Military Review

"Ash-M": the long-awaited, necessary and dear

156

Some thoughts on our nuclear-powered submarines with cruise missiles of projects 885 "Ash" and 885M "Ash M".


About MAPL Tasks


Unlike SSBNs, they are not so easy to identify. Everything is simple with the naval component of strategic nuclear forces: its main task in peacetime is nuclear deterrence, and in warfare is a full-scale nuclear retaliation for anyone who encroaches. But with multipurpose nuclear submarines, everything is much more complicated for the simple reason that there is a very wide range of tasks that you want to assign to this class of ships.

Destroy enemy submarines that are targeting our SSBNs, preparing to strike Tomahawk SLCMs, or covering enemy AUGs? Without any doubt! Thunder enemy surface warships - both single and acting as part of the KMG, AUG or amphibious formations? By all means and without fail! To stop hostile sea lanes by drowning military transports carrying something that is plowing and thumping to our mainland? Sure! Strike land targets, enemy infrastructure? How else!

But is it possible to create a MAPL that could equally effectively solve such diverse problems? Technically, yes. But, as practice shows, the cost of such a solution will exceed all conceivable limits and rely on some kind of mass equipment with such ships fleet - the perfect utopia.

About atomic supercrafts


Interestingly, attempts to create MAPL of extremely high performance characteristics were made twice, in the USA and the USSR / RF. The Americans built the greatest death machine of their time, the Sivulf. But even in the most optimistic plans, they did not anticipate the complete transfer of their Navy to MAPLs of this type - the maximum construction program for the Sivulfs involved the commissioning of only 29 submarines. In fact, this turned out to be too much, so in the end the series “dried up” to only 3 units. The choice was made in favor of the less “militant” submarines of the Virginia type, which had more modest performance characteristics, but at the same time, a significantly lower price.

As for the USSR, in it work on the creation of a universal MAPL was carried out since 1977, and finally embodied in metal in the project 885M or Yasen-M. Kazan became the lead ship of this project, and I really hope that it will replenish the Russian Navy in 2020. As for the “initial” Yasen, unfortunately, Severodvinsk, due to a number of compromises between the wishes of sailors and the Navy’s budget turned out, to a certain extent, an “intermediate” ship, in which it was not possible to realize all the technologies we could and needed.

But what in the end will the Russian Navy receive “in the face” of “Kazan”? In fact, it is the largest multi-purpose nuclear submarine in the world, whose surface displacement most likely exceeds 8 tons, although it probably does not reach 000 tons of Severodvinsk. The similar indicator of Sivulf is 8 tons, Virginia - depending on the modification and according to various sources from 600 to 7 tons, the British Astyut - 460 tons. Why is this?


Of course, TTX "Ash-M" are secret, but they, apparently, differ from those of "Ash-tree". It is known, for example, that the 885M project’s hull is 9 meters shorter, which suggests a slightly lower displacement compared to the “original” Ashen of Project 885. In addition, the composition of the weapons has probably changed. If Ash has 10 torpedo tubes and 8 vertical launchers (VPU) for missiles, then Ash is supposed to have 8 torpedo tubes and 10 VPU. The total ammunition of the “Ash” consists of 30 torpedoes / missile torpedoes or missiles used from torpedo tubes and 32 missiles in the VPU. Accordingly, it can be assumed that the Yasenya-M ammunition will be 24 torpedoes or the same number of other ammunition for torpedo tubes and 40 missiles.

So, the first answer to the reasons for the large displacement of the most modern domestic MAPL is the composition of its weapons. Sivulf and Astyut do not carry VPU at all, and Virginia, depending on the modification, has VPU at 12, and Block V even has 40 Tomahawk cruise missiles. And it is this modification of Virginia that is approaching our Ash-M in terms of its surface displacement. But keep in mind that American VPUs are more compact - simply because the American Tomahawks are significantly lighter than the domestic Caliber and, moreover, Onyx.

In addition, we should not forget that the British and American nuclear submarines are single-hull, but the Yasen-M is a half-hull ship, which, obviously, makes the hull of our submarine somewhat heavier.

Be that as it may, in the person of Kazan, our Navy will receive a very formidable underwater universal cruiser, capable of effectively solving the above tasks. In theory, Ash-M should get all the best that we could come up with for our submariners. It is possible, of course, that this is not so, and that our science and industry was able to give even better torpedoes, hulls and other units and equipment (yes these are the same water cannons, for example) than what is actually installed on the "Ash Tree - M ". But such things should be attributed to our internal oversights and undercover games, and not to “punctures” of the concept of the ship. Say, nothing prevents equipping the Yasen-M with high-quality anti-torpedoes and traps-simulators of a submarine - would these very torpedoes / traps and desire.

In other words, in the person of "Ash-M" we really can get (and, I want to believe, get) a universal multi-purpose nuclear submarine of ultimate characteristics ... only its cost, according to various estimates, is 1,5-2 times higher than that of Project 955 SSBN " Northwind. " Which, incidentally, is in good agreement with the results obtained in the USA. Their serial "Ohio", which went into operation in the 90s, cost 1,3-1,5 billion dollars, while the cost of a serial nuclear submarine of the Sivulf type - Connecticut - was estimated at 2,4 billion. dollars, but in fact most likely it came out even more expensive.


Connecticut seems to be on the left ...

But the cost of building serial Virginia at some point fell to as much as $ 1,8 billion, despite the fact that they were built much later, already in the 2016st century, and the dollar has since noticeably “relieved” it - by the size of inflation . Then, of course, inflation took its toll, the cost of the same Illinois transferred to the fleet in 2,7 reached $ 1998 billion. But let's not forget that Connecticut went into operation in December 2016, and Illinois - in October 47,4, dollar inflation during this time was 1998%, that is, in 1,83 prices, Illinois would cost only 1,3 billion dollars, that is, at least XNUMX times cheaper than the serial ship type "Sivulf".

In other words, the United States, having won the Cold War and at the peak of its economic power, nevertheless curtailed the construction of the Super Sivulfs in favor of mass production of cheaper MAPLs. But the Russian Federation, having completely incomparable economic opportunities with the United States, has begun the serial construction of Yasenei-M with ultimate performance characteristics.

Another planning mistake?


After reading these lines, dear reader, I am probably quite sure that the author will once again criticize the Russian Defense Ministry. But ... not in this case.

First of all, we, apparently, had no choice. As already mentioned, the universal MAPL began to be developed in the USSR and by the time of its collapse it was the most modern project available. The creation of a new project in the 2000s promised to drag out, if not indefinitely, then for a very long time, while the “wild 90s” and the financing of the fleet “per year on a teaspoon” in the period 2000-2010. led to a landslide reduction in MAPL as part of the Russian Navy. It was simply impossible to wait and do nothing until the development of an optimal project for the Navy, and bordered on crime. We have already “reformed” to the point where, at some point, the entire Pacific Fleet only had 1 (ONE) multipurpose submarine of the Schuka-B type.

Secondly, many of the new items that Yasen-M received should be tested in metal before undertaking the creation of more advanced analogues for the latest MAPL.

Thirdly, in 2011-2020. The Russian Federation was to reanimate the production facilities for the construction of a submarine fleet. If we even wanted (and we wanted) to keep this industry, it was necessary to order multipurpose nuclear submarines, moreover, urgently. And the only project that could be quickly “brought to mind” and to bookmark was “Ash-M”.

Fourth, the appearance of the "white elephants" - that is, the construction of a limited series of nuclear submarine "super-cruisers" of ultimate characteristics, at least in theory, fits well with the concept of the Russian Navy.

About the usefulness of MAPL ultimate characteristics


In a full-fledged conflict with the United States, even a relatively small number of such MAPLs can have a deterrent effect on the operations of the surface forces of the Americans. Not a single American admiral wants to become a target for a missile salvo at 40 Zircons, so the enemy AUG and KUG will have to act much more carefully than they could. But it should be understood that in the foreseeable future the Russian Federation may be threatened not only by the total nuclear-missile Armageddon, but also by conflicts of a lower rank, using only the conventional weapons.

You can say as much as you like that “we are a nuclear power” and “if that - the whole world is in ruin!”, But the fact is that China, having attacked Damansky, for some reason ignored all our Soviet “nuclear power”. The USSR, on the other hand, resolved the Chinese question, albeit radically, but quite conventionally. And in the newest stories even the former Georgia, present Georgia, which cannot be found without a magnifying glass on the world map, managed to attack Tskhinval, killing our peacekeepers. And again, the issue was decided by us strictly by conventional means. One can recall the foreign experience - in 1982 England was also in no hurry to clutch at the "nuclear club", preferring to resolve the issue of whether the Falkland Islands belonged "on fists". Moreover, taking into account the noticeable number of British marines killed and wounded in bayonet battles with the Argentine infantry, one could write on the fists without quotes.

In general, peace is still very, very far away. There are plenty of territorial claims against our country - take at least the same Kuril Islands. Moreover, the United States, with its “Arab springs” and “revolutions of orange dignity”, is striving to create military-political chaos on our borders. In order to effectively counter all this, the Russian Federation absolutely needs to have powerful armed forces of general purpose - ground, space, air, and, without a doubt, naval. That's just because of the geographical factor, we are forced to split our ships between 5 theaters: the Baltic, Black and Caspian seas, the North and the Far East.

It turns out interesting. If we add up the size of all our fleets, the Russian Navy has every right to claim third place in the world after the US and China Navy. In terms of combat potential, taking into account the quality of our submarines, we can perhaps talk about parity with China - they, of course, tuned the destroyers and corvettes, as we never dreamed of, but in terms of the submarine fusion, the Yellow Dragon is not so clear . Thus, the Russian Navy, even despite a landslide reduction in its composition, is still a significant force, providing the Russian Federation with a worthy place among the great sea powers. But this is if we consider the total number of the fleet.

But if you look at each maritime theater separately, the picture turns out to be completely not rosy. Today, we are simply unable to saturate our fleet with so many ships, in which each individual fleet surpassed, or at least stood on a par with the strongest Navy of the powers present there. The Pacific Fleet is inferior to the Japanese Navy in the Far East, the Northern Fleet hardly has parity with the fleet of His Majesty, the Baltic is weaker than the German Navy, and the Black Sea has much smaller naval composition than the Turkish Navy.

Accordingly, in order to effectively prevent possible non-nuclear conflicts with serious naval powers, or, if it was not possible to prevent it, then win them, an inter-theater maneuver of the forces of our Navy is necessary. Yes, it will take some time, but in the modern world such conflicts usually do not arise from scratch - they are preceded by a certain period of political tension, during which it is quite possible to make the necessary “castling”. And our Yaseni-M, being extremely powerful and versatile warships, are the best suited for the role of the very “cavalry” that can quickly strengthen our naval presence at the right time at the right theater.


It is clear that MAPLs will not go to the Baltic or Black Seas, but other means of amplification are possible there. But the entire oceans, including our northern and Far Eastern borders, as well as the Mediterranean Sea, are easily accessible to Project 885M ships.

Initially, the GPV 2011-2020. included too few Ash-trees - only 7 units, of which only six were really modern Ash-M. This was categorically insufficient for the Russian Navy, and the author rejoiced with all his heart news on laying two more ships of Project 885M, which was supposed to bring the total number of Yasenei-M to 8. Ideally, at least 3 more Yasenya-M should be built to form a division of 6 ships (including Severodvinsk) in the North and Pacific Fleets.

What's next?


Despite the high cost of the Ash-M, the budget of the Russian Federation is quite capable of withstanding the construction of 3 more ships of this type. Of course, not immediately, but as the Boreev-A and Yaseney-M are now under construction, the stocks and production facilities will be released, so why not? But even in this case, the total number of MAPL projects of 885 and 885M will be only 12 units, which the fleet will receive no sooner than by 2030. And this, of course, is absolutely not on a par with the threats facing us.

We will try to make an optimistic forecast of what general fleet the Northern Fleet will have in 2030, provided that bookmark 3 is Ash-M in addition to those already ordered. In this case, the Northern Fleet will receive, in addition to Severodvinsk, another 5 Yaseney-M, and in addition, most likely, the fleet will have 2 or even 3 modernized Anteys (Voronezh, Smolensk and Eagle "), which will allow the formation of a full-fledged anti-aircraft division according to the Soviet model of 8-9 ships.

In addition, currently in the composition of the Federation Council there are 6 MAPLs of the project 971 of various modifications. It is hoped that 5 of them will still be operational by 2030. But Panther, which was commissioned to the fleet in 1990, has “hit” exactly 40 years, despite the fact that the last repair, to date, it completed in 2008, the chances that in the period 2020-2030. it will receive a major upgrade with a longer service life, which is relatively small, so that, most likely, if by 2030 it will also be part of the fleet, then it is already ready for “retirement”. As for the MAPL of earlier projects, even if by some miracle they remain in the Northern Fleet, they will already have a minimum combat value.

With DEPL, the situation is as follows: all 7 "Halibut" of the project 877, obviously, will go on a well-deserved rest, since their service life will reach or exceed 40 years. In addition to them, there is also the lead ship of project 677 "St. Petersburg". It is also assumed that of the 4 LEPs of the Lada type, which are currently under construction, or ordered to such, one (Velikie Luki) will also leave for the Northern Fleet. In general, in an optimistic scenario, in which everything will work out with project 667, and we will manage to launch their serial construction in the current decade, the Northern Fleet will be able to include up to 2030 diesel-electric submarines of project 8 by 677.

And in total, 22 submarines are obtained on the SF, including: 14 MAPLs, of which six are of the 4th generation, eight are of the 3rd generation and 8 diesel-electric submarines. I repeat, in an optimistic scenario. Now let's see what our “sworn friends” have.

The US Navy currently has at least 28 Los Angeles-type MAPLs (the status of Olympia and Louisville is unclear - perhaps they are preparing for disposal, if not then 30), 3 Sivulf ships and 19 -type "Virginia." That is, at least 50 MAPLs, not counting the four transformed into carriers of cruise missiles SSBNs of the Ohio type. It is possible, of course, that this number may be reduced even more, since the Americans are very energetically writing off their Los Angeles and there may be a situation where the arrival of the latest Virginia will not compensate for the failure of the ships of the previous generation. But the United States has 9 Virginia under construction, and there is an order for another 10 ships. Thus, even if new orders do not follow, which is extremely doubtful, the total number of Virginia in the US Navy will reach 38 units, and the total number of 4th generation MAPLs will reach 41 units. (plus 3 Sivulfa). Considering that the Americans are striving to lay 2 MAPLs a year today, the construction of the 38th Virginia will be completed no later than 2031. This is the minimum below which the US Navy will not fall, and it can be assumed that the Americans will strive to maintain their submarine fleet MAPL at a level not less than 50 units. But, since here we have an optimistic scenario for Russia, suppose that by 2030 the US Navy will have 40 MAPLs. Of which, without a doubt, they will be able to allocate 15-18 ships for operations in the northern seas. They will be supported by 8 MAPLs of the Astyut type of the British Navy (today - 3 in service, 4 in construction, 1 signed a contract) and 6 French type Barracuda.


Submarine type Astyut. Terrible on the face, and not that kind inside ...

And, of course, Norway’s 6 diesel-electric submarines, although it’s not possible to predict exactly which boats this will be. The Norwegians were planning to build new ships to replace their 6 diesel submarines “Ula”, but delayed with the contract, and it is possible that by 2030 it was the “Ula” (the same age as our “Halibuts”) that would still form the basis of the submarine forces of this northern country .

And in all, by the year 2030, NATO has obtained 35-38 submarines in the northern theater, including 29-32 4th generation MAPLs and 6 diesel-electric submarines.

Thus, we get more than a double superiority of NATO in the MAPL, while we have only 4 fully-fledged 5th generation ships (Severodvinsk is still intermediate) against 29-32 American and European ones. That is, for equivalent ships, the ratio will be approximately 1: 6 not in our favor. And 8 of our MAPL projects 945A, 971 and 971M, even if modernized, will nevertheless be inferior to their foreign counterparts in a number of parameters. In other words, even in the optimistic scenario, as regards the MAPL, by 2030 there is an overwhelming quantitative and qualitative superiority of the NATO countries, while the small advantage in the DEPL, of course, cannot compensate for it.

Having received this situation in an optimistic scenario, I no longer want to talk about pessimistic.

conclusions


According to the author, who, however, he does not impose on anyone, the construction of multi-purpose nuclear submarines of projects 885 and 885M in the amount of 9 units is fully justified, and meets the urgent needs of the Navy. One can criticize here only for the small size of the series: I would very much like to bring the number of Ashenes and Ashen-M in our fleet to 12 units to form 2 divisions of such ships - one each for the Northern and Pacific Fleets.

However, the further construction of ultimate in its characteristics, highly efficient, universal (and therefore extremely expensive) submarines will not allow us to create an underwater fleet of the size we need. In the future we will need other submarines.

To be continued ...
Author:
156 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. sav
    sav 10 July 2020 06: 06
    20
    I fully agree with Andrey’s conclusion yes
    We look forward to continuing good
    1. Finches
      Finches 10 July 2020 06: 19
      18
      Ash-n, what Ash-M is needed! And the author is right in this ... And it is not correct to compare with the United States today - while we were building "democracy", they were building submarines ...
      1. sav
        sav 10 July 2020 06: 20
        16
        Quote: Finches
        Ash-n, that Ash-M is needed

        Yes you are a poet! good
      2. sav
        sav 10 July 2020 06: 22
        15
        Quote: Finches
        comparing with the United States is not correct today - they have been building submarines for 30 years, while we were building "democracy"

        I agree, "democracy" threw us back 20 years.
        1. Finches
          Finches 10 July 2020 06: 25
          +5
          hi And how much was stupidly cut under the watchful eye of the Americans ... Only for this you can suspend the Mechnoi Bear by Faberge without trial!
          1. Bashkirkhan
            Bashkirkhan 10 July 2020 08: 05
            -1
            Quote: Finches
            And how much was stupidly cut under the watchful eye of the Americans ...

            Soviet radioactive scrap metal. Also on funds allocated by Congress. If not for the United States, all of these nuclear submarines would now rot at the walls, awaiting disposal. How now the submarine cruisers of Project 941 "Severstal" and "Arkhangelsk" at the pier of the White Sea naval base of the Northern Fleet are rotting with plugs in their missile silos.
            1. Finches
              Finches 10 July 2020 08: 13
              -3
              Even Gorbachev has his own lawyers ... laughing
              1. Bashkirkhan
                Bashkirkhan 10 July 2020 08: 23
                12
                Utilization of nuclear submarines with US money was carried out in the 90s and early XNUMXs. Gorbachev at that time was already promoting pizza. And Gorbachev was appointed scum from the Communist Party, the Communists, who plundered and merged the USSR.
                1. Charik
                  Charik 10 July 2020 19: 49
                  -3
                  and the president was nitup-when the typhoons sawed and yet she drowned
                  1. Finches
                    Finches 15 July 2020 18: 52
                    -1
                    No, the Supreme pulled the army out of de ... ma!
                    1. Charik
                      Charik 15 July 2020 18: 59
                      -1
                      that-No, Yes, he was president when disposing of 941x-zh pieces for Amer’s money, what he saved up on the army well, maybe he spread the Americans on $ and spent on missiles and on yus, the fart blazed
                      1. Finches
                        Finches 15 July 2020 19: 06
                        0
                        He was Supreme, this is the first! And secondly, you, a sailor?
                      2. Finches
                        Finches 15 July 2020 19: 23
                        +2
                        And, thank God, they, the Supreme, remain laughing
                      3. Charik
                        Charik 15 July 2020 22: 14
                        +1
                        No, I’m not a sailor, well, and that he’s VGK, didn’t they cut the boats with him, is it right or not, I hz, but I don’t understand what the argument is about
            2. mdsr
              mdsr 10 July 2020 11: 24
              15
              Quote: Finches
              Even Gorbachev has his own lawyers ... laughing

              I’ll support my colleague, he is not a lawyer of Gorbachev, but of common sense. Regarding the fleet, a huge number of ships and submarines decayed after it, during the time of the drunk and zeroed, right at the berth walls, not having the financial ability to even maintain combat readiness, not to mention undergoing repairs. I’ll tell you more, many of them still rot in factories in anticipation of the allocation of funds for their disposal. And 30 years have passed already, as there is no hunchback in power!
              But you operate exclusively with stereotypes and persistently try to pull an owl on the globe.
              1. Finches
                Finches 15 July 2020 18: 51
                +1
                Personally, I was serving in the army at that time and saw how an owl was pulled on a globe, selling a homeland!
          2. Fizik M
            Fizik M 10 July 2020 18: 22
            +3
            Quote: Bashkirkhan
            Soviet radioactive scrap metal.

            Monsieur, YOU, as usual, have "amnesia"
            because it was a "two-way street" (HEU-LEU - "in the same place")
          3. silver_roman
            silver_roman 11 July 2020 00: 06
            +3
            Ships were cut, which did not even use up half of their resource. 941 are far from the only ones who went under the knife. and that 160 or that 22m how many cut? talk of course about the fleet, but no need to invent excuses for our "friends" and look for good intentions in their actions.
            1. Bashkirkhan
              Bashkirkhan 11 July 2020 11: 37
              +1
              Quote: silver_roman
              941 are far from the only ones who went under the knife.

              For example, "Pike" was disposed of, but objectively they would not have waited for a medium repair in those years. The United States, in turn, financed the dismantling, because these submarines could be returned to service after average repairs.
              Quote: silver_roman
              that 160 or that 22m how many were cut?

              Cut in Independent Ukraine. In Russia, no one cut the Tu-160.
              1. 3danimal
                3danimal 7 August 2020 09: 09
                0
                The US has also cut a lot of boats, all older than the Los Angeles.
            2. 3danimal
              3danimal 7 August 2020 09: 08
              0
              Let's be objective, many disarmed then.
              The contingent of US troops in Europe was reduced by 10 times, everything was in favor of security in the future.
              But money was very bad. It came to humanitarian aid from the same USA. Not to starve people, "squeezing out" the budget for the preservation of most of the fleet? Which was so large for a reason, but for tasks that disappeared with the relaxation of tension.
              IMHO
              1. Bashkirkhan
                Bashkirkhan 7 August 2020 09: 35
                0
                The USSR was destroyed by other means. Therefore, disarmament became possible.
                1. 3danimal
                  3danimal 7 August 2020 09: 40
                  -1
                  So maybe they disarmed because he was no longer a threat?
                  Has ceased to prepare to "wave to the English Channel", to support subversive (and somewhere terrorist) activities in a number of countries. Rejected the idea of ​​"victory of communism" throughout the world (by military means, including).
                  By early 2014, troops in Europe had dropped to 24000. After the ensuing events, by 2020 their number "grew" to 52000.
                  In the second half of the 80s, there were 213000 US military personnel in Germany alone.
                  1. Bashkirkhan
                    Bashkirkhan 7 August 2020 11: 38
                    0
                    Rather, the USSR did not want to retreat again to Moscow as in 1941.
                    1. 3danimal
                      3danimal 7 August 2020 16: 00
                      -1
                      Unlikely. Well, or the good old doctrine "in a foreign land, and to the English Channel" smile NATO had a defensive (conventional) strategy, there is a lot of evidence.
        2. Jager
          Jager 15 July 2020 18: 17
          0
          The main period of collapse is the actions of EBN.
      3. Baron pardus
        Baron pardus 19 July 2020 23: 27
        -2
        At 20? You deign to joke. Let's compare the USSR 84 and Russia 2019. Russia still has to crawl and crawl to the USSR in 1984. Russia 2019 did not reach the borders of Russia in 1935, when compared with other countries in terms of living standards, technology and GDP. Only if Russia does not repeat the year 1937 within the next 5 years, it will lag behind in the technological, scientific and military sense from the United States, Japan, England, Germany and China forever :-(
        1. 3danimal
          3danimal 7 August 2020 09: 13
          -1
          How do you suggest repeating 1937? Introduce the term enemy of the people, blame pests for failures and accidents? Encourage mass denunciation, give part of the victim's property to the person who wrote it? Make a special orphanage for the children of the enemies of the people and get them into rights?
          Introduce criminal liability for dislike and criticism of the leader and the party (for anti-United Russia activities)?
        2. 3danimal
          3danimal 7 August 2020 09: 15
          -1
          Let me remind you that because of 1937 we lost Vavilov (but Lysenko's "genius" remained), we almost lost Korolyov. Etc.
  2. mdsr
    mdsr 10 July 2020 11: 17
    +3
    Quote: sav
    I fully agree with Andrey’s conclusion

    Of course, we can agree with the conclusions, but with the content of the article - no way.
    I don’t even know what happened to the author. Maybe he drank some pills that cause increased production of dopamine, serotonin and oxytocin? Earlier, somehow, he did not notice a craving for fiction, so the author always soberly described the existing situation and gave realistic scenarios for the development of the situation. What, alas, cannot be said about this article.
    And in total, 22 submarines are obtained on the SF, including: 14 MAPLs, of which six are of the 4th generation, eight are of the 3rd generation and 8 diesel-electric submarines. I repeat, in an optimistic scenario.
    No, this is not an optimistic scenario, this is FANTASTIC! If we talk about the optimistic scenario, it will look something like this: 1 MAPL pr.885, 4 MAPL pr. 885M, 2 shock nuclear submarines pr 949A (AM), 3-4 MAPL pr 971 (M), 6 diesel-electric submarines . This will not be the paper composition of the submarines of the SF, but those that will be in service, as they say.
    Total, in 2030 the Northern Fleet will have 10-11 MAPLs and 6 diesel-electric submarines. And this, in my amateurish opinion, I repeat, an optimistic scenario, which implies the timely construction of contracted and planned for the construction of ships, without taking into account delays in their construction due to many reasons, accidents, sequestration of the military budget, etc.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      10 July 2020 11: 51
      12
      Quote: mdsr
      Earlier, somehow, he did not notice a craving for fiction, so the author always soberly described the existing situation and gave realistic scenarios for the development of the situation.

      That is why I wrote in an article about an optimistic scenario. Optimistic and realistic usually vary. realistic - less :)))
      Quote: mdsr
      No, this is not an optimistic scenario, this is FANTASTIC!

      Oddly enough - no. There would be desire and funding. We have been building Kazan for 11 years, provided that the ship will enter service in 2020, and it may enter (although it may not enter). Novosibirsk, next to it, has a good chance of being delivered to the fleet in 2021 - that is, 8 years from the moment of laying. It should be assumed that the rest of the ships will be built for 7-8 years. Now there are 6 Yasen-M under construction with Kazan, two more are planned to be laid in 2020, and if 3 more buildings are laid by 2023, then all of them will be commissioned until 2030. The production capacity is quite enough, taking into account the completion of the construction of part of the SSBN and Ash trees until 2023
      Thus, 1 and 885M for the SF in 5 are technically quite feasible.
      Quote: mdsr
      2 shock nuclear submarines, pr. 949A (AM), 3-4 MAPL pr. 971 (M),

      This is just not an optimistic, but rather a pessimistic scenario. Get two Antey in the version of AM SF will get, there is no talk. About 971M, the Wolf and Leoprad are undergoing modernization, the Boar after a long repair will be handed over to the fleet in 2020, so that it will reach 2030 for sure, the Cheetah will remain in the fleet there - its fleet was handed over in 2001. That is, we already see 4 nuclear submarines, so that the question is only about the Tiger, which is now waiting for repair. But he, most likely, will wait for him, as the Boar leaves the repair. In 2020, Russian Defense Ministry sources announced plans to return the Boar to the current fleet in 2023.
      So 2 949AM is realism, not optimism, but 3-4 nuclear submarines of project 971 are pessimism, actually 4-5 units.
      Quote: mdsr
      6 DEPL.

      And why only 6? Over 10 years, we will fully master 16 Frets for the Northern Fleet and Pacific Fleet, taking into account the fact that St. Petersburg has a fleet, another 2 are in a high degree of readiness. If only the project was not a failure.
      1. Bashkirkhan
        Bashkirkhan 10 July 2020 13: 51
        +4
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        the only question is the Tiger, which is now waiting for repair

        "Tiger" is undergoing 3,5-year renovation at Nerpa from 1.1.2020 to 30.6.2023, according to the contract signed in March 2019.
        http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:cCxMHIXeMpIJ:zakupki.gov.ru/223/purchase/public/download/download.html%3Fid%3D55353623+&cd=4&hl=ru&ct=clnk&gl=ru
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          10 July 2020 14: 09
          +3
          Especially :)))) And this is exactly the Tiger fierce?
          1. Bashkirkhan
            Bashkirkhan 10 July 2020 14: 30
            +6
            Precisely, I still remember how on the social network Nerpa's employee wrote that they were given three leopards, "Cheetah", "Boar" and "Tiger". That's what he wrote, "our beasts." "Cheetah" has been delivered, "Vepr" is already a sailor, and will soon return to the Fleet. Since the 10s, the Tiger simply stood at the pier awaiting repairs, including because of the need to recharge the reactor core, and is now under repair.
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              10 July 2020 14: 34
              +6
              Well, glory to those, Lord :)) Thanks for the answer!
        2. The comment was deleted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          10 July 2020 22: 30
          +2
          Maxim, but who would doubt :)))
          1. Fizik M
            Fizik M 11 July 2020 07: 56
            -1
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            yes who would doubt :)))


            and if without smiles, then the very first REAL tests of "Last" (with the actual destruction of the attacking torpedo) will become "FUNERAL MUSIC" for "Ash"
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              11 July 2020 11: 28
              +2
              Quote: Fizik M
              and if without smiles, then the very first REAL tests of "Last" (with the actual destruction of the attacking torpedo) will become "FUNERAL MUSIC" for "Ash"

              And if without smiles, Maxim, then declaring the project of the ship a ram on the grounds that it does not have a specific weapon system (which, incidentally, can be installed there) is, to put it mildly, not very correct.
              One must still distinguish between the ship and the weapons systems installed on it. The T-34-76 was a pretty decent machine, but without a normal armor-piercing projectile, it suffered unreasonably high losses in collisions with German armored vehicles. This does not mean that the T-34 is a ram, it means that the tanks needed normal warheads. So here
              By the way, for the sake of interest, interest for - recall the analogue of the discussed Last in the US nuclear submarines
              1. Fizik M
                Fizik M 11 July 2020 20: 48
                -1
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                And if without smiles, Maxim, then declaring the project of the ship a ram on the grounds that it does not have a specific weapon system (which, incidentally, can be installed there) is, to put it mildly, not very correct.


                after the very first real tests of the "Fins" (which, according to TTZ, was OBLIGED to be still on the head) 885 (M) will go into MEDIUM REPAIR WITH MODERNIZATION
                because the "construction" is rotten ...
              2. Fizik M
                Fizik M 11 July 2020 20: 49
                0
                Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
                remind the analogue of the discussed Last on American nuclear submarines

                Tripvire
                + SGPD
                that's enough for them
              3. Jager
                Jager 15 July 2020 18: 22
                0
                Andrey, tell me - when exactly did the 76s not have a normal BB? In 41st, for the early “three” there was enough shrapnel to hit.
  3. Fizik M
    Fizik M 10 July 2020 18: 21
    0
    Quote: sav
    I fully agree with Andrey’s conclusion

    and there are no conclusions, in the sense of their SUBSTANTIATION
    the main thing is that there is NO clarity with the new weapon (both with the "Zircon" and the sea underwater)
    this is "to put it mildly" ...
    well, the torpedo complex on the "Yasen (M)" is simply RUDIMENTAL - in fact, a DECORATED version of the 3rd generation complexes
    1. Scaffold
      Scaffold 11 July 2020 09: 02
      +1
      "Rudimentary" - when somewhere I heard a clever word, but did not understand the meaning and did not cope with the letters.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. The comment was deleted.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. The comment was deleted.
              1. The comment was deleted.
        2. The comment was deleted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. Fizik M
        Fizik M 12 July 2020 07: 53
        +1
        Quote: Scaffold
        "Rudimentary" - when I heard somewhere

        this is when YOU "heard somewhere", and then (YOU) - "what I do not know - about that I sing"

        this is my materiel, which I have been operating on a submarine for a long time
        1. Scaffold
          Scaffold 12 July 2020 08: 17
          +1
          You didn't even understand the essence of the claims. You do not understand the meaning of the words "rudiment" and "mental", they have merged into one. And this is not a typo, it is precisely not knowing the language. Typos look different.
          1. Fizik M
            Fizik M 13 July 2020 10: 18
            -2
            Ok typo
            rudimentary
  • mark1
    mark1 10 July 2020 06: 23
    +6
    Underwater drones will save us. The approximate ratio of crewed submarines to unmanned submarines is 20/80 (preferably 10/90). So it is necessary to "torment" Poseidon and use it as a base for the development of underwater drones (non-nuclear options are also welcome)
    1. sav
      sav 10 July 2020 06: 31
      14
      Quote: mark1
      Submarine drones will save us. The approximate ratio of crewed submarines to crewless ...

      Progress, apparently, is heading for this, and everywhere: in water, in air, etc.
    2. Fizik M
      Fizik M 10 July 2020 18: 27
      0
      Quote: mark1
      Underwater drones will save us. The approximate ratio of crewed submarines to unmanned submarines is 20/80 (preferably 10/90). So you have to "torture" "Poseidon"

      "Status-6" has nothing to do with what you want ...
  • Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 10 July 2020 06: 31
    +4
    Thanks to the author. Very optimistic ... the main thing is that shipbuilding has not been lost, personnel have been preserved, there is where to build.
  • Bashkirkhan
    Bashkirkhan 10 July 2020 07: 41
    +9
    The Project 971 "Panther" has not been out to sea since 2015, the reactor needs to be recharged, the ship is 30 years old, it will not wait for medium repair and will be written off. Voronezh project 949A has been put into reserve and is being prepared for decommissioning. One of the Yasenei-M planned for laying will be named Voronezh.
    1. 2 Level Advisor
      2 Level Advisor 10 July 2020 08: 28
      10
      971s, in general, for a couple of pieces per fleet, if it remains, it’s good, after 2-3 years .. for them there is no room for repair / modernization stupidly .. everything is taken for years to come ..
      And in general, the author counted many boats that will no longer go out for military service .. but are included in the fleet ..
      And there’s nothing to argue about the need for new MAPLs — they are VERY lacking ..
      1. Bashkirkhan
        Bashkirkhan 10 July 2020 08: 35
        +6
        hi For some reason, Andrey stubbornly does not want to use at least the data of the site storm of depth in articles about submarine. He writes about the modernization of actually decommissioned ships, confuses the location of 971 submarines. The same "Sperm whale", which since the beginning of the XNUMXs has been at the NPP and is currently being disposed of, he posted on "Zvezda" in previous publications. But his articles about battleships are very good.
        1. Fizik M
          Fizik M 10 July 2020 18: 30
          +1
          Quote: Bashkirkhan
          For some reason, Andrey stubbornly does not want to use at least the site data to storm the depths in articles about the sub-melting.

          correctly does not want;)
      2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
        10 July 2020 08: 42
        +8
        Quote: Level 2 Advisor
        And in general, the author counted many boats that will no longer go out for military service .. but are included in the fleet ..

        In this case, I did not try to calculate the correct number of MAPLs, but took to an extreme optimistic scenario (which I wrote about several times in the article) - that almost all the nuclear submarines that are in the fleet will remain in it for 2030.
    2. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      10 July 2020 08: 50
      +4
      Quote: Bashkirkhan
      "Panther" project 971 since 2015 does not go to sea, the reactor needs to be recharged

      You yourself sent me to the "storm of the depths". And it says that in 2015 she took part in the competition for the championship of the Navy. And now - in the fleet hi
      Quote: Bashkirkhan
      Voronezh project 949A has been put into reserve and is being prepared for decommissioning. One of the planned Yasenei-M will be named Voronezh.

      It is written about it very carefully. That, according to media reports, one of the new Yasen-M will receive the name Voronezh, which means that, probably, Voronezh 949A has been written off. Although in 2019, according to Dipstorm, he still walked
      1. Bashkirkhan
        Bashkirkhan 10 July 2020 09: 21
        +6
        hi In 2015, the Panther went to sea for the last time. Yes, she is in the Navy, but there is no place to repair her and the age of the ship is 30 years. Recharging the reactor is a very expensive operation. Everything is objective. Voronezh is in reserve. It also has nowhere to repair (even dock, taking into account the loss of PD-50), and even more so to modernize. It will be good if Chelyabinsk is modernized, which will have a place in the boathouse occupied by Irkutsk. By 2030, "Panther" and "Voronezh" will definitely go down in history. Therefore, it is strange, knowing your awareness of the possibilities of ship repair, to read about the prospects for the service of these ships. The last photo of "Voronezh" dated 18.06.2020/XNUMX/XNUMX.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          10 July 2020 09: 57
          +4
          Good day! (something I forgot to say hello repeat )
          Quote: Bashkirkhan
          Therefore, it is strange, knowing your awareness of the possibilities of ship repair, to read about the prospects for the service of these ships.

          Well I wrote about the most optimistic option :)))
          Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
          In this case, I did not try to calculate the correct number of MAPLs, but took to an extreme optimistic scenario (which I wrote about several times in the article) - that almost all the nuclear submarines that are in the fleet will remain in it for 2030.

          There is still a pessimistic and realistic one, but the message was different - EVEN if we save and repair them all, then ... By the way, in the optimism of my KSF, I issued the whole division 677 until 2030 :)
          1. Bashkirkhan
            Bashkirkhan 10 July 2020 10: 20
            +6
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            Incidentally, in the optimism of my KSF, I issued the whole division 677 until 2030 :)

            The division may well be by 2030. If the 677 project is brought to mind. Here I share your optimism.
            1. Boa kaa
              Boa kaa 10 July 2020 21: 25
              +4
              Quote: Bashkirkhan
              The division may well be by 2030. If the 677 project is brought to mind.

              677 project - diesel-electric submarines, and they are "built" in brigades. The division is the organizational structure of the submarine.
              Therefore, "I do not share your optimism" hi
              1. Bashkirkhan
                Bashkirkhan 10 July 2020 21: 33
                0
                hi Clear. What do you think, is there any point in modernizing pr. 949A? The nuclear submarine "Irkutsk" will have to return to service in 2021. "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, was put into reserve in 1997 and defended pending repairs. The ship has changed its fourth decade, after repair and modernization, it will last no more than 10 years and then for needles. Does it make sense to upgrade 30-year-old ships for billions of rubles?
                1. Boa kaa
                  Boa kaa 10 July 2020 22: 13
                  +4
                  Quote: Bashkirkhan
                  Does it make sense to modernize pr. 949A?

                  It seems that 2 units will be modernized according to the 949AM project under 3M22.
                  Therefore, apparently there is a sense. And what happens - we'll see.
                  1. Fizik M
                    Fizik M 11 July 2020 07: 54
                    +2
                    Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
                    It seems that 2 units will be modernized according to the 949AM project under 3M22. Therefore, apparently there is a sense. And what happens - we'll see.

                    the upgrade to the 949A makes a lot more sense than the ash series
                    I had a direct relationship to this topic since the mid-2000s, and moreover - my personal "rubylovo" at one of the meetings on shipbuilding in 2006. became decisive for "Irkutsk" (during the break he hacked to death for Nagorno-Karabakh State Technical University Reshetkin (while leading "hand-to-hand combat";) with the brigade commander-72 Zakharchenko (he tried to forbid me to speak, including "physically";)) and then "entered "Deputy State Duma" Prometheus "with the phrase "we are ready to consider extending the terms of the hull by deducting the fact that it is on a solid foundation."

                    the problem is that the 949AM is a very "short" modernization ...
                    I don’t want to condemn Baranov here, shortly before his death I had a conversation with him on this, and I understand him too well when he said: "at least do it this way ..."
        2. Fizik M
          Fizik M 10 July 2020 18: 31
          -1
          Quote: Bashkirkhan
          "Panther" went to sea for the last time. Yes, she is in the Navy, but there is no place to repair her and the age of the ship is 30 years. Recharging the reactor is a very expensive operation.

          YOU, as usual, carry illiterate nonsense
          the cost of "operation No. 1" in "native birches" is more than divine (unlike the USA)
          but replacing cable routes is real
  • silberwolf88
    silberwolf88 10 July 2020 08: 05
    +2
    I agree with the author regarding ... "the construction of 885 multipurpose nuclear submarines of projects 885 and 9M is fully justified" however, I believe that everything is correct ... and it is necessary to build further multipurpose (weapons change qualitatively) ... and use them differently, including in conjunction with crewless vehicles ... and universality (within certain limits) is rather a plus ...
  • Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 10 July 2020 08: 45
    10 th
    I fully support the logic and conclusions of the respected Andrei from Chelyabinsk, we need more submarines and coast-based aviation, we need to abandon meaningless projects of surface monsters in favor of the development of submarines, coast aviation, and the surface fleet should be small and designed for coastal defense and submarine defense, maybe several universal frigates of small displacement, for PLO and convoy functions. It is the development of nuclear submarines and submarines = the main direction of the development of maritime security in the Russian Federation, here it is possible and necessary to maintain a leading position in the world to achieve parity even by NATO and China
    1. Fizik M
      Fizik M 10 July 2020 18: 33
      -4
      Quote: vladimir1155
      need more sub

      in the sense of Unworthy - HOW NOW?
      and the disadvantages of which vEmEfE and USC does not eliminate and HIDES?
      1. Vladimir1155
        Vladimir1155 10 July 2020 19: 04
        +2
        dear Maxim, I respect your position and civic courage, I had in mind the combat-ready, such as Ash M, and Borey, and others that have undergone modernization
        1. Fizik M
          Fizik M 10 July 2020 20: 05
          -1
          Quote: vladimir1155
          I meant combat-ready, such as Ash M, and Borey, and others that have undergone modernization

          there is no CORRECTIVE DISADVANTAGES
          1. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 10 July 2020 21: 39
            +3
            Quote: Fizik M
            there is no CORRECTIVE DISADVANTAGES

            Maksim, hi
            I am glad that you are "free" again after the "bath".
            However, your negative outlook on everyday life is very annoying, damn it! Solid nihilism! You can not do it this way. You kill faith in the best ...
            About the "critical flaws".
            What is the reason? In the reluctance to see them or in the impossibility of the pros to do what is required? Or sabotage and corruption? Explain, please ...
            With PTZ, the situation is less clear. But for the time being, the misunderstandings are continuous ...
            Sincerely, Boa.
            1. Fizik M
              Fizik M 10 July 2020 21: 49
              0
              Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
              However, your negative outlook on everyday life is very annoying, damn it! Solid nihilism! You can not do it this way.

              in 1998. we at AT did what the Americans and the Fritz can’t repeat until now
              Our first version of the AT was back in the late 80s - according to MK48 there were norms, but troubles according to MK46 (which was decided in the 90s and demonstrated in 1998)

              TODAY EQUIPMENT AT OUR PL
              and this is CONSCIOUS Sabotage

              yes, and one more thing - you can FORGET about the "promising Pack and Last"
              for January 7, Myandin A.F. ...
              1. Boa kaa
                Boa kaa 10 July 2020 22: 17
                +1
                Thanks for the info ...
                Now at least your assessment of the situation has become clear.
                Question: so will we switch from AT to DUKS caliber or will we heat the furnace with logs, as before?
                1. Fizik M
                  Fizik M 11 July 2020 07: 41
                  0
                  Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
                  Now at least your assessment of the situation has become clear.

                  it's not just "my grade"
                  there is a VIP holding a high official position in the topic, a couple of times they crossed paths with him "informally" (once on the sidelines of the conference, and the other - "just in the St. Petersburg metro"), and his assessment, literally, of what is happening in the topic and industries: "CONSCIOUS SABOTAGE"
                  1. timokhin-aa
                    timokhin-aa 11 July 2020 13: 15
                    +2
                    Do you remember what I told you about VNP IMMEDIATELY?
                    Only no use. Everyone knows everything and nothing has changed for many years, the system has no feedback.
                2. Fizik M
                  Fizik M 11 July 2020 07: 45
                  +1
                  Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
                  So will we switch from AT to DUKS caliber or will we burn the furnace with logs, as before?

                  about the "small" (midget) AT after the death of Myandin YOU CAN FORGET
                  because without it it is 10 YEARS OF FAILURE TESTS (this is a real assessment, taking into account troubles on a similar topic earlier), the minimum - that no one will allow

                  with Myandin - it was real for 3-4 years
                  specific proposals were in the spring of 2013. (for the meeting of the military-industrial complex on PTZ), I personally prepared them
                  nailed it (despite the extreme interest of the Navy) SECRETARY POSPELOVA (see my article about the troubles of "Severodvinsk")
                  1. Boa kaa
                    Boa kaa 11 July 2020 10: 53
                    +3
                    Quote: Fizik M
                    (see my article about Severodvinsk troubles)

                    I read ... how could such an info be missed! Then he consumed horsemeat in the kitchen, as he had sewn in his youth, but indignation did not leave, and a vile feeling remained from the leeches from the USC.
                    Quote: Fizik M
                    what is happening in the subject and industry: "CONSCIOUS SABOTAGE"
                    Pancake! And where are the Chekists looking !? Or is it all skillfully disguised as a "struggle of opinions, trends and views on the future of the Navy"? But what about the assessment of the western directions in the development of PTZ systems? Or are they going to repeat the story of cybernetics again? am
                    1. timokhin-aa
                      timokhin-aa 11 July 2020 13: 19
                      +4
                      Or are they going to repeat the story of cybernetics again?


                      They are going to repeat the 1905 revolution. When, in the course of a war with some minor enemy, our super-duper propagandized boats and RTOs will be shot "dry." After this, the people will have a lot of questions for the authorities.
                      And it will be impossible to answer them.
                    2. Fizik M
                      Fizik M 11 July 2020 22: 52
                      0
                      Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
                      And where are the Chekists looking !?

                      someone is reporting
                      someone contributes
                      about how I was "treated" at the Lubyanka in March 2015. once wrote
  • d4rkmesa
    d4rkmesa 10 July 2020 09: 02
    +1
    Good, balanced article. I practically agree with everything. Yes, Ash-M is not so bad, but other submarines are already needed. Preferably cheaper and with a new generation reactor.
    1. Fizik M
      Fizik M 10 July 2020 18: 34
      -4
      Quote: d4rkmesa
      Good, balanced article.

      Yeah
      sorry not just incompetent, but with IGNOR of "inconvenient" FACTS ...
      Quote: d4rkmesa
      Yes, Ash-M is not so bad

      Today it’s * OWN-PROJECT
  • Eldorado
    Eldorado 10 July 2020 09: 26
    0
    Thank you, I look forward to continuing ...
  • Lebed
    Lebed 10 July 2020 09: 37
    12
    Rather, two new Ash-trees would be laid, we are waiting from April.
  • NEXUS
    NEXUS 10 July 2020 09: 55
    +3
    Ash-M is really expensive for us. More precisely, they are expensive for a very unpleasant reason - misuse of money, but simply theft in the highest echelons of power. With the money that was stolen by our bureaucrats, it was possible to build a fleet from scratch in no way inferior to the American and this is a fact.
    Ash-M, of course, today is all that we have developed and invented the most advanced, but ... I think now we need to think about the Husky and Laika project. And in this regard, a series of even 9 Ash-M seems ghostly. I don't think that 9 Ash-M will be in the series, rather 4, maximum 5. We follow the same path as the mattresses. They built the Wolf, and it turned out to be expensive. Therefore, they created an economy version in the form of a Virgin. So Laika , I think, will be the very "Virginia" for our fleet. Cheaper and faster to build. Although, I think that, unlike the first Virgins, who were significantly inferior to the Wolf, our Laika will surpass Yaseni-M in performance characteristics.
    1. timokhin-aa
      timokhin-aa 10 July 2020 15: 06
      +5
      Laika is a sawmill, if you focus on what has already been attacked by it in open access.
      I want to believe that this is just misinformation, but somehow it can’t ...
      1. Fizik M
        Fizik M 10 July 2020 18: 35
        -1
        Quote: timokhin-aa
        Laika is a sawmill, if you focus on what has already been attacked by it in the public domain. I want to believe that this is just misinformation, but somehow it can’t ...

        Yes, everything is simple - "Malachite" has "touched" the prospect of "the cat cried", therefore they are accustomed to "mastering the dough"
  • sleeve
    sleeve 10 July 2020 13: 10
    -2
    It still seems to me that Borea's wake-up call is in the game. There is no particular difference in maneuverability. Creation and installation of packages for anti-missile systems, Zur and vertical launch of torpedoes are mere pennies in comparison with the main costs. The series is "rocked", you can just keep the pace and by 2030 have 4 "arsenals" on each TVD. Or more.
    1. bayard
      bayard 11 July 2020 05: 13
      +1
      Quote: sleeve
      Zur and vertical launch torpedoes

      What ?
      Torpedoes upright? belay
      And missiles? what
      Where are you going to shoot anti-aircraft missiles? ... From silos?
      What are you going to bring them together?
      Through the periscope, you can only opto-location station.
      This means that the missiles will be small (the maximum is the same as for the "Pantsir" or MANPADS), there will be enough space for them in the wheelhouse.

      But for the thesis about "arsenals" based on "Borey-K" from me plus.
      1. sleeve
        sleeve 11 July 2020 05: 49
        -1
        Guidance either from unaccompanied, from the sky (long), space ,. But you are right, the maximum efficiency is something like "armor". However, we will not completely rule out the front line about it.
        1. sleeve
          sleeve 11 July 2020 06: 14
          0
          Spooky editor. "Not" -NK, "long" - AWACS.
  • prodi
    prodi 10 July 2020 13: 36
    0
    It seems to me that a missile carrier at 8000 tons of displacement is, first of all, an attacking universal (conventional nuclear weapon) platform. In my opinion, we obviously need less of these than pure strategists. Something smaller can track and fight against enemy SSBNs and AUGs
    1. Fizik M
      Fizik M 10 July 2020 19: 07
      0
      Quote: prodi
      I think the missile carrier in 8000t displacement

      there is not 8000, but "much more than 13000"
  • timokhin-aa
    timokhin-aa 10 July 2020 15: 04
    13
    Alas, Andrew.
    The fact is that the attempt of our wonderful Ministry of Defense to present the case in such a way that the Yaseni are our multipurpose submarines is just a bluff.
    In fact, when TTZ signed up for the submarine generation back in the pot days, everything was different.
    The future "Borey" (then it was conceived with two valolines and propellers, and not a water cannon, under the future Bark, which did not exist then, etc.) - had to replace the BDRMs.
    And the future "Ash" was to replace Project 949, the production of which was already underway.

    Ash is a SSGN. This is not a MAPL. It is simply unsuitable to be a submarine, both because of its size, and because of its propulsion, and because the submarine is a "consumable" of the war under water, the Ash simply cannot be it because of its price.
    There are a lot of nuances with both acoustic visibility and non-acoustic. Such a boat cannot be MAPL.

    And, returning to the beginning of the comment, she should not have.
    Project 957 (or 957T) "Kedr" was supposed to become the third promising submarine, the one that "disappeared" from the mass consciousness of the new generation MPSS.

    And attempts to present the matter in such a way that "Ash" is a MAPL, this is already a post-Soviet fornication, and nothing more.
    1. 5-9
      5-9 10 July 2020 15: 42
      0
      So it looks like MAPL only for the "youngest" and will remain, Virgie Blok5 is quite a SSGN, only without suitable anti-ship missiles
      1. timokhin-aa
        timokhin-aa 10 July 2020 21: 21
        +1
        And what is “Good” anti-ship missile system in your understanding?
        1. 5-9
          5-9 12 July 2020 08: 22
          0
          Ultrasonic and long range.
          1. timokhin-aa
            timokhin-aa 12 July 2020 09: 31
            +2
            It reminds me of a joke about one gyrus.
    2. Fizik M
      Fizik M 10 July 2020 18: 36
      -1
      Quote: timokhin-aa
      In fact, when TTZ signed up for the submarine generation back in the pot days, everything was different.

      there was PE
      I had a chance to communicate with the brow who signed TTZ (very "lascivious") in the "part of acoustics"
      WITH COGNAC PORTFOLIO
      1. timokhin-aa
        timokhin-aa 10 July 2020 21: 20
        +4
        Yes, we always have PE.

        The question is that under the talk of super-duper Yasen we lost a whole class of submarines.
        It just disappeared at all.
    3. Nemchinov Vl
      Nemchinov Vl 10 July 2020 23: 35
      +1
      Quote: timokhin-aa
      The project 957 (or 957T) "Kedr" was supposed to become the same "disappeared" from the mass consciousness of the new generation MAPL.
      really now, I perfectly understand the high cost of "Yasen-M", and the terrible shortage of SSNS (multipurpose hunters of smaller size and cost of construction), especially at the Pacific Fleet, including to cover the deployment of strategists, no one is lobbying in the Navy ?!
      1. timokhin-aa
        timokhin-aa 11 July 2020 00: 12
        +4
        And what is lobbying for? It is necessary first to voice the fact that it is necessary to include another type of PLA into the PC, and the "Laiki" kickoff. And for this, someone must muster up the courage and report to the decision maker that before that they were hung up on their ears for many years.
        Moreover, if such a speaker is not immediately believed, then those who hung noodles will literally wipe it into powder.
        And everyone knows about it.
        1. Fizik M
          Fizik M 11 July 2020 08: 53
          +1
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          if such a speaker is not immediately believed, then those who hung the noodles literally will wipe it into powder.

          !
        2. Connor MacLeod
          Connor MacLeod 23 July 2020 03: 59
          0
          Well, how long would it take to restore the 957th project, if at all possible? Or creating an alternative?
          1. timokhin-aa
            timokhin-aa 23 July 2020 11: 41
            +2
            Recovery is pointless, but a new project depends on which one. But a lot in any case.
    4. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      11 July 2020 01: 33
      +1
      Quote: timokhin-aa
      Ash is a SSGN. This is not a MAPL.

      Alas, Alexander, this is MAPL
      Quote: timokhin-aa
      The future "Borey" (then it was conceived with two valolines and propellers, and not a water cannon, under the future Bark, which did not exist then, etc.) - had to replace the BDRMs.
      And the future "Ash" was to replace Project 949, the production of which was already underway.

      And then they began to sculpt a station wagon from it, and even in Soviet times.
      Quote: timokhin-aa
      It is simply unsuitable to be a submarine, both because of its size, and because of its propulsion, and because the submarine is a "consumable" of the war under water, the Ash simply cannot be it because of its price.

      Sivulf is also not MAPL? Dear, after all :))))) And Virginia, almost the same size as Yasenyu-M is not MAPL? Oh well.
      1. Fizik M
        Fizik M 11 July 2020 08: 54
        -3
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        Sivulf is also not MAPL? Dear because :)))))

        Americans refuse him
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        And Virginia, almost the same size as Yasenu-M

        fool
        nifiga ce "almost equal" wassat
        there is a difference of two times
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          11 July 2020 11: 32
          0
          Quote: Fizik M
          Americans refuse him

          And from this he ceased to be MAPL?
          Quote: Fizik M
          nifiga ce "almost equal" wassat
          there is a difference of two times

          The surface displacement of Yasen-M is a little more than 8000 tons, but noticeably less than 8600 tons. Recent Virginia reached 7 tons. Twice, yes fool
          1. Fizik M
            Fizik M 11 July 2020 22: 50
            0
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            The surface displacement of Yasen-M is a little over 8000 tons, but noticeably less than 8600 tons

            lol
            Your "numbers" are from "MURZILKA" tongue
            By 885 they have no relationship

            this is the first
            and the second - decent people compare the FULL (in windproof volumes) underwater displacement
      2. timokhin-aa
        timokhin-aa 11 July 2020 12: 23
        +4
        Alas, Alexander, this is MAPL


        And 152 mm self-propelled guns are PTO.
        What we say is one thing, but what is real ...

        A simple question is how to use this boat in battle if it has low-noise speed at times lower than that of a likely enemy? Let's get started with that.

        And then they began to sculpt a station wagon from it, and even in Soviet times.


        Sculpt, yes. Good word, suitable. As a result, they didn’t blind, but said that they blind.

        And Virginia, almost the same size as Yasenyu-M is not MAPL?


        A normal MAPL is not Virginia, a normal MAPL is a boat that is technically capable of destroying Virginia with a high probability, and in conditions when the enemy widely uses its anti-submarine forces as a whole, and not just their boats.
        No need to copy the Americans, our conditions are completely different. We are not Americans, Andrey. We do not need to fight with Russia.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          11 July 2020 12: 33
          +1
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          What we say is one thing, but what is real ...

          Alexander, well then you write like this: "According to my personal classification" Ash "is not a MAPL". And I would not have a single reason to object wink
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          A simple question is how to use this boat in battle if it has low-noise speed at times lower than that of a likely enemy?

          The simple answer is - firstly, we do not have reliable data on the low-noise moves of the Ash, and secondly, the fact that the Shchuka-B is inferior to the Sivulf in low-noise speed does not make it a ship of a different class. You mix up the class of the ship and its combat capabilities, which is fundamentally wrong. "Dreadnought" was a battleship and "Queen Elizabeth" was a battleship, and even served at the same time, although their capabilities were incomparable.
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          Sculpt, yes. Good word, suitable. As a result, they didn’t blind, but said that they blind.

          Everything is possible. But I'm not so sure.
          Quote: timokhin-aa
          Normal MAPL is not Virginia, Normal MAPL is not

          This is a discussion about what type of MAPL is relevant for us. If a certain type of MAPL does not fully meet the requirements, this does not mean that it is not a MAPL
          1. timokhin-aa
            timokhin-aa 11 July 2020 13: 04
            +1
            Alexander, well then you write like this: "According to my personal classification" Ash "is not a MAPL". And I would not have a single reason to object


            No not like this. According to TTZ, Ash was created as a submarine. It's all right?

            "Dreadnought" was a battleship and "Queen Elizabeth" was a battleship, and even served at the same time, although their capabilities were incomparable.


            Well, both the Dreadnought-class battleship and the Superdeadnought-class battleship are not just the same thing from a formal point of view.
            So pass by an example.

            If a certain type of MAPL does not fully meet the requirements, this does not mean that it is not a MAPL


            not "not fully responsible", but "of little use against a potential enemy" and "cannot be built in quantities sufficient to carry out tasks as intended", and, to the heap, "was not thought of in such a capacity."
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              11 July 2020 15: 52
              +1
              Quote: timokhin-aa
              No not like this. According to TTZ, Ash was created as a submarine. It's all right?

              Started to be created :))))
              Quote: timokhin-aa
              Well, Dreadnought-class battleship and Superdeadnought-class battleship are not just the same thing from a formal point of view. So pass by an example.

              Alexander, there is no such class - dreadnought. And the super dreadnought, too. This is an unofficial classification. So an example is a bullseye :)
              Quote: timokhin-aa
              not "not fully responsible", but "of little use against a potential enemy"

              This is your point of view. I will not argue, but the point is that such a formulation does not change the class of a warship
              1. timokhin-aa
                timokhin-aa 11 July 2020 20: 30
                +2
                Started to be created :))))


                And it was created. A huge boat, with a monstrous (due to the size of the hull structure) secondary acoustic signature and a "multi-knot" low-noise course. But with more cruise missiles.
                Unable to work as a MAPL against top opponents, but quite suitable as a submarine.
                1. Fizik M
                  Fizik M 12 July 2020 16: 43
                  0
                  Quote: timokhin-aa
                  and "multi-knot" low-noise running.

                  this is not true
                  in 885 this indicator is noticeably better than in 971
                  but far to SW

                  although, IMHO, instead of 885 in the early 90s, it was necessary to make a decision on a series of 971.3 (with airborne TA, a new HAC and UVP) and make an ABSOLUTELY NEW boat of 4 generations
          2. Fizik M
            Fizik M 11 July 2020 20: 29
            0
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            firstly, we do not have reliable data on the low-noise moves of Ash

            WE HAVE
            see on the tail and everything is clear
  • yufhvd
    yufhvd 10 July 2020 15: 35
    +5
    And if we add to this article the composition of the entire submarine fleet of all NATO countries and their partners outside the bloc, then the superiority is not double, but six.
    1. Maki maki
      Maki maki 10 July 2020 19: 21
      +8
      Quote: yufhvd
      superiority is not double, but six

      Then six times smile
  • 5-9
    5-9 10 July 2020 15: 39
    0
    American Tomahawks are significantly lighter than domestic Caliber

    What are you? 1,5 and 2 tons (with a greater range and our warhead) is not the point. Onyxes - yes.

    Well, ICAPL is not a tank, the quantity is of course important, but the performance characteristics are more important ...
  • Smirnoff
    Smirnoff 10 July 2020 17: 09
    14
    It would be cheaper for us to develop an analogue.
    1. Fizik M
      Fizik M 10 July 2020 18: 37
      0
      Quote: Smirnoff
      It would be cheaper for us to develop an analogue.

      Yeah
  • demiurg
    demiurg 10 July 2020 18: 58
    -2
    From my sofa I see the following:

    Ash is needed, no doubt. And the series will have to continue. 10-12 perfect underwater hunters are needed.
    But instead of DEPL and Husky. to build something like Varshavyanka with an egg of Dollezhal. In peacetime, the submarine runs on diesels and batteries, the reactors are on shore, each fleet has one or two submarines with a reactor for the practice of crews. Maintenance is cheap, docking is simple, crews are constantly practicing. In times of crisis, you can get 2-3 dozen nuclear submarines with trained crews. About 80% of the tasks such submarines can easily be solved, leaving the hunt for enemy submarines and aircraft carriers Yasenyam. And yes, interchangeable crews would be very necessary.
    1. FIR FIR
      FIR FIR 10 July 2020 21: 53
      +5
      In times of crisis, you can get 2-3 dozen nuclear submarines with trained crews.

      How much time will it take to put the reactors on 2-3 dozen submarines?
      "Crisis time" will end faster than pl will go out into the ocean ... winked
      1. Fizik M
        Fizik M 12 July 2020 16: 41
        -2
        Quote: FIR FIR
        How much time will it take to put the reactors on 2-3 dozen submarines?

        with the "right approach" to the question - a PAIR OF HOURS is enough
  • Local from the Volga
    Local from the Volga 10 July 2020 19: 05
    +1
    Good day! And who can tell you about the Samara nuclear submarine (K-295)? It seems to have been under repair since 2014 ..
    1. Bashkirkhan
      Bashkirkhan 10 July 2020 21: 22
      +3
      hi Since 2014, after the troubleshooting, Samara has simply been standing at the wall of Zvyozdochka Ship Repair Center, JSC, awaiting placement in the boathouse, which will take place no earlier than the withdrawal of the Leopard or Wolf.
      1. Local from the Volga
        Local from the Volga 10 July 2020 23: 12
        +1
        here’s a half-boat, therefore there isn’t enough power for planned repairs? not special on the sea, sorry!
        1. Bashkirkhan
          Bashkirkhan 10 July 2020 23: 15
          +2
          So it is, in particular, it took too long to modernize the "Leopard". Therefore, there is no place on the slipway for "Samara".
          1. Local from the Volga
            Local from the Volga 10 July 2020 23: 24
            +1
            what is the way out of the situation?
            1. Bashkirkhan
              Bashkirkhan 10 July 2020 23: 31
              +1
              The timing of the modernization of Project 971 submarines approached the construction time of the Yasenei-M. This means that new ships have to be laid, the concept of "a new ship in an old hull" has not justified itself.
              1. Local from the Volga
                Local from the Volga 10 July 2020 23: 36
                +1
                not sure if the price is good! the samara boat is not old, it is logical that it is cheaper to stuff it than to build a new one! ps is not at all in the subject, just logic!
                1. Bashkirkhan
                  Bashkirkhan 10 July 2020 23: 56
                  0
                  The same type "Samara" "Leopard" has been stuffed for 6 years. The agreement was signed at the end of 2013. The end of the modernization is not in sight.
              2. Fizik M
                Fizik M 11 July 2020 09: 00
                0
                Quote: Bashkirkhan
                The timing of the modernization of Project 971 submarines approached the construction time of the Yasenei-M. This means that new ships have to be laid, the concept of "a new ship in an old hull" has not justified itself.


                YOU again "in a puddle" Monsieur Bashkirkhan
                for "in the part concerning" the "Ash" is EVEN WORSE than the "leopards"

                и without taking tough measures to industry to ensure effective repair and modernization of ships, the fleet has no prospects
                1. K298rtm
                  K298rtm 11 July 2020 15: 41
                  +1
                  There are prospects - only they are very sad. We do not want to learn from our own mistakes. In Soviet times, a lot of submarines were built, and the possibility of ship repair was modest to say the least. I got the impression that those leaders (perhaps) thought that there would be a global war and that nothing would need to be repaired or modernized.
                  1. prodi
                    prodi 12 July 2020 12: 25
                    0
                    Probably, it would be necessary already in the project to plan the replacement of certain (up to replacement along the "entire midsection") modules, for in advance, by the time of modernization, prepared
          2. Fizik M
            Fizik M 11 July 2020 08: 58
            -3
            Quote: Bashkirkhan
            So it is, in particular, it took too long to modernize the "Leopard". Therefore, there is no place on the slipway for "Samara".


            Monsieur Bashkirkhan, do not forget to indicate that in the subject YOU are at the level of "Aunt Frosy" lol

            and one of the most serious troubles of the 971 project is its extremely low maintainability
            "Malachite" "sang a song" that JACOBS "it was impossible to do otherwise" (for low noise), but a comparison with 949A shows that it was all "pestny"
            maintainability and modernization capabilities of 949A ("Rubinovsky") are incomparably higher than those of 971
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Boa kaa
    Boa kaa 10 July 2020 22: 09
    +2
    Quote: mdsr
    Of course, we can agree with the conclusions, but with the content of the article - no way.

    Well, you, my friend, are pouring molasses ... There are flaws in the truth of the author's statement. Somehow:
    1. Nobody is going to "divide" the submarine between 5 fleets. They are based only in the north and the Pacific Fleet. Dot!
    2. The author's assertion about a certain "parity" in submarine forces with the PRC Navy is controversial. Our component of the NSNF is still the second on the planet in terms of composition and power, which cannot be said about the PRC SSBNs, which never went to the BS and are in the bases even without loading SLBMs. What are you talking about, comrade Andrey?
    3. I don’t know how the Pacific Fleet is doing there and its relations with the Navy of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces, but that’s what the CSF will be stronger than the Fleet of Her Majesty - that's for sure! I will not say anything about the Baltic and the Black Sea Fleet with CFL ... so far there is nothing to object.
    4. The inter-naval maneuver of the "Ash" and their position in the role of "cavalry" seems extremely doubtful. NSR - 2 weeks and a bottleneck in the Berenga Strait ... What is called - "sailed"! And around Africa it is ... well, in general, you understand me.
    As for "optimism-pessimism and real-life" - it's all from the evil one.
    Our OSK is still that fruit. Promising there are a dime a dozen, but as far as business goes, you will find guilty hell in the afternoon with fire! There is no tough hand of the proletariat on them, Messrs. The capitalists chattered! It's time to organize "sharazhki", otherwise it will be too late to drink Borjomi!
    AHA.
    1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
      11 July 2020 01: 27
      +3
      Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
      Nobody is going to "divide" the submarine between 5 fleets. They are based only in the north and the Pacific Fleet. Dot!

      The author has not argued otherwise.
      Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
      The author's assertion about a certain "parity" in submarine forces with the PRC Navy is controversial. Our component of the NSNF is still the second on the planet in terms of composition and power, which cannot be said about the PRC SSBNs, which never went to the BS and are in the bases even without loading SLBMs. What are you talking about, comrade Andrey?

      About MSON, of course. It seems out of context request
      Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
      I don’t know how the Pacific Fleet is doing and its relations with the Navy of the Japanese Self-Defense Forces, but that’s what the CSF will be stronger than the Fleet of Her Majesty - that's for sure!

      An extremely dubious statement, which will definitely become false when the British nevertheless put into operation avik.
      Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
      The inter-naval maneuver of the "Ash" and their position in the role of "cavalry" seems extremely doubtful. SMP - 2 weeks and a bottleneck in the Berenga Strait ... And around Africa this is ... well, in general, you understand me.

      And what is the problem you see here?
      Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
      As for "optimism-pessimism and real-life" - it's all from the evil one.

      Not in this case. 2 949AM will EXACTLY be on the SF. Of the 971, three are completing modernization, one is undergoing repairs, and the Cheetah is 2001. Who will write it off in 2030?
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 11 July 2020 10: 37
        +1
        Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
        An extremely dubious statement (on the correlation of forces between the KSF and the UK Navy - Elfd), which will definitely become false when the British nevertheless put avic into operation.
        Andrei, so we will repair our 1143.5 by this time. And if you consider that they will trample on us in the Norwegian Sea, then the Tu-22M2 will help the X-32 or Daggers ... So, not a fact.
        1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
          11 July 2020 11: 35
          +3
          Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
          Andrei, so we will repair our 1143.5 by this time. And when you consider that they will trample us in the Norwegian Sea

          What for? The conversation was about victory over the fleet of a first-class naval power in a conventional conflict. And such a conflict is a conflict of interests, which, if it happens, is definitely not on our shores.
          Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
          then the Tu-22M2 will help X-32 or Daggers ..

          Yes, only they are no longer naval. And I was talking about fleets
          1. Boa kaa
            Boa kaa 11 July 2020 14: 07
            0
            Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
            The conversation was about victory over the fleet of a first-class naval power in a conventional conflict. And such a conflict is a conflict of interests, which, if it happens, is definitely not on our shores.

            Andrew! The United Kingdom is a member of the nuclear club, however ... I find it hard to imagine a "conventional" conflict between the nuclear powers. - This is, firstly.
            And, secondly, it’s hard for me to imagine that our and English interests can enter into an insoluble contradiction somewhere far from our native shores ... The Yankees have taken on this function, and the little shavers today are outsiders. They even can’t blame whales across, although they whirl into Africa with their carts! So, they will come to us most likely. And obviously not with a bouquet of forget-me-nots.
            But.
            1. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
              12 July 2020 20: 27
              +1
              Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
              It is difficult for me to imagine a "conventional" conflict between the nuclear powers.

              I have already given an example of such a conflict
              Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
              And, secondly, it’s hard for me to imagine that our and English interests can enter into an insoluble contradiction somewhere far from our native shores ...

              I’m sure it was difficult for the British to imagine that the Argentines would risk going on a crusade to the Falklands.
          2. 5-9
            5-9 12 July 2020 10: 01
            +1
            Even the USSR Navy was not going to fight without tactical nuclear weapons, and even more so. Think thousands of special tactical battleships in the Navy for beauty?
  • xomaNN
    xomaNN 10 July 2020 22: 24
    +3
    I would very much like to bring the number of "Ashen" and "Ashen-M"

    So everyone involved in the Navy wanted. laughing But there are no genies that could fulfill wishes. Therefore, it is necessary to build up shipbuilding with at least small steps, especially in Komsomolsk on DalVostok. And then Peter and the NSR Severodvinsk do not have time.
  • Alexander Yaroshenko
    Alexander Yaroshenko 11 July 2020 03: 52
    +5
    I agree with the author, but Shoigovschina in the army, she, like Serdyukovschina, is not for the development of the fleet, but for the redistribution of babos between the general mafia, and in Vilyuchinsk we still have the last 971 submarines, for the whole Pacific Fleet
  • Devil13
    Devil13 11 July 2020 08: 57
    +1
    Author, you must understand that under the water just one hunter is better than a dozen victims. Whoever hears better, is better armed, who has anti-torpedoes and walks deeper - he and slippers.
    Only 0,1% better stealth and better your sonar is all, a very high probability of victory.
    In addition, ash replaces several types of nuclear submarines at once: it is clearly cheaper to build separately again 949A, 971 (yes, even if you take the latest version 671) or Lyra, and I sincerely hope that each boat is superior in its "direction".
    Yes, they need more. At least 6, and preferably 9 on the SF, on the Pacific Fleet. But alas, a normal economy and regime, as well as the absence of corruption at all levels, would also not hurt, as well as the presence of normal shipyards and repair bases at Pacific Fleet.
    1. Fizik M
      Fizik M 11 July 2020 09: 57
      -1
      Quote: Devil13
      Whoever hears better, is better armed, who has anti-torpedoes - that and slippers. In general, 0,1% is better than stealth and better than his sonar, that's all, the probability of victory is very high.


      THIS IS NOT ABOUT ASH
      and Virginia has a lot better with that
      1. Devil13
        Devil13 16 July 2020 11: 35
        0
        Do you have specific data on its noise level?
        It should be quieter than 971. And this is an indicator, because 971 is equal to the noise level with Los Angeles at least
        1. Fizik M
          Fizik M 17 August 2020 15: 37
          +1
          Quote: Devil13
          Do you have specific data on its noise level?

          let's say
          Quote: Devil13
          And this is an indicator, because 971 is equal to the noise level with Los Angeles at least

          this is nonsense
  • K298rtm
    K298rtm 11 July 2020 10: 56
    +3
    Old-old wisdom says that "everyone imagines himself a strategist, leading the battle from the side." So I, from my retirement couch, will allow me to express some opinion on the article under discussion.
    1. The author has almost completely enumerated the tasks that MAPL faces. I only note that the task of ensuring the combat stability of strategists (anti-submarine security, checking for lack of tracking in the DMZ, under ice, etc.) can be solved by torpedo tubes of a smaller displacement (without RS, which are not applicable in ice conditions).
    2. In my (amateurish) opinion, it is quite possible to design and build modern torpedo planes (for example, in the dimensions of the project 671rtm). If we consider that modern electronics takes up much less space and does not require such powerful electrical power and cooling (as on the 3rd generation), then the ammunition can be increased from 24 to 32 or more (if you leave 4 and 533 mm).
    3. Where to build - at the Admiralty Shipyards. There, I hope it is relatively quickly possible to restore competencies in the construction of the submarine (before this, of course, you need a project).
    4. And in order to realize these (and others) fantasies of sofa strategists (in our country), political will is needed.
    1. Alien From
      Alien From 17 July 2020 23: 07
      0
      I agree with you. Here we are all measuring boats, but in my opinion, it's time to create high-precision torpedoes. After all, the price of a torpedo / boat is simply not comparable. And the "partners" ALREADY have such torpedoes and are in operation.
  • businessv
    businessv 11 July 2020 17: 41
    0
    However, the further construction of the ultimate in characteristics, highly efficient, versatile (and therefore extremely expensive) submarines will not allow us to create an underwater fleet of the size we need.
    Andrey, thank you very much for the interesting and informative article! We look forward to continuing! good
  • Petrol cutter
    Petrol cutter 12 July 2020 18: 45
    0
    You really decide somehow .... The long-awaited, necessary or dear?! ..
    We shipbuilders need an understanding - will there be a series or not?
    It is important to know in fact! ...
  • nikant
    nikant 13 July 2020 13: 26
    +2
    if from afar ... there is practically no naval aviation that meets modern challenges ... there is no full-fledged coastal infrastructure ... there is no auxiliary normal fleet either ... for at least 20 years they have been chewing snot with power plants for surface sailors ... now we are talking AROUND nuclear-powered ships .. There is no point in talking about projects, parameters and data: they see and hear us much farther than many think ... bases are like a cat crying, and all of them are well protected and blocked by satellites, boats, ships by various other means ... oil painting ... it is becoming more and more difficult to leave the base unnoticed ... in the Arctic under the ice the Yankees walk as they want - this is no secret for a long time ... there are also problems with normal torpedoes and anti-torpedoes ... there are a lot of problems with electronics-acoustics ... I bow my head to the submariners -you will not envy them !!!
    It’s hard to argue against the submarine fleet, but ... there is no guaranteed hope of not winning a submarine war at the time of X ... there is no full confidence in mine systems and mobile complexes along all already known routes ...
    For some reason, no one wants to return to mobile railway complexes: completely autonomous, difficult to fix and constantly moving ... thanks to our top-level traitors, the Yankees achieved their folding ... Instead of 10 missile carriers, have 100-120 railway complexes, of which 80-90 on constant duty. It will be really scary for all “friends” around the world!
    ... cry for money ... statistics say that the amount spent by the oligarchs on yachts (and their total tonnage), palaces and castles, is akin to the cost of the fleet ... okay? The lake cooperative and all this oligarchic brigade are forbidden to touch! Altai reindeer herder with a Masonic mark and a harem general will give out clever thoughts? so think ...
  • hostel
    hostel 16 July 2020 01: 53
    0
    Andrey bravo! As always to the point!
  • 3danimal
    3danimal 7 August 2020 06: 18
    -1
    There seems to be some contradiction: the author says that the wealthy USA abandoned the construction of MAPLs of extreme characteristics in favor of Virginias (simpler). Which are cheaper and build faster.
    And he advocates the creation of RF boats .. extreme characteristics, while annoyed at the small size of the series and slow construction.
    So maybe it's worth learning from experience and not building a wunderwaffe with 40 CR, but simpler and more? And those 12 boats for the Northern and Pacific fleets will be recruited.
    (By the way, Seawulf is more of a hunter-boat, even the CD launches through TA)
  • voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 20 September 2020 13: 08
    +1
    Russia in general is now in an excellent position. America switches to China - it is officially named the main enemy.
    Russia can calmly and thoughtfully rearm as it pleases.
  • storm
    storm 1 October 2020 02: 44
    0
    The choice was made in favor of less "militant" nuclear submarines of the "Virginia" type, which had more modest performance characteristics, but, at the same time, also a significantly lower price.


    The author is wrong when he draws conclusions that the only option for the Russian Federation was the project 855 Ash.
    It was quite possible to take a more economical and therefore more acceptable path and start building a series of 12 multipurpose nuclear submarines based on the industrialized Borey project.
    In terms of stealth characteristics, Borey is five times "quieter" than our best hunters, pr. 971 Shchuka-B.

    Therefore, a titmouse in hand is better than that crane in the sky ...