Russian submarine fleet: so afraid of it or what?

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 missiles, 26 are nuclear with cruise missiles, and the rest are multi-purpose. 22 diesel-electric do not take it 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.
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

60 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +19
    March 5 2020
    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
      March 5 2020
      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
        March 5 2020
        They themselves wrote:
        Served less than 10 years
        those. the resource is not developed, and can last another 40 years.
      2. 0
        March 9 2020
        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?
        what are you all, here - cruel ... Here at Bram Stoker, in one of the books, there was a much more humane phrase - "let the madman sleep in his madness ...". "G", - Humanity ...
    2. +11
      March 5 2020
      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
    March 5 2020
    cheap cap-working for the enemy ......
    1. +1
      March 5 2020
      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
    March 5 2020
    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
    March 5 2020
    22 do not take diesel-electric, it is a melee weapon.
    Even so, the possibility of Caliber-PL cannot be ruled out. In the fall of 2017, speaking at the Valdai Club, President V.V. Putin spoke about the maximum flight range of the sea-based Caliber of 1400 kilometers. Even if the range for the Caliber-PL is much shorter (the exact information is classified), this is an early deterrent argument. A significant proportion of American cities are concentrated on the coasts to which "black holes" can get close. Even one rocket with a special charge, on one diesel-electric submarine, can become a problem for the United States, especially with the massive construction of these relatively cheap and low-noise boats. With the installation of VNEU, the potential of the boats 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
    March 5 2020
    What a solid sell
    и
    number manipulation,
    in isolation from actual reality ...
    1. +13
      March 5 2020
      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
          March 5 2020
          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
    March 5 2020
    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
      March 5 2020
      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
    March 5 2020
    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
      March 5 2020
      Uryayaya Yrayaya Yuryayaya
      1. -8
        March 5 2020
        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
    March 5 2020
    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
    March 5 2020
    For the author, about the American submarine fleet fleet ... 3 boats Sivulf (which the Americans call the best in the world). They will not build the series because of the high cost ... ... ..Our about our boats they say that too))) ... Next Virginia -17 boats in service. The first boat was included in 2004, the seventeenth -2019 year. According to the plan, 13 more should be built .. Los Angeles 32 boats remained in service on 1.01.2018/1976/1996. The first boat was included in 18, and the seventy-sixth in 2006 ... Ohio - in the composition of 2006 boats. Of these, four boats in 154-4 were converted into carriers of the Kyrgyz Republic Tomogavk, each boat carries 2002 missiles !!!!! Is there something similar in the Russian Federation ?????? 2008 more boats from 1-2 were converted from Trident 5 missiles to Trident 2019 DXNUMX (the most advanced American ballistic missile for boats) .... Columbia - the first boat was laid down in XNUMX ...... ... ..Yes pseudo patriots have reason to shout what are we cooler ??? And I strongly doubt it. ... In our country, only MRCs with Caliber can boast)), but not submarines. About our diesels there is no sense even talking if we are talking only about Americans. Well, about their torpedoes and ours, it makes no sense to talk. Delays for decades. And Ameri constantly fired torpedoes under the ice of the Arctic. In the USSR and the Russian Federation there has never been such a thing! And the torpedoes there behave differently than in open water. And the Americans, following the results of unsatisfactory firing, are making changes to the torpedoes. And torpedoes are the main weapon of boats against other boats ....
  10. -6
    March 5 2020
    Today, submarines carrying ballistic missiles are simply nonsense for Russia. The cost of maintaining one rocket is much higher than for land placement. Therefore, investing in Russian missile cruisers is wrong. Yes, boats carrying cruise missiles are needed to participate in a local conflict. Just so that there are not a dozen missiles there, but 100+ as remade in Ohio.
    1. -1
      March 5 2020
      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
        March 6 2020
        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
          March 6 2020
          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
            March 7 2020
            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
    March 5 2020
    Dear author! I have not seen such a fresh photo of "Dmitry Donskoy", he is about six months old, or maybe less - thank you very much!
    About plugging nuclear submarine repairs - Russia has neither the required number of personnel, nor funding, there is no normal industry - Zvezdochka has been looking for counterparties for years for certain items that are needed to repair and modernize orders - they wrote on the site many, many times.
    Severstal and Arkhangelsk should be disposed of, as well as Kirov, BUT (see the paragraph above). "Losharik" was discussed the other day (see the paragraph above). About multipurpose boats, boats with CD and their repairs, commentators have already painted everything not bad 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
    March 5 2020
    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
      March 5 2020
      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
        March 6 2020
        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
    March 5 2020
    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
    March 5 2020
    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
      March 5 2020
      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
        March 6 2020

        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
    March 5 2020
    A correctly asked question already contains the correct answer.
  17. 0
    March 5 2020
    Well, with strategists, we are more or less. You can argue whether they are needed or not, but in fact by the year 24 we will have 3 Borea and 5 Boreev. Squid of course write off by the time you receive the last Borea-a from this party. Shark - experimental, why talk about it? Both decommissioned Sharks are waiting for disposal. Dolphins will gradually begin to change also to Borei. 2 pieces should be pledged this year and 2 more should be contracted, sort of like at the end of summer. As the dolphins are written off, Boreas will arrive. By the time the head of Colombia was built, we should have completely rearmed ourselves on the Boreas. Our strategists are much better than the states, because they have not yet begun rearmament, and we are already rearming. request
    Well, NOW MULTI-PURPOSE. I don’t know why Roman DEPL is not interested, but now it is 21 submarines. Of these, 8 are new. Two more are in trials, 3 are under construction and 4 more are contracted. That is, there will be 17 new ones already. 3 more have passed or are undergoing modernization, until the mid-20s they will definitely serve. Then they are going to order Varshavyanka for the BF to order and Lada for the SF. Well, okay - there is no contract and we won’t consider them yet. That is, according to DEPL, even at a minimum, we will have 20 multipurpose 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.
    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.
    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, the submarines will be approximately parity. Their advantage in the number of mapples is compensated by our diesel-electric submarines. hi
    1. +6
      March 5 2020
      M-dya .... Excuse me, but your calculations - fantasy is simply enchanting
      1. 0
        March 5 2020
        In what? It seems like only what was being built or contracted was taken into account.
        1. +7
          March 5 2020
          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
            March 5 2020
            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
              March 5 2020
              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
                March 7 2020
                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.


                Somewhere I had more detailed plans for the US Navy to decommission and order ships under the age of 35, but could not find. In general, in a bottleneck, the US Navy will have just about 42 submarines. 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.
                1. +1
                  March 7 2020
                  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
                    March 7 2020
                    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
                      March 8 2020
                      Quote: g1v2
                      Further decommissioning will accelerate. According to the schedule it was like that

                      Vitaly, where did you get these charts, if not a secret? In any case, as I already said, no schedule is a dogma, especially since the schedules for the decommissioning of ships are balanced with the schedules for entering them there. It is clear that in some cases the resource, the condition of the ship, will be decisive, but for American nuclear submarines, the resource is still quite sufficient. The Americans have been planning for some time now to commission 2 Virginias a year, and taking into account this income and according to your schedules, they will have 51 submarines in 2023. In order to sink to 41 nuclear submarines, they will have to write off ALL the remaining 23 " elk ", by 2025 and disrupt the commissioning of Virginias from 4 to 3 nuclear submarines in 2024-2025 :))))) Or predict a complete halt in commissioning 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
              March 7 2020
              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. I can not predict which submarines will be modernized or undergoing VTG in the second half of the 20s. To Ash-tree and Ash-tree by the year 27-28 I am sure that there will be all 9. Anthei will be in the fleet. From Schuk-b, I think that 8 out of 10 pieces will be part of the fleet. How many of them will be modernized and how, and how many scheduled repairs will simply be held - I think that even the admirals do not know it now. But I see no reason for the early mass write-off of Shchuk-b. Of Condor, of course, there is no clarity, but I see no reason to write them off either. Moreover, the titanium case. PM should be preserved better than Pike-b.
              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
                March 7 2020
                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
                  March 7 2020
                  As a friend from Nerpa told me, the leak was precisely related to radiation. And by the stupidity of either the crew or the repair team. And that means no damage to the reactor. He did not spread. At that time I thought that Tambov was all waiting for cancellation, but he assured me that he would still be repaired and handed over, although the volume of work was large. The crew harshly swore, most likely the jamb was theirs. request
                  1. 0
                    March 8 2020
                    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
            March 6 2020
            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
              March 8 2020
              Good afternoon, dear Bashkirkhan! hi
              Thanks for the information!
          3. 0
            March 7 2020
            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
    March 5 2020
    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 too optimistic. Although, I will be glad if I made a mistake.
  19. +1
    March 5 2020
    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, the diesel-electric submarines of the Black Sea Fleet, the Northern Fleet and in the Baltic, where they were left all alone (as I haven’t watched now, I don’t know), in addition to actions in the near zone and security, are also capable of creating a threat to the EU countries of NATO members, NATO facilities and infrastructure in the region, in addition, they will draw significant forces upon themselves, well, they are actually capable of destroying many goals 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
    March 6 2020
    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
      March 6 2020
      An amateurish question, we see in the photo of pr. 941 Shark, surrounded by tugs, people standing on the boat look at the tugs from above as if from the roof of a house, and in the distance like a tower of a medieval castle the wheelhouse rises another eight meters ... "need such a high deckhouse? probably it was possible to do with a smaller size, about like a pimple on the body of a hippopotamus, because all the same, the wheelhouse is not a battering ram for breaking through the ice when surfacing.
      1. +1
        March 6 2020
        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
    March 6 2020
    Andrey from Chelyabinsk (Andrey), dear, you, unfortunately, repeat the mistakes that have been living since Soviet times. There is such a statement: "The lead ship is being modernized the longest, the second - a little faster, and the third and subsequent ones - even faster, since everything is clear and worked out." On the basis of this statement, plans for the commissioning of ships are written. Even in the Soviet years, this statement did not work. If a welder and a fitter-assembler put something on the modernized head order, bending with the letter "S" and the welder cooks through a mirror - otherwise it will not creep up, but it happens upside down, then the fitter-installer will also fit into this casing or on this foundation install by bending with the letter "S", and after them the electrician of the "Arctic" will also pull the cable there. After them, with mats, every day the supplying sailors will climb to the device to clean everything. And in a day or two, painters will try to get to the device. And since boats are waiting for repairs on the water for years, after three to five years the military has a modernized device, which, damn it, the cables go from above, and not from below, as it was on the previous model of the device, it means that everything around the device needs to be redone ... While the technologists of Zvezdochka agree on everything with the technologists and design engineers, and they still want to fly to Zvyozdochka, the northern pension has not yet been canceled and representatives of the enterprises-counterparties fly to Severodvinsk with pleasure, time is running out. And when it will be necessary to remove the old device and install a new one on the order, it turns out that the welder who worked on the head order retired, and the young assembly fitter who helped him went into the army, and the fitters were assemblers who worked on the head order. order, graduated in 6 years from the institute and work as foremen in another workshop, and the guys electricians from the "Arctic" 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 have to work bent over with the letter "S", and working this way is not very fast and convenient. True, rationers believe that the first ship to be upgraded is the longest ...
    And also the people of Severodvinsk and Arkhangelsk people are happy. Finally, in the cage of the court they showed Vanya Tretyak's "Vesti Pomorya"; for bribes, the faces took him to the deputy chief of the Ministry of Internal Affairs for the Arkhangelsk Region, the prospect - up to 15 years in prison. And what pleases - his "roof" Prosecutor of Severodvinsk Vladimir Petrovich Podgorny - all deserved and honorable, long ago left this world and no one seems to be able to help Vanya. I hope, like many residents of Severodvinsk, that Tretyak will get a real long term. And there you see, faces with the operatives of the Federal Penitentiary Service, the former first secretary of the Belomorsk district committee of the CPSU in Severodvinsk, will arrange a sweet life in the zone. Where will he be ready to go to the pre-trial detention center alone and tell, tell, tell the investigators of the RF IC how he received construction contracts, including at SEVMASH and Zvezdochka, how he built dachas for their leaders in Belgorod, Anapa, Sochi, how, to whom and how much he put in envelopes at the factories ... Many managers of the GRTSAS and former leaders, now honorary pensioners, tensed when they saw Tretyak in the court cage ... So, discussing the timing of the launch of the nuclear submarine, let's not forget the introductory words: according to plans, I hope probably if the due date, as always, will not be shifted to the right. Best regards, Testov.
    1. 0
      March 7 2020
      Quote: Podvodnik
      If the fencing is made small, the hull will be thrown up due to its proximity to the surface.

      Thanks for the clarification and for nesting the circuits,
      Probably it would have been possible to completely dispense with the central strong hull No. 34, which would have connected the side hulls with a passage and everything, and even the retractable devices themselves with such boat sizes, would fit in any side hulls to their full height even without cutting.

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"