Russian submarine fleet: so afraid of it or what?

38 808 60

David Ex from The National Interest produced a very original analysis: “Watch Out! Russian Submarines Are Prowling Off the US Coast ».

On the one hand, a schukher, the Russians came and I will not save them, on the other hand, the people, we don’t panic, everything will be a hamburger and a stake.



But American admirals are not very pleased with the growing activity of Russian submarines off their coasts.

This is normal. This is generally logical. You just need to remember the "good old" times of the Cold War, when the jambs of Soviet submarines were scared away by US aircraft carriers, lugged inside warrants, in general, they acted as masters of the oceans.

No wonder. The US location is twofold in itself. On the one hand, the country occupies the entire continent. Okay, not all, but I'm sure no one will blame me for the fact that I do not consider Canada a country that can say something like that across the United States. Well, Mexico too.

So the United States is fully insured against conflicts on its land. While in the world there is no one who is able to arrange a landing operation on the coast of the country.

But to come closer under water, to swim up and shy away with something very heavy, nuclear, and with a separable warhead ... Yes, so that without a chance to intercept ...

Aw, aircraft carriers, how are you? Nothing?

The idea of ​​floating airfields pushed into the ocean and keeping nobody within the shot range is a very competent concept. But for an atomic ship that goes at a depth of half a kilometer, and in case of great luck, it can only be detected by a hydrophone. Airplanes, satellites, something else ...

In general, for a submarine this is so ...

That is why the US military very ambiguously perceived the appearance of Russian submarines near their shores.

And buddy David began to console his readers. Say, do not worry, the Russians are swimming, and they’ll get away. And in ten years they will not have any submarines left in order to seriously threaten the United States.

The question is for those readers who are in the compartment: and who will say how many of our nuclear submarines are needed to seriously puzzle Americans?

If one is Yellowstone and the second is Washington?

Last year, the Americans spotted eight of our boats. And two in the test exits. So the Americans have reason to believe that Russia doubled the number of submarine exits. And it cannot but strain. Because to counter these submarines, in theory, you need to triple the number of ships of the US Navy. To search for needles (submarines) in a haystack (ocean).

In fact, everything is not so bad. Eight of our submarines took part in the exercises, and two were on a test trip.

But these two months, during which the exercises went, greatly agitated the American naval command. Naturally, no one in the United States believed in the defensive essence of the exercises in the ocean, they are not defending off the coast of the enemy, even if it’s potential, which means that the intentions of the Russians should be regarded exclusively as a manifestation of aggression of the highest level.

This is a very significant statement. And it would be even cooler if, as an argument, Ex would not cite some data received from ... sources in the intelligence of Norway.

Well, listen, it’s not serious at all! Refer to the intelligence of Norway, which has been searching for Russian boats in its waters for so many years and cannot find the ONLY Baltic submarine fleet - Well, really, not serious at all!

However, the commander of the Second Fleet (urgently resurrected from the non-existence of a reserve in 2018), Andrew Lewis stated that "the east coast is no longer a safe haven for American ships." In February 2020.

Well, I do not agree with the admiral. To the west, too, you can throw someone, it is very possible. Guys will be pulled from Vladivostok, if necessary. And the fleet, which has simply stood in reserve since 2011, is unlikely to be able to become such an effective tool.

“We are seeing an ever-increasing number of Russian submarines deployed in the Atlantic, and these submarines are more capable than ever to deploy over longer periods of time, with more deadly weapon systems,” said Lewis.

No, that’s logical! And why then still need to drive boats into the oceans, to teach and train crews, to develop new weapons systems? No, of course, it would be nice if rowing galleys went on the attack at the USA AUG, but here excuse me - we have what we have.

“Our new reality is that when our sailors go to sea, they can expect to act in a disputed space as soon as they leave Norfolk. “Our ships can no longer expect to operate in a safe place on the east coast or simply cross the Atlantic unhindered to operate elsewhere.”

And this is what the admiral says, under the command of 6 cruisers, 21 destroyers, 8 strategic submarines, 15 multi-purpose attack submarines and 13 patrol ships. And a bunch of completely new and powerful Poseidon anti-submarine aircraft.

Who would check the admiral's pants ... Well, who said that the US Navy simply must feel dry and comfortable anywhere in the World Ocean?

Apparently, Admiral Lewis really scared the public with his remarks, and the brave Interest employee Ex had to reassure the public.

Say, nothing, Moscow simply is not able to maintain the pace and very soon they simply will not have any submarines in order to keep the entire American continent in suspense.

At present, Russia has 62nd submarines of all classes. (In fact, there are 68 of them, the data of the Americans is somehow a little outdated.)

11 of them are strategic with ballistic rockets, 26 - nuclear with cruise missiles, the rest are multi-purpose. 22 diesel-electric we do not take into account, this is weapon close combat. A total of 59.

The remaining nine are special-purpose boats that are not intended to participate in combat operations.

The American expert says that the boats are old, built in the 80-90s, which means that they will soon reach the final. I do not agree, the age for nuclear powered ships is not very critical. Specially looked, but what about the star-striped?

Ok there. The freshest Ohio was built in 1997, and the first in 1984. And the new Columbia will go in the 30s.

And so who would talk about old boats ...

Meanwhile, once every two years, the Borey rises, which can be called anything but not an old boat. Given that there are actually 4 Boreevs in the ranks, the fifth (Prince Oleg) should be put into operation this year, and 4 more are under construction ...

Given that the construction of boats, which are part of the nuclear triad, is given the highest priority, and besides, we have not forgotten how to build them ...

So I would not be in a hurry with conclusions.

But they are sure of The National Interest: by the end of the 20s, by the beginning of the 30s, maximum 12 submarines will remain in the Russian Navy. The rest either completely fail, or become so old that it will be pointless to keep them in the fleet.

Where such confidence? Maybe we don’t know something like that? Let's watch. Moreover, American colleagues have a terrible figure of 28 submarines at their disposal. Everything that Russian shipbuilding can achieve in 10 years.

No, we have a lot of problems in building ships. But not enough to condemn the submarine fleet.

So let's see.

There is no point in taking diesel submarines for a reason that I already wrote about. So just a figure of 15 boats minimum and 20 maximum, if they do not disrupt the program - and that’s all.

We look at nuclear powered ships.

Project 949A Antey. 8 boats. The first boats came to the fleet in the late 80s. The last Antei was put into service in 1996. Six of them underwent repair and modernization. Two should be updated by 2022. Comparable to Ohio? Quite.

Project 671RTMK "Pike." 2 boats. They went into operation in the early 90s, modernized.

Project 945 Barracuda. 2 boats. It seems to be decided to upgrade to the level of the fourth generation. The boats are old (1983 and 1986), but apparently there is confidence in the correctness of the action.

Project 945A "Condor". 2 boats. They will also upgrade. In general, right, a titanium case is a titanium case.

Project 971 "Pike-B". 12 boats. Yes, unlike the Barracudas and Condors, the steel case is instead of titanium. Because it is debatable, the newer boats will work again.

Project 885 "Ash." One boat. In service since 2014. And two are planned for 2020.

Of course, unlike the American Navy, it is very motley, unfortunately. If you look like the Americans are watching, then yes, the first candidates for parsing are two Pikes. And that’s all. Something else, well, only in the case of deterioration, but I don’t have such data, so use a pitchfork to calculate how many boats can be written off in the next 10 years.

Perhaps some will write off. But really hardly a lot, because it would be worth pulling to the last. Let's take that there are 20 boats left. If we add all those under construction to this quantity, then we will get the same figure 28.

However, we still have the second class of nuclear submarines. SSBN. Suddenly so ...

Ryazan, the last of the project 667RBD Kalmar, of course, will be written off. The 1982 ship built long will not live, alas. Plus the “wet" launch of the missiles - well, still yesterday.

Project 667BDRM "Dolphin". 6 boats. They will still live, since they managed to rearm them on modern Sineva missiles. But it is the “Dolphins” that should replace the “Boreas” by 2030. Which is quite possible.

Project 941 "Shark". One boat. Converted to the Bulava missile, it was tested on it, and may still be living. Although it is possible Severstal and Arkhangelsk will be modernized and put into operation. Not excluded. I would be very happy about this.

Project 955 "Northwind." Three boats. It is planned to build until 2027 another seven cruisers of the modernized project 955A.

Thus, we get 10 (+9).

We put all the nuclear powered ships in one pile and get 38 ships. This is a bit bigger than what David Ex predicts. Well, obviously not 12. But a decrease, of course, will take place.

Summarizing everything, we get that in the most negative development of the situation in the Navy, 37 submarines will be operated. This, of course, is more than NI - 12 predicts. But a decrease in composition will still be significant.

If everything planned is completed, then we will have 41 nuclear submarines. This is minus the Dolphins, who did not understand. Now there are 46 of them. The difference in my opinion is not very big.

That is, there is certainly a difference in quantity, but let's take a sober look: it will be partially compensated by quality. And given the situation with the construction of nuclear submarines, which is better than diesel ones, there is no particular reason for concern.

Ian Ballantyne, David’s colleague, editor of another publication, Warships International Fleet Review, picked up the funeral howl. He also said many kind words to our submarine forces.

“Most strike submarines date from the 1980s and 90s. There are still quite a lot of old, Soviet ships carrying the main load, both shock submarines and boats with ballistic missiles. How many more of these old ships can be sent to the sea, awaiting the arrival of new ones, is a moot point.
The time will come when most of the Russian submarine forces both in the Northern Fleet and in the Pacific Fleet - the most important naval forces - will cease to function, leaving huge gaps. ”

Well, blessed are the believers ...

In fact, without hatred, the Russian submarine fleet is a more serious and reliable thing. We can build submarines, we can use them. And it is not for nothing that in the USA the admirals began to feel not very comfortable. There is logic in their behavior. It is very difficult to preserve the integrity of the country, which is very easy to get close to the underwater missile cruiser.

But simply waiting for the development of a positive scenario in our country is possible only when the cadres decide everything. When personnel from the bottom to the very top will not steal fuel from emergency generators, will not allow fires on repaired ships, will not continue to sink docks and ships out of the blue, they will not delay the construction of ships for several years.

Then everything will be fine with us, in fear of our enemies. I'd love to.
60 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. + 19
    5 March 2020 06: 04
    Roman, and when comparing submarine forces — how many boats from the Navy’s enlisted personnel — are ready to perform military service with us and with the Minke whales, how many will be written off with us / them in the coming years, how many will be put into operation, why didn’t you take it apart?
    For an analytical comparison of weapons, it is necessary to take into account not only the list composition - that we have, that the "partners" do not have all the nuclear submarines on the BS from the list and not all of them will ever go .. you did it very superficially, you usually dig deeper ..
    And in any case, the enemy needs to be afraid of our submarine fleet, even one submarine for a couple of some divisions of the Strategic Missile Forces can work out .. it would be strange not to take this into account hi

    ps at least - 941 projects to be included in the combat forces You obviously got excited about including-he is an experienced nuclear submarine at present .. unfortunately ..
    1. + 17
      5 March 2020 07: 53
      Roman needed to check the payroll at least on the Sturm of Depth website. http://www.deepstorm.ru. The same Shchuk-B is not 12 as Roman writes, but only ten (of which 2 are in service after the VTG - "Cheetah" and "Kuzbass" + "Vepr" will soon be released from the VTG). There were 14 units, "Shark", "Bars", "Barnaul" and "Kashalot" were withdrawn from the fleet. Regarding the modernization of Project 949A, they write that the first of them nuclear submarine "Irkutsk" will have to return to service in 2021, if again the deadlines do not go to the right. I personally doubt the advisability of upgrading this ship. "Irkutsk" was launched in 1987, commissioned in 1989, in the Pacific Fleet from the 90th. He served less than 10 years, not a single combat service and was put into reserve back in 1997, where he defended in Krasheninnikov Bay pending repairs. In 2001 transferred to FSUE "DVZ" Zvezda "in the settlement of Bolshoy Kamen, the repair began in 2014. It was withdrawn to the reserve pending repair in 1997, the completion date of the repair is 2021. The ship has changed its fourth decade, after repair and modernization it will not more than 10 years, then it will be expelled from the fleet. What is the point for this to spend huge funds on modernization, is unclear. The same type of nuclear submarine "Chelyabinsk" is located in the water area of ​​the plant, it has not yet begun to modernize.
      1. +1
        5 March 2020 18: 08
        They themselves wrote:
        Served less than 10 years
        those. the resource is not developed, and can last another 40 years.
      2. 0
        9 March 2020 14: 20
        Quote: Bashkirkhan
        Roman needed to check the payroll at least on the Storm of Depth website. http://www.deepstorm.ru. The same Shchuk-B is not 12 as Roman writes, but only ten (of which 2 are in the ranks after the VTG - "Gepard" and "Kuzbass" + "Vepr" will soon be released from the VTG). There were 14 units, "Shark", "Bars", "Barnaul" and "Kashalot" were withdrawn from the fleet.
        c'mon there ... Don’t break the kid raspberry optimism ...
        Russian submarine fleet: so afraid of it or what?
        he could not write, - COMPETE ...
        Quote: aries2200
        cheap cap-working for the enemy
        don't hit the guy with realism. This is not humane.
        Quote: Per se.
        A significant part of American cities is concentrated on the coasts, to which "black holes" can get close.
        Here is a guy with optimism to help the author !!!
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        What can I say? Roman has 12 Shchuk-B in the fleet, in reality, EMNIP 2 in the Northern Fleet and 1 in the Pacific Fleet. The rest are in repair and its expectation, and it is obvious that not all will wait
        sw. Andrey, do not offend him, otherwise you may get the impression that you are simply "fighting a competitor" .... winked good
        Quote: Ros 56
        A miracle in feathers, you beguiled a site with a May Day demonstration.
        Yuri, this is certainly true, but it sounds rude ... crying
        Quote: Fan-Fan
        Yes, the author is very free to operate with numbers, the number of submarines counted enchantingly, even took into account those that will never even reach recycling under their own power.
        For this, a man tried ...
        Quote: Brylevsky
        Unfortunately, they will not catch up. And that's why. From Vladivostok to, say, San Francisco, about 4500 nautical miles. This is if through the La Perouse Strait. Minus 1400 km (the line of the missile attack by "Caliber"), 3744 miles remain. Now we remember: in an economic course of 3 nodes "Varshavyanka" travels about ... 400 miles, after which it will be forced to surface (hello, air-independent power plants) or continue on in the RDP mode. Formally, in this mode, she can go about 7500 nautical miles, but who will let her go, like at home?
        How cruel you all are here... Bram Stoker, in one of his books, had a much more humane phrase - "let the madman sleep in his madness..." "G", - Humanity ...
    2. + 11
      5 March 2020 11: 37
      Among Americans, combat readiness is considered so - out of the fleet, 297 ships serve 100. That is, a third of the fleet is always ready and deployed, the rest is trained, repaired, and rested. But if necessary, they can withdraw a bunch of forces in a couple of months, for example, when they crushed the DPRK two years ago, they deployed 2 instead of 3 AUGs in 7 months. 5 of them were brought to the Pacific Ocean.
  2. + 20
    5 March 2020 07: 00
    cheap cap-working for the enemy ......
    1. +1
      5 March 2020 09: 27
      No, this is a reason to write another article for the minke whales - "We knew it, it's time for Russia to dry the oars")))))
  3. +7
    5 March 2020 07: 16
    On the one hand, a schukher, the Russians came and I will not save them, on the other hand, the people, we don’t panic, everything will be a hamburger and a stake.

    Depending on what politicians and admirals need to achieve! Win elections, for example, or beg the babosiks!
  4. -2
    5 March 2020 07: 21
    22 do not take diesel-electric, it is a melee weapon.
    Even if so, the possibility of the Kalibr-PL cannot be ruled out. In the fall of 2017, speaking at the Valdai Club, President V.V. Putin spoke about the maximum range of the sea-based Kalibr at 1400 kilometers. Even if the range for the Kalibr-PL is much less (the exact information is classified), this is still an argument for deterrence. A significant number of American cities are concentrated on the coasts, which "black holes" can approach. Even one missile with a special charge, on one diesel-electric submarine, can become a problem for the United States, especially with the mass construction of these relatively cheap and quiet submarines. With the installation of a VNEU, the potential of the submarines will increase significantly. Let the Americans exclude our diesel-electric submarines from the calculations, and our fleet needs to improve them and take them into account.
  5. + 23
    5 March 2020 07: 28
    What a solid sell
    и
    number manipulation,
    in isolation from actual reality ...
    1. + 13
      5 March 2020 09: 35
      This is a very significant statement. And it would be even cooler if, as an argument, Ex would not cite some data received from ... sources in the intelligence of Norway.
      Well, listen, it’s not serious at all! To refer to the intelligence of Norway, which has been searching for Russian boats in its waters for so many years and cannot find the ONLY submarine of the Baltic Fleet - well, really, not seriously!


      What does Norway and the BF have to do with it? We don’t confuse it with the Swedes ... or B-806 Dmitrov dangles regularly through the Danish Straits to the Norwegian coast ... Something neither Swedes nor Danes squealed about this.
      I agree, the article is, to put it mildly, strange.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. +4
          5 March 2020 18: 59
          Quote from rudolf
          I’m struggling to remember when we had a situation similar to the current one at the BF. One DEPL.

          But the jester knows him. Even at the height of the revolution, there were 6 submarines in the bunker. recourse
          1. The comment was deleted.
  6. + 26
    5 March 2020 08: 47
    What can I say? Roman has 12 Shchuk-B in the fleet, in reality, EMNIP 2 in the Northern Fleet and 1 in the Pacific Fleet. The rest are in repair and its expectation, and it is obvious that not all will wait
    1. + 17
      5 March 2020 10: 13
      Yes, the author is very free to operate with numbers, the number of submarines counted enchantingly, even took into account those that will never even reach recycling under their own power.
  7. -21
    5 March 2020 09: 16
    Let them be afraid and how. Despite all the shortcomings in the fleet and problems with financing, according to all-propellers, at least Russia has something to say striped so that as Columbus opened them, so they can close forever.
    I am not a supporter of war, like any normal person, but if forced, then the guys do not be offended, and no one will probably be offended.
    1. +3
      5 March 2020 17: 15
      Uryayaya Yrayaya Yuryayaya
      1. -8
        5 March 2020 17: 22
        A miracle in feathers, you beguiled a site with a May Day demonstration. Go wash yourself with a cold little water, maybe he will let him go, and not let him go, this is to the doctor in the PND, there are a lot of such clever men and even Napoleons are there. fool
  8. + 10
    5 March 2020 09: 32
    Strange tone in the article. If the author wants to write about the number of submarines, then you need to deal with this issue, and in order to study the pants of the American admiral, you need to work out a few more questions. In my amateurish opinion - how they will leave the bases (who will interfere with this and how) and how to get to the coast of a likely enemy, taking into account the means of detection he has
  9. + 15
    5 March 2020 09: 45
    For the author about the American submarine fleet... 3 Seawolf boats (which the Americans call the best in the world). They will not build a series because of the high cost...…..Ours also say the same about our boats)))...Next - Virginia - 17 boats in service. The first boat entered service in 2004, the seventeenth - in 2019. According to the plan, 13 more should be built.. Los Angeles - 32 boats remain in service as of 1.01.2018. The first boat entered service in 1976, and the seventy-sixth in 1996... Ohio - as part of 18 boats. Of these, four boats were converted into Tomahawk cruise missile carriers in 2006-2006, each boat carries 154 missiles!!!!! Is there anything similar in the Russian Federation?????? Another 4 boats were converted from Trident 2002 missiles to Trident 2008 D1 (the most advanced American ballistic missile for boats) from 2-5… Columbia - the first boat was laid down in 2019.......Yes, pseudo-patriots have a reason to shout that we are cooler??? But I strongly doubt it. ... We can only boast about small missile ships with Kalibr missiles)), but not submarines. There is no point in even talking about our diesel engines, if we are talking only about the Americans. Well, there is no point in talking about their and our torpedoes. Decades of lag. And the Americans constantly conduct torpedo firing under the Arctic ice. This has never happened in the USSR and the Russian Federation! And torpedoes there behave differently than in open water. And Americans Based on the results of unsatisfactory firing, changes are made to the torpedoes. And torpedoes are the main weapon of submarines in combat with other submarines....
  10. -6
    5 March 2020 09: 53
    Submarines carrying ballistic missiles are simply nonsense for Russia today. The cost of maintaining one missile is significantly higher than for land deployment. Therefore, investing money in Russia's missile cruisers is wrong. Yes, submarines carrying cruise missiles are needed to participate in a local conflict. But not a dozen missiles, but 100+ like the converted Ohio.
    1. -1
      5 March 2020 21: 49
      Quote: certero
      Today, submarines carrying ballistic missiles are simply nonsense for Russia.

      What ??? have you heard of projects 955 and 955A? And yes, the same Sharks (project 941), if desired, can be put into operation again in two versions (SSBN with Sineva / Bulava or SSGN with Caliber).
      Quote: certero
      The cost of maintaining one rocket is much higher than for land placement.

      Seriously? This is where you dug this? Now all the missiles are in the TPK, respectively, no maintenance / maintenance is required, except for the costs of production - delivery - installation ...
      1. 0
        6 March 2020 08: 54
        That is, the boat is free?
        Nuclear submarines with br were needed when they did not finish off to the USA. Now this is a dumb waste of resources. Placing missiles in mines or in the mobile version on land is cheaper and faster
        1. 0
          6 March 2020 20: 18
          Quote: certero
          That is, the boat is free?

          and what’s the conversation about? about building or still about the contents ???
          you
          decide ...
          1. 0
            7 March 2020 01: 56
            what is determined there. To keep 16 missiles on a boat, you need to spend several tens of billions of rubles to build the boat itself. To keep these 16 rockets on land will require significantly less money. in the process of operating the boat, more money is required than maintaining the infrastructure for these 16 missiles on land.
            in addition, land missiles will be significantly more protected from a sudden blow than a boat. Just because the Americans at sea are much stronger than us. But attacking missiles in the mines means starting a war
  11. The comment was deleted.
  12. +6
    5 March 2020 10: 06
    Dear author! I have never seen such a fresh photo of "Dmitry Donskoy", he is about six months old, maybe less, - thank you very much!
    The problem with submarine repairs - Russia has neither the necessary number of personnel nor the funding, there is no normal industry - Zvezdochka has been looking for contractors for years for individual items of what is needed for repair and modernization of orders - has been written about on the website many, many times.
    "Severstal" and "Arkhangelsk" are long overdue for scrapping, as is "Kirov", BUT (see paragraph above). "Losharik" was discussed the other day (see paragraph above). Commentators have already described everything quite well about multi-purpose boats, boats with cruise missiles and their repairs before me.
    And in vain you are so about the intelligence of Norway. They nerves to our military, they wind and they will wind, pros with not bad equipment.
  13. +8
    5 March 2020 11: 31
    Guys will be pulled from Vladivostok, if necessary.

    Unfortunately, they will not catch up. And that's why. From Vladivostok to, say, San Francisco, about 4500 nautical miles. This is if through the La Perouse Strait. Minus 1400 km (the line of the missile attack by "Caliber"), 3744 miles remain. Now we remember: in an economic move in 3 knots "Varshavyanka" travels about ... 400 miles, after which it will be forced to surface (hello, air-independent power plants) or continue on in the RDP mode. Formally, in this mode, she can go about 7500 nautical miles, but who will let her go, like at home? Its route will pass through the Aleutian Islands, which are actually the territory of the United States. Comrades, do you understand that in modern warfare, sending a boat on a mission "under a diesel engine" is practically guaranteed to doom it to death from enemy anti-submarine forces? Vladivostok's "diesel engines" are designed to perform completely different tasks and no one in their right mind will send them on a suicidal "business trip". Anyway, I hope so.
    1. -1
      5 March 2020 21: 53
      Quote: Brylevsky
      Do not pull up, unfortunately. And that's why. From Vladivostok to, say, San Francisco, about 4500 nautical miles.

      and why should it be there? What, in Alaska and in Canada / Japan there are no goals? even I, far from the fleet and the Strategic Missile Forces on vskidku can name about 10 targets to strike only in Alaska.
      1. +2
        6 March 2020 02: 11
        And here is Canada or Japan? Let’s attack South Korea again, there is also an American base there, and from Vladivostok to Busan it’s three days. The article implied a hypothetical conflict between Russia and the United States. If Russia engages in a war with Japan and / or Canada, Russia will only get worse. Are you interested in why San Francisco was chosen for the attack? It's simple: this is a major port city on the west coast of the United States. In addition to him, of course, there are others (the same Long Beach near Los Angeles), but they are located even further than Frisco. Consequently, our boat will be under the gun of the US anti-submarine forces longer. In fairness, I must inform you that the port city of Vladivostok is also the target of the strike for American naval sailors.
  14. + 11
    5 March 2020 11: 37
    And this is what the admiral says, under the command of 6 cruisers, 21 destroyers, 8 strategic submarines, 15 multi-purpose attack submarines and 13 patrol ships. And a bunch of completely new and powerful Poseidon anti-submarine aircraft.

    Yes, everything is fine - just the commander of the second fleet solves his internal tasks of pulling a budget blanket precisely on his fleet. And he does this in the traditional way - frightening the Russian military threat, which is the largest in the area of ​​his fleet. smile
    Do not forget that the Second Fleet under Obama was disbanded. And restored only in 2018. So now he needs to urgently gain points.
  15. qaz
    +3
    5 March 2020 11: 44
    Sooooo strange article. The boats of the Yasen-M project may and will be able to strike along the coastline of the United States, but there is no point in driving them there, they serve to ensure security for the "strategists", as it was in the USSR and so it is now.
    1. 0
      5 March 2020 21: 54
      Quote: qaz
      but driving them there makes no sense

      Well, Pikes with "Pomegranates" were driven there for some reason during the Soviet era, apparently there was some sense.
      1. 0
        6 March 2020 20: 41

        Well, Pikes with "Pomegranates" were driven there during the USSR for some reason


        The pikes were chased, but the Granat was never loaded. They shot only "in the factory" on state vehicles.
  16. +1
    5 March 2020 12: 45
    A correctly asked question already contains the correct answer.
  17. 0
    5 March 2020 13: 49
    Well, everything is more or less fine with the strategists. You can argue whether they are needed or not, but in fact by 24 we will have 3 Boreis and 5 Boreis. Of course, the Kalmar will be written off by the time the last Boreis from this batch is received. The Akula is an experimental one, so what is there to talk about? Both decommissioned Akulas are awaiting disposal. The Dolphins will gradually be replaced with Boreis as well. 2 pieces should be laid down this year and 2 more should be contracted for at the end of summer, I think. As the dolphins are written off, the Boreis will arrive. So by the time the lead Columbia is built, we should already be completely rearmed with Boreis. So in terms of strategists, we are much better off than the States, since they have not yet begun rearming, and we are already rearming. request
    WELL, NOW ABOUT MULTIPURPOSE. I don't know why Roman isn't interested in diesel-electric submarines, but there are 21 submarines now. Of these, 8 are new. Two more are undergoing trials, 3 are under construction, and 4 more have been contracted. That means there will be 17 new ones. Another 3 have undergone or are undergoing modernization, so they will definitely serve until the mid-20s. Then they are going to order Varshavyankas for the Baltic Fleet and Ladas for the Northern Fleet. Oh well - there is no contract and we won't count them yet. That means that we will have 20 multipurpose submarines, even at a minimum, regarding diesel-electric submarines. request
    Maple
    Ash. 1 in service, 1 in testing, 5 under construction and 2 more contracted. That is, we will have 9 pieces of completely new submarines.
    Antei. All 8 of them are undergoing or have undergone or will undergo repairs with varying degrees of modernization. Even the oldest Irkutsk of 88 is undergoing a deep modernization. The rest are younger. They will definitely last up to 40 years.
    Barracudas. They are stupidly old. They wanted to upgrade because of the titanium case, but it is already clear that the modernization was frozen. We will not take into account.
    Condors. Both are in service and run until the 30s. Will they upgrade - xs. Not the fact that the game is worth the candle.
    Pikes are ordinary. 2 pieces. They were recognized as having no modernization potential, they were likely to be written off in the mid-20s, but Tambov was still under repair, and he was active, he was definitely running after repair for 5 years. Moreover, it is relatively not old.
    Pike-b. 10 pieces. The oldest is Bratsk, 89 years old, the youngest is Cheetah 2001. They wanted to lease one to the Indians, but in fact there is no exact information, we don’t take into account. 5 pieces for modernization, which means they reach the end of the 20s. Moreover, they will modernize the oldest one - Bratsk. 2 at VTG. 3 in the ranks, and Kuzbass after repair with modernization. Suppose a couple of the older ones are written off or given to the Indians. We will count 8 pieces at a minimum.
    So we get to the second half of the 20s. 14 strategists. 17 APCR. 10-11 PLAT-PLARK. Pieces 20 DEPL. And this is at a minimum if they don’t order anything else - neither new Ash-trees, nor Laika, nor Lada, nor Varshavyanka. But it’s already clear what will be ordered. request
    Well, let's estimate that by state in the second half of the 20s. The old Ohio strategists will still wait for the shift workers. If the oldest 4 pieces are not written off. 4 refitted Ohio write off - they are too old. Moose is gradually written off, but about 10 pieces will still run in the second half of the 20s. 3 Sivulfa. In service, 28 Virginia are being built and contracted. Since we do not consider possible orders from us, we will not even guess if they will still have orders. Total in the region of 41 maples they will have in the second half of the 20s and 10-14 strategists. DEPL they do not have.
    In general, there will be approximate parity in submarines. Their advantage in the number of mapples is compensated by our diesel-electric submarines. hi
    1. +6
      5 March 2020 15: 57
      M-dya .... Excuse me, but your calculations - fantasy is simply enchanting
      1. 0
        5 March 2020 16: 38
        In what? It seems like only what was being built or contracted was taken into account.
        1. +7
          5 March 2020 18: 00
          Quote: g1v2
          In what?

          Let's watch
          Quote: g1v2
          You can argue whether they are needed or not, but in fact by the year 24 we will have 3 Borea and 5 Boreev.

          Maybe. At least I wouldn’t put my head on it
          Quote: g1v2
          Ash. 1 in service, 1 in testing, 5 under construction and 2 more contracted. That is, we will have 9 pieces of completely new submarines.

          We will be. The only question is - when? Kazan was launched in 2017, God forbid, to be accepted into the fleet this year. Next - Novosibirsk was launched last year. It is clear that everything will be faster with him, but in 2020 he is unlikely to replenish the fleet. In general, taking into account the constant shifts to the right, it can be assumed that all 7 Ash-trees will go into operation by the year 2030, well, maybe a year or two earlier, and even those that have not even been laid down, they are most likely already at 30 years of the current century.
          Quote: g1v2
          Pike-b. 10 pieces. The oldest is Bratsk, 89 years old, the youngest is Cheetah 2001. They wanted to lease one to the Indians, but in fact there is no exact information, we don’t take into account. 5 pieces for modernization, which means they reach the end of the 20s. Moreover, they will modernize the oldest one - Bratsk. 2 at VTG. 3 in the ranks, and Kuzbass after repair with modernization. Suppose a couple of the older ones are written off or given to the Indians. We will count 8 pieces at a minimum.

          In our Navy, a program for the global modernization of the 971M was conceived, while initially it was supposed to modernize 6 boats, then they were reduced to 4: "Leopard", "Wolf", "Bratsk" and "Samara". So, "Leopard" has been modernized for 9 years, "Wolf" - 6, and there is no end in sight for the completion of the work. But "Bratsk" and "Samara" ... did not even begin to repair them. So the Leopard and the Wolf, of course, will enter service by 2025, but the next pair will definitely not, if they are destined to return to service, it will be closer to 2030.
          The next 2 are Pike-B, Tiger and Panther. These ships were remodeled in 2002 and 2008. accordingly, so by 2025, obviously, the following will be needed. But there will be no one to do it, because Zvezdochka will pore over Bratsk and Samara, so that in the second half of the 20s they will be waiting for repairs.
          "Vepr. Since 2016, it has been waiting for repairs, and most likely will not wait (either at the expense of Samara or Bratsk). Magadan is now being straightened for leasing to India. Cheetah and Kuzbass returned after repairs in 2015-16. and will serve.
          So a realistic forecast for the 2nd half of the 20s is four Pike-Bs (Cheetah, Kuzbass, Leopard and Wolf) 2 in modernization (Bratsk and Samara), three awaiting repairs (Tiger, Panther, Vepr) and one among the Indians (Magadan).
          Quote: g1v2
          Anthei. All 8 pieces either pass or undergo or will undergo repairs with varying degrees of modernization. Even the oldest 88 year Irkutsk undergoes a deep modernization. The rest are younger. Up to 40 years old, they are definitely moving away.

          Really undergo modernization 2 Antey - Irkutsk and Chelyabinsk. They embarked on modernization in 2013 and there are chances to get out of it before 2025 ... of course, but the question is, what is modernization there
          1. +6
            5 March 2020 18: 06
            The 971M is even more abruptly, and the Star on which it is guided is objectively weaker than the Asterisk. So in the second half of the 2020s there will be 2 modernized Anteyas, 2 recently renovated (Oryol and Omsk), but the rest are likely to be pending repairs. Purely theoretically, you can try "on parole" to hold on to Smolensk and Tomsk, which completed the renovation in 2014, but very unlikely.
            So really in the second half of the 2020s there will be 1 Ash, 5-6 Ash M, 4-5 949A and 4 Pike-B. That is 14-16 PLAT-PLARK.
            1. +5
              5 March 2020 18: 10
              Quote: g1v2
              Moose is gradually written off, but about 10 pieces will still run in the second half of the 20s. 3 Sivulfa. In service, 28 Virginia are being built and contracted. Since we do not consider possible orders from us, we will not even guess if they will still have orders. Total in the region of 41 maples they will have in the second half of the 20s

              Vitaliy, USA is changing Los Angeles to Virginia now. So as it was in their ranks over 50 multipurpose nuclear submarines will be so. The ships of 1981 still serve with them, why would they suddenly be able to launch ships of 1990 and later in five to seven years?
              1. 0
                7 March 2020 13: 17
                Moose change in Virginia more than one to one. Los Angeles is the brainchild of the Cold War when they did not spare money on defense. Virginia will be much smaller. Again, mattresses need to be built in Colombia, because this construction will be to the detriment of the Virginia. Congress is very reluctant to allocate money for building ships. Because of this, the Navy has to save. The Colombia construction program is a priority. What will be the next order for Virginia-xs.
                So I found only plans for disposal and decommissioning in the state Navy for the coming years.


                I had somewhere more detailed plans of the US Navy for decommissioning and ordering ships until '35, but I couldn't find them. In general, in a bottleneck, the US Navy will have exactly 42 submarines. Again, since I do not take into account the Husky-Lika and Kalina, since there is no contract for them, I do not take into account Block 5, since there is no contract for them either.
                1. +1
                  7 March 2020 17: 06
                  Quote: g1v2
                  So I found only plans for disposal and decommissioning in the state Navy for the coming years.

                  Total 10 submarines in 4 years with revenue plans for 2 Virginia per year. These plans can be frustrated, of course, like any plans - but then the Americans may well hold back the withdrawal of moose from the fleet.
                  Quote: g1v2
                  Again, I do not take into account Laika-Husky and Kalina, because there is no contract for them, then I do not take into account block5, because there is no contract for them either.

                  And this is wrong. even if Laika was laid in 2020, and today, it should not be expected before 2030. And they definitely didn’t lay it down today :)))))
                  1. 0
                    7 March 2020 21: 41
                    Further decommissioning will accelerate. According to the schedule it was like that. request
                    It is impossible to lay anything without a contract - neither Laika-Husky, etc., nor their Block5. This is at least the allocation of money from the budget of the fleet, but it is not rubber, both with us and with them. There are, after all, GOZs. request
                    At the expense of Laika - Husky and Kalina try not to rub at all. Projects are not ready, there is no contract, money is not provided for in the state defense order. MEANS TO SPEAK THE FACT NOTHING ABOUT. The coming years 3-4 of their bookmarks just do not wait. And here are the additional bookmarks of Ash-tree-m and Lad - why not. request As the slipways at Sevmash and the Admiralty shipyards become free. Again, infa recently passed that after the Pacific Fleet Varshavyanka will be ordered for the BF. There are no foreign contracts for them, you can build PM. The Hindus stuttered for some reason, but as long as they decide, a submarine can already be built.
                    PM contracts will be - the question is what. hi
                    1. 0
                      8 March 2020 14: 00
                      Quote: g1v2
                      Further decommissioning will accelerate. According to the schedule it was like that

                      Vitaly, where did you get these graphs, if it's not a secret? In any case, as I already said, no graph is a dogma, especially since the schedules for decommissioning ships are balanced with the schedules for putting them into service. It is clear that in some cases the service life, the condition of the ship will be decisive, but the service life of American submarines is still quite sufficient. The Americans have been planning to put into service 2 Virginias per year for some time now, and taking into account this arrival and according to your schedules, they will have 51 SSNs in 2023. In order to drop to 41 SSNs, they will need to write off ALL the remaining 23 "mooses" by 2025 and disrupt the commissioning of Virginias from 4 to 3 SSNs in 2024-2025:))))) Or predict a complete stop in the commissioning of Virginias after 2025. Both scenarios are clearly unrealistic.
                      Quote: g1v2
                      It is impossible to lay anything without a contract - neither Laika-Husky, etc., nor their Block5. This is at least the allocation of money from the budget of the fleet, but it is not rubber, both with us and with them.

                      But only at Block5 the money will be allocated with a probability of almost 100%. The Americans do not contract Virginia today for one simple reason - they have already contracted 10 ships, of which only 6 were laid down, and one was launched. That is, there is no point in contracting further - they will sign a contract for the next series closer to the actual start of its construction, probably somewhere in 2021-2024. At the same time, the Americans got the hang of building their virgins in 2,5-3 years, so that they can actually put nuclear submarines into operation before the end of the 20s, in addition to those already ordered.
                      We can not.
            2. 0
              7 March 2020 12: 58
              It seems we are talking about different things. I was talking about what will be in the fleet. You are talking about what will be in the permanent readiness forces. I cannot predict which submarines will be modernized or undergo VTG in the second half of the 20s. I am sure that all 27 Yasen and Yasen-M will be in the fleet by 28-9. Anteis will be in the fleet. Of the Shchuk-8s, I think that about 10 out of XNUMX will be in the fleet. How many of them will be modernized and how, and how many will simply undergo scheduled repairs - I think that even the admirals do not know now. But I do not see any reason for the early mass write-off of Shchuk-XNUMXs. Of course, there is no clarity about the Kondors, but I do not see any reason for writing them off either. Especially since the hull is titanium. So the Shchuk-XNUMXs should be preserved better.
              Simply, of course, they wanted to write off the Pikes, but the Tambov on the Nerpa in fact sorted out. As one comrade wrote to me, there seemed to be some kind of leak there. It is unlikely that they are working so hard on her that they can write off in a couple of years. I think that until the second half of the 20s it will definitely survive.
              Personally, I roughly estimate the life of the current subfloor at about 40 years. I think that most apl will be written off after this age. hi
              1. +1
                7 March 2020 17: 09
                Quote: g1v2
                It seems we are still talking about different things. I talked about what will be in the fleet. You are about what will be in the forces of constant readiness.

                Not certainly in that way. The fact that until the mid-20s will not become part of the forces "ready to march and fight" will be scrapped, since there is no point in getting involved in the repairs of ships under 40 years old.
                The problem is that we simply do not have enough production repair facilities, we cannot give our ships timely repairs. This leads to the appearance of dead souls, who formally in the fleet, but in fact never will be put into operation. The Americans still have no such problem.
                Quote: g1v2
                Simply, of course, they wanted to write off the Pikes, but the Tambov on the Nerpa in fact sorted out. As one comrade wrote to me, there seemed to be some kind of leak there.

                Leak of what? :))) If anything happens with the reactor ... then that's it.
                Quote: g1v2
                It is unlikely that they are working so hard on her to write off in a couple of years.

                There could be a hole in the hull, so they patched up quickly so that it would not sink at the pier.
                1. 0
                  7 March 2020 21: 30
                  As one comrade from Nerpa told me, the leak was precisely related to radiation. And due to the stupidity of either the crew or the repair team. And therefore not damage to the reactor. It did not spread. At that time, I thought that Tambov was done and was already waiting for decommissioning, but he assured me that it would still be repaired and handed over, although the amount of work was large. He harshly swore at the crew, so most likely it was their mistake. request
                  1. 0
                    8 March 2020 14: 02
                    Quote: g1v2
                    As a friend from Nerpa told me, the leak was precisely related to radiation.

                    Then this is an emergency repair in order to eliminate the consequences of the accident, after which the ship, most likely, will again stand in expectation of repair ...
          2. +1
            6 March 2020 11: 11
            Dear Andrey hi
            The next 2 are Pike-B, Tiger and Panther. These ships were remodeled in 2002 and 2008. accordingly, so by 2025, obviously, the following will be needed. But there will be no one to do it, because Zvezdochka will pore over Bratsk and Samara, so that in the second half of the 20s they will be waiting for repairs.
            "Boar.

            Since the 10s, "Tiger" has just stood at the pier awaiting repairs. Now the "Vepr" has left the VTG, the slipway on the "Nerpa" is free. In the group of the plant in VK they wrote in December that the Vepr was on mooring trials. They will do VTG "Tiger". In total, Nerpa had to make VTG to three leopards: Gepard, Vepr and Tiger. "Cheetah" and "Vepr" passed the VTG, the "Tiger" remained (link to the VTG "Tiger" https://topwar.ru/167466-apl-tigr-proekta-971-schuka-b-vernetsja-v-sostav-sf -v-konce-2023-goda.html.) "Panther" since 2015 does not go to sea, it needs medium repair and recharging of the reactor. Video about carrying out HTG "Vepr".
            1. 0
              8 March 2020 14: 27
              Good afternoon, dear Bashkirkhan! hi
              Thanks for the information!
          3. 0
            7 March 2020 12: 43
            OK. We will see. Kazan is the main one. Her tests and finishing touches all the other submarines. If it is accepted this year, then the rest will go much faster and the tests will go much faster. The test program for the head and for serial submarines is of different sizes. Novosibirsk is unlikely to surrender this year, despite all the promises. Until Kazan has completed the tests and all the improvements have been completed, Novosib will wait. This year he will probably go to the test, and will be accepted next. But now Krasnoyarsk and the subsequent ones will be built and accepted faster. As soon as the project rises to serial tracks - it accelerates. Bottlenecks are embroidered. So, if this year two Ash-trees are laid, then in 7 years they will be built. I see no obstacles to this.
            The "new fleet in the old corps" program clearly failed. This has been clear for a long time. The cost and terms of modernization of old submarines are comparable to the construction of new ones. But here we must take into account that you are talking about deep modernization. I mean not only deep, but also RSM. I think that part of the Schuk-b and both Kondors will not undergo deep modernization, but will carry out the middle one. Fault detection, replacement of worn-out and parts of systems with newer ones. Perhaps some will just be repaired. But they are unlikely to be written off by this time. Still, the oldest one is being modernized. request
            Again - according to Antaeus. Most likely only half will undergo a deep modernization, but PCM will surely pass. Again, if even the oldest Irkutsk is being modernized, and not prepared for decommissioning.
            In general, by age, all of the above in the second half of the 20s should be in the fleet. It is clear that to predict how many will be repaired and modernized is unrealistic. As well as make a schedule of VTG for the current sub-melting. But they will be in the fleet.
  18. exo
    +1
    5 March 2020 18: 43
    As far as one can judge by open publications: they refused to modernize 945A Condor. Unfortunately, 941 projects are unlikely to be modernized. If it succeeds in commissioning, after repairs and upgrades, all ships of the 971-pr. Will be already, not bad.
    In my opinion, the article is overly optimistic. Although, I will be glad if I was wrong.
  19. +1
    5 March 2020 21: 37
    Quote: Brylevsky
    Guys will be pulled from Vladivostok, if necessary.

    Unfortunately, they will not catch up. And that's why. From Vladivostok to, say, San Francisco, about 4500 nautical miles. This is if through the La Perouse Strait. Minus 1400 km (the line of the missile attack by "Caliber"), 3744 miles remain. Now we remember: in an economic move in 3 knots "Varshavyanka" travels about ... 400 miles, after which it will be forced to surface (hello, air-independent power plants) or continue on in the RDP mode. Formally, in this mode, she can go about 7500 nautical miles, but who will let her go, like at home? Its route will pass through the Aleutian Islands, which are actually the territory of the United States. Comrades, do you understand that in modern warfare, sending a boat on a mission "under a diesel engine" is practically guaranteed to doom it to death from enemy anti-submarine forces? Vladivostok's "diesel engines" are designed to perform completely different tasks and no one in their right mind will send them on a suicidal "business trip". Anyway, I hope so.
    Undoubtedly, in the Pacific Fleet, DPLs have their own tasks and they are very useful there because of the constant delays in the construction of surface ships of the near zone, but why at once, even hypothetically, cut them tasks and targets on the US coast at least? In addition to guarding the bases and routes of strategists, there are goals nearer and no less important and reachable for our DPL in this region, you just need to remember where the nearest bases of the USA and their allies are. A caliber with the appropriate equipment can very well cope with the damage that is more than enough for the withdrawal of both US forces and infrastructure in this region.
    Well, and the diesel-electric submarines of the Black Sea Fleet, the Northern Fleet and the Baltic Fleet, where there was only one left (I don’t know how I was watching now), in addition to actions in the near zone and protection, are also capable of creating a threat to the EU countries, NATO members, NATO facilities and infrastructure in the region, in addition, they will draw off significant forces, and are really capable of destroying many targets, not only in the event of a local conflict.
    VNEU is all rushing around with it like a written shell, I think it will come to naught as soon as the domestic industry can degenerate with more advanced batteries, it will be more reliable, cheaper and quite effective in the conditions and tasks for our diesel-electric submarines, and it will make it possible to upgrade existing ones.
  20. +2
    6 March 2020 05: 08
    Russian intentions should be regarded exclusively as a manifestation of aggression of the highest level.

    This is a very significant statement. And it would be even cooler if

    ... if only the interests of Gazprom were not the basis of the state policy.
    The country is mired in corruption. The salaries of ministers and senior officials are simply frankly immodest, to put it mildly. No education
    1. 0
      6 March 2020 09: 40
      An amateur question, we see in the picture the project 941 Akula surrounded by tugs, people standing on the boat are looking at the tugs from above as if from the roof of a house, and in the distance, like the tower of a medieval castle, the wheelhouse rises another eight meters... why does a submarine with such a high "side" need such a high wheelhouse? Probably it was possible to get by with smaller dimensions, approximately like a pimple on the body of a hippopotamus, because anyway the wheelhouse is not a battering ram for breaking through ice when surfacing.
      1. +1
        6 March 2020 20: 56
        Why does a submarine need such a high deckhouse with such a "side"?


        In the fencing of the wheelhouse (in a simple "wheelhouse") there are retractable devices of the appropriate height, the central post compartment and the PTV compartment, pop-up cameras. In addition, it is necessary to provide the ability to move under the periscope. If the felling fence is made small, the hull will be thrown upward due to its proximity to the surface.

        The general scheme of the internal device TRPKSN project 941: 1 - lightweight housing; 2 - 533 mm bow torpedo tubes; 3 - strong case; 4 - nose retractable horizontal rudders; 5 - emergency escape hatches; 6 - torpedo compartment; 7 - sonar compartment; 8 - mine ballistic missiles R-39; 9 - the central post; 10 - rescue pop-up cameras; 11 - retractable devices; 12 - fence sliding devices; 13 - compartment of electronic weapons; 14 - reactor compartment; 15 - hatches of pop-up communication antennas; 16 - wing protecting the propeller-steering group from ice; 17 - turbine compartment; 18 - KShR (aft lock cabin); 19 - hydrodynamic guides; 20 - vertical aft plumage; 21 - vertical rudders; 22 - propeller in an annular nozzle; 23 - aft horizontal rudders; 24 - antenna GAS; 25 - retractable thrusters; 26 - rocket compartments; 27 - survivability compartments; 28 - a nuclear reactor; 29 - line of the main propeller shaft; 30 - horizontal aft plumage; 31 - strong nose module; 32 - the main strong building (right); 33 - the main strong case (left); 34 - central strong module; 35 - stern sturdy module; 36 - quick immersion tank i - commander periscope; ii - universal periscope; iii - radio sextant; iv - radar system; v - RCP; vi, viii - radio antennas of communication systems; vii - direction finder; ix - antenna of the space navigation system; x - GPA
  21. +1
    6 March 2020 13: 42
    Andrey from Chelyabinsk (Andrey), sir, unfortunately, you are repeating the mistakes that have been around since Soviet times. There is a saying: "The lead ship takes the longest to be modernized, the second one a little faster, and the third and subsequent ones even faster, since everything is clear and well-established." Plans for commissioning ships are written based on this saying. Even in Soviet times, this saying did not work. If a welder and an assembly fitter install something on a lead ship being modernized, bent in an "S" shape, and the welder welds through a mirror - there is no other way to get to it, and sometimes upside down, then the assembly fitter will install the device in this casing or on this foundation bent in an "S" shape, and after them, the "Arktika" electrician will also pull cables there. After them, the support sailors will climb to the device every day with swear words to clean everything up. And in a day or two, the painters will try to get to the device. And since the boats sit on the water for years awaiting repairs, after three to five years the military gets a modernized device, which, damn it, has cables running from the top, not the bottom, as was the case with the previous model of the device, which means everything around the device needs to be redone. While the Zvezdochka technologists agree everything with the technologists and designers-developers, and they still want to fly to Zvezdochka - the northern pension has not yet been cancelled and representatives of the contractor enterprises fly to Severodvinsk with pleasure, time flies. And when it is necessary to remove the old device and install a new one on the order, it turns out that the welder who worked on the main order retired, and the young fitter-assembler who helped him went to the army, and the fitters who worked on the main order graduated from the institute in 6 years and work as foremen in another shop, and the electrical fitters from the "Arktika" flew to Sevastopol on a business trip for 2 months. And there are only painters, they, like everyone who is on the second order for the first time, all will have to work bent in the letter "S", and it is not very fast and inconvenient to work like that. However, the rate setters believe that the first ship to be modernized is the longest...
    And the residents of Severodvinsk and Arkhangelsk are also happy. Finally, Vanya Tretyak was shown in the court cage by Vesti Pomorya; the FACEs caught him for bribing the deputy head of the UMVD for the Arkhangelsk region, the prospect is up to 15 years in prison. And what is good is that his "roof", the prosecutor of Severodvinsk Vladimir Petrovich Podgorny - all honorable and honorable, has long since left this world and no one, it seems, can help Vanya. I hope, like many residents of Severodvinsk, that Tretyak will get a real, long term. And then, you see, the FACEs and the operatives of the UFSIN will arrange a sweet life for the former first secretary of the Belomorsky district committee of the CPSU of Severodvinsk in the zone. Where would he be ready to go to a pretrial detention center alone and tell, tell, tell the investigators of the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation how he received construction contracts, including at SEVMASH and Zvezdochka, how he built dachas in Belgorod, Anapa, Sochi for their management, how, to whom and how much he brought in envelopes at the factories... Many of the GRCAS managers and former managers, now honorary pensioners, tensed up when they saw Tretyak in the court cage... So, discussing the deadlines for putting the submarine into operation, let's not forget the introductory words: according to plans, I hope, probably, if the delivery date, as always, is not shifted to the right. With respect, Testov.
    1. 0
      7 March 2020 13: 15
      Quote: Podvodnik
      If the fencing is made small, the hull will be thrown up due to its proximity to the surface.

      Thanks for the explanation and for attaching the diagrams,
      It would probably have been possible to do without the central strong hull No. 34; the side hulls would have been connected by a passage and that would have been it, and the retractable devices themselves, given the boat's dimensions, would have fit in any of the side hulls at full height, even without a wheelhouse.