build new submarines.

      Is not it so? this is exactly what is happening.

      The Chinese Sohu recently published that Russia has "laid down (probably to be built!) 60 new modern submarines. Of these, 35 are nuclear", which will be a real threat to American aircraft carriers.
      In my opinion it’s time to finish "harnessing" it’s time already to whip up horses!
      1. rocket757 23 January 2020 18: 00 New
        • 0
        • 0
        0
        Quote: BoA KAA
        In my opinion it’s time to finish "harnessing" it’s time already to whip up horses!

        Who should I charge it to?
  4. Grad-Xnumx 22 January 2020 11: 48 New
    • 1
    • 1
    0
    I did not know that the USA also had problems with financing and they reduced the number of plans for the future.
  5. knn121121 22 January 2020 14: 50 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Don't Wait
  6. Typhoon 22 January 2020 15: 07 New
    • 2
    • 2
    0
    The trouble is sadness! You can only sympathize with the plight of the US Navy! How can they solve their problems? After all, shipyards are in decline, there is no new technology, there is a problem with personnel, I am silent for their collapsed infrastructure, in which there are not even floating docks) Probably, they will order in China, via Alik)))
    1. Boa kaa 23 January 2020 17: 02 New
      • 3
      • 0
      +3
      Quote: Typhoon
      You can only sympathize with the plight of the US Navy!

      The irony is a good thing when it does not put pressure on the "pet peeve!" The US fleet is the most powerful fleet in the world. Even the PRC’s fleet is not yet a competitor to him ... neither in submarine forces, nor in aircraft carrier components. You can talk about us only in the future tense ...
  7. Vladimir1155 22 January 2020 22: 05 New
    • 0
    • 4
    -4
    you need to sell an unnecessary aircraft carrier, stop laying new surface ships, except for minesweepers, and with this money repair submarines and build new submarines
    1. Cyrus 24 January 2020 08: 59 New
      • 1
      • 1
      0
      It’s easier for you to sell more benefits.
  8. Karaul14 23 January 2020 04: 20 New
    • 1
    • 2
    -1
    Therefore, the competition of great powers under water will continue on an equal footing: the potential of the submarine fleets of the United States and Russia is approximately the same, but both submarine fleets face the same problems.
    I wonder how it was possible to draw a similar conclusion at the end? The US military has no problems either with financing or with production facilities, the nagging of the US military about the lack of funding is a long tradition, according to which they obviously beg for more money than they can give.
    By the 2030s, the number of submarines in the Russian Navy may be reduced to 12 pieces
    At least someone in their right mind would prophesy such a US Navy? The question is rhetorical. So where are the same gaps and equal competition? The conclusion at the end contradicts the article itself.
  9. shinobi 26 January 2020 11: 22 New
    • 0
    • 0
    0
    Get out, let them continue to dream.