Military Review

USC is ready to build underwater tankers on the basis of Sharks prepared for disposal

121
USC is ready to build underwater tankers on the basis of Sharks prepared for disposal

The strategic nuclear submarines of Project 941 of the "Akula" type prepared for disposal can be used to create submarine tankers, there is such a project, the general director of USC Alexey Rakhmanov said in an interview with TASS.


Answering the relevant question, Rakhmanov explained that USC is ready to create submarine tankers on the basis of Project 941 Severstal and Arkhangelsk submarines, but such a project would be expensive and cost up to 90 billion rubles.

The idea of ​​such a tanker has not completely died out and we are happy to build it. After all, what difference does it make whether you carry rockets or fuel? From the point of view of navigation safety, such a tanker is a good design. Under water, for example, a storm is not terrible

- he said.

According to Rakhmanov, the cost of such an underwater tanker will be very high given that about 30% of the solutions will be borrowed from the current design. The cost of construction has already been calculated by the design bureaus that are part of the USC.

An underwater tanker can cost 80-90 billion rubles, then the economy of this project turns out, as they say, "on a thin"

- he added.

Project 941 nuclear submarines are the largest in the world (entered in the Guinness Book of Records). The total displacement of these submarines is almost 50 thousand tons with a length of 172 m and a width of more than 23 m. Two submarines "Arkhangelsk" and "Severstal" are currently decommissioned fleet and are laid down at the Zvezdochka Ship Repair Center in Severodvinsk, awaiting disposal.

In 2019, the former First Deputy Chief of the Main Staff of the Russian Navy, Vice Admiral Oleg Burtsev, proposed not to dispose of the Arkhangelsk and Severstal submarines, but to modernize them under cruise missile carriers, following the example of the American Ohio-class nuclear submarines converted into cruise missile carriers. "Tomahawk"
121 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 23 August 2020 11: 53 New
    22
    90 yards to convert each sub? And how much will new ones come out? And economically, how can such ships be justified? There were more than a dozen such projects in the USSR. None were built. They knew how to count money. Now what?
    1. Vasyan1971
      Vasyan1971 23 August 2020 12: 31 New
      +2
      Quote: Stroibat stock
      They knew how to count money. Now what?

      Either they have forgotten how, or completely different people are now counting. request
      1. Alex777
        Alex777 23 August 2020 14: 46 New
        -1
        Just chatter.
        It’s interesting, will the Sarmatians or something from the base to the Akula get up?
    2. Charik
      Charik 23 August 2020 12: 39 New
      11
      if palaces with yachts and foreign football players are sold, it should be enough
      1. vitvit123
        vitvit123 23 August 2020 13: 21 New
        -11 qualifying.
        Would you sell yours? ... and how do they differ from you ...
        1. Charik
          Charik 23 August 2020 18: 04 New
          0
          WHAT your car or bike
          1. vitvit123
            vitvit123 23 August 2020 22: 51 New
            0
            I translate for the special. If you were in their place, would you sell? You talked about palaces and yachts ...
            1. Charik
              Charik 24 August 2020 09: 52 New
              -4
              In their place, I would have bought myself this nuclear submarine, repaired, hired a crew of high-class submariners + combat swimmers, and would make me scary-where necessary
              1. vitvit123
                vitvit123 24 August 2020 10: 10 New
                -2
                You still haven't answered the question: would you sell your palaces and yachts?
                .....
                1. Charik
                  Charik 24 August 2020 11: 53 New
                  -2
                  just answered, there would be financial opportunities, then the previous message
                  1. vitvit123
                    vitvit123 24 August 2020 13: 39 New
                    0
                    You wrote that you would fix the boat, etc. , this is not quite the correct answer to my question ...
                    I, of course, doubt your altruism, well, there ..., then you are one in millions. This is called populism, my opinion.
                    1. Charik
                      Charik 24 August 2020 14: 47 New
                      -2
                      INSTEAD OF A YACHT ASSEMBLED IN ENGLAND OR WHERE ELSE THEIR DRILLS WOULD BUY A SHARK OR ANOTHER NPS built
                      1. vitvit123
                        vitvit123 24 August 2020 15: 40 New
                        0
                        The answer is fine. THX. Everything else is in the previous comment, in the second half.
        2. Shuttle
          Shuttle 23 August 2020 22: 39 New
          +5
          Quote: vitvit123
          Would you sell yours? ... and how do they differ from you ...

          Usually just the origin of capital.
          Someone has a personal car and a bicycle, and someone has a metallurgical plant and a personal business jet. Moreover, both the first and the second built this plant together. But only one stayed to work for him, and the second arranged things so that the whole plant works for him.
          That's the difference.
          1. vitvit123
            vitvit123 23 August 2020 23: 00 New
            +3
            Why did you write the children's concepts of capital inequality? Actually, it was not about that ... if it is difficult for you to master the semantic load, I can chew it easier for you ...
            1. Shuttle
              Shuttle 24 August 2020 06: 28 New
              0
              Quote: vitvit123
              Why did you write the children's concepts of capital inequality? Actually, it was not about that ... if it is difficult for you to master the semantic load, I can chew it easier for you ...

              This is not about capital inequality. It's about the nature of their origin.
              And yes, I cannot cope with the semantic load you suspect without your efforts. So go ahead and chew it already, please.
              1. vitvit123
                vitvit123 24 August 2020 08: 21 New
                +2
                The nature of origin, in my address to man, did not play any role, by the way, this is also childish populism (excuse me). I asked him: if he was in the place of the one who has palaces and yachts, would he sell them and give money for the needs of the Navy? What's so difficult in my commentary? And what is not clear?
                By the way, you can also answer this question ...
                I asked this question because I think that that person (including you), if you had a lot of money, would not donate it to the needs of the Navy. From this I conclude that people are the same, and if they are the same, then why poke a finger at another when he himself is like that? I don’t even know what it’s called (I don’t want to write in bad words) ...
                I am wrong ?
                And you, with your comment, went on a completely different topic ...
                1. Shuttle
                  Shuttle 24 August 2020 19: 31 New
                  0
                  Quote: vitvit123
                  The nature of origin, in my address to man, did not play any role, by the way, this is also childish populism (excuse me). I asked him: if he was in the place of the one who has palaces and yachts, would he sell them and give money for the needs of the Navy? What's so difficult in my commentary? And what is not clear?
                  By the way, you can also answer this question ...
                  I asked this question because I think that that person (including you), if you had a lot of money, would not donate it to the needs of the Navy. From this I conclude that people are the same, and if they are the same, then why poke a finger at another when he himself is like that? I don’t even know what it’s called (I don’t want to write in bad words) ...
                  I am wrong ?
                  And you, with your comment, went on a completely different topic ...

                  If I had such funds, I would certainly donate. The truth is not for the needs of the Navy, yes. Where - I will not discuss this issue here. Because the sacrifice must take place in secret.
                  I understand that the existence of people like me like you is unclear and inconvenient. Because it destroys the solipsistic picture of the world. But nothing can be done.
                  Here is an example.
                  During the war in this country, ordinary workers and peasants and even children gave their money to purchase tanks and aircraft for the front. This is full of documentary evidence. So alas for you and your conclusion.
                  Of course, of course - now is not a war. But that doesn't change much.
                  1. vitvit123
                    vitvit123 24 August 2020 22: 22 New
                    +1
                    Well, finally, they understood my question ...
                    And thanks for the answer, which can be discussed, of course, but .....
                    That there is a lot of altruism around, but we live as we live ...
                  2. vitvit123
                    vitvit123 24 August 2020 22: 56 New
                    +2
                    You see, you would not donate to the needs of the navy ... then why point your finger at another, if he himself would have done it .. I don’t understand that ..
                    And why Alas my conclusion? Didn't you start a dialogue on another topic?
                    Well, for you there is a war or not a war, it is almost the same, it does not change much, as you said .. well, I do not agree with you here. And if you live in such a regime, or an approximate one (since this does not change much), then there is a reason to think and consult, at least with your loved ones to begin with.
                    And again the question: why can your existence be inconvenient for me, etc. ? Why do you think so ? Do we know you personally? Remind me please (I hope this is not joking), otherwise I don't remember you ..
          2. Svetlana
            Svetlana 24 August 2020 21: 23 New
            0
            This is not the difference. The difference is that one can work with his hands, the other can
            create jobs, seek contracts, and sell first-made products. Without the second, the first will be unemployed.
            But if you look even deeper, the difference between a hired worker and an entrepreneur is a difference in psychology.
    3. Piramidon
      Piramidon 23 August 2020 13: 55 New
      13
      Quote: Stroibat stock
      90 yards to redesign each submarine? And how will new similar ones come out?

      The Koreans build conventional gas carriers at a price of $ 235 million per unit.
      1. SAG
        SAG 24 August 2020 12: 22 New
        0

        The Koreans build conventional gas carriers at a price of $ 235 million per unit.

        For less than one f-22 fighter ?! laughing fellow bully miracles hd
        1. Piramidon
          Piramidon 24 August 2020 16: 51 New
          +1
          Quote: SAG

          The Koreans build conventional gas carriers at a price of $ 235 million per unit.

          For less than one f-22 fighter ?! laughing fellow bully miracles hd

          I did not come up with this figure myself. For what he bought, for what he sold.
          The cost of the work of the Koreans, with whom it was planned to build the ships, is estimated at $ 235,4 million, regardless of the serial production.
          https://www.vedomosti.ru/business/news/2019/02/12/793880-stoimost-gazovozov
      2. Shuttle
        Shuttle 24 August 2020 19: 34 New
        -1
        Quote: Piramidon
        Quote: Stroibat stock
        90 yards to redesign each submarine? And how will new similar ones come out?

        The Koreans build conventional gas carriers at a price of $ 235 million per unit.

        Ordinary gas carriers do not depend on storms at sea and can float under the ice and?
  2. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 23 August 2020 11: 54 New
    10
    So so idea. In the absence of an icebreaker fleet, it could have done it, but now? And what about the infrastructure for receiving such unusual tankers? Was this taken into account in the calculations? I doubt it!
    1. uladzimir.surko
      uladzimir.surko 23 August 2020 13: 30 New
      0
      And in case of war, to expand the radius of the DEPL, did anyone think about that? And the example of the Second World War does not roll with the Germans with their cash cows? !!
      1. Pilat2009
        Pilat2009 24 August 2020 07: 23 New
        +2
        Quote: uladzimir.surko
        And in case of war, to expand the radius of the DEPL, did anyone think about that? And the example of the Second World War does not roll with the Germans with their cash cows? !!

        Do you remember how many boats the Germans had? And how many were sunk. A diesel engine in the ocean is not very good.
    2. ccsr
      ccsr 23 August 2020 17: 22 New
      +8
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      So so idea.

      Most likely vicious - it's like giving out tanks to villagers for plowing instead of tractors and waiting after this to reduce the cost of grain.
  3. 501Legion
    501Legion 23 August 2020 11: 56 New
    +4
    there were such monsters. it is a pity that they were scrapped. I remember a film about Severstal; the size and equipment of the boat were very impressive.
  4. Lesorub
    Lesorub 23 August 2020 11: 57 New
    37
    Answering the relevant question, Rakhmanov explained that USC is ready to create submarine tankers on the basis of Project 941 submarines Severstal and Arkhangelsk

    The modernization project for cruise missile carriers would look much more attractive!
    1. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 23 August 2020 12: 01 New
      +8
      Quote: Lesorub
      The modernization project for cruise missile carriers would look much more attractive!


      This was the only adequate option. Unfortunately. Now it is too expensive and it makes no sense ..

      Did they decide to remove Rakhmonov from the trough there? Or there was nothing to saw? I'm watching a series of stupid ideas from the bablopilians voiced on his behalf!?!
      1. rudolff
        rudolff 23 August 2020 12: 29 New
        17
        Not the only one. The option of converting into carriers of deep-sea stations suggested itself. Instead, they castrated one combat-ready BRDM and rebuilt one "loaf", which would be more useful and for its intended purpose.
        1. Cyril G ...
          Cyril G ... 23 August 2020 12: 36 New
          +8
          Quote: rudolff
          Instead, they castrated one combat-ready BRDM and rebuilt one "loaf", which would be more useful and for its intended purpose.

          That's right ...
        2. Bashkirkhan
          Bashkirkhan 23 August 2020 12: 41 New
          +7
          Quote: rudolff
          Instead, they castrated one combat-ready BRDM

          Pests, in a word. To convert a fresh missile carrier into a truck in the presence of 941 is a crime. In addition, at the Pacific Fleet, how many loaves have been waiting for repairs for decades (the same "Irkutsk" has been slow-moving since the 90s), it would be better if they made cabbies for the GUGI once they really needed it, or they redesigned the BDR for these purposes.
        3. rudolff
          rudolff 23 August 2020 13: 16 New
          +5
          Sorry, the devil has beguiled! BRDM, not BRDM.
        4. rudolff
          rudolff 23 August 2020 15: 21 New
          +6
          Another option is a floating nuclear power plant. Floating nuclear power plants. In addition to electricity and heat, there is also water desalination. And self-propelled, in contrast to Lomonosov.
      2. Vasyan1971
        Vasyan1971 23 August 2020 12: 35 New
        +1
        Quote: Cyril G ...
        Or there was nothing to saw?

        Send somewhere in Komi, on a "creative business trip", saw the forest, for enlightenment in the brain ...
      3. codetalker
        codetalker 23 August 2020 13: 25 New
        0
        I apologize, I didn’t follow this subject very much, wasn’t there a conversation about selling these boats to India?
  5. svp67
    svp67 23 August 2020 11: 57 New
    +6
    What's the point? What is the point of having such expensive tankers to operate? Given that we have an ever expanding fleet of icebreakers and warming in the North.
    Maybe it's better to rebuild them for carriers of "Caliber"?
    1. Lionnvrsk
      Lionnvrsk 23 August 2020 12: 16 New
      +4
      Sell ​​it to Iran, let it bring fuel to Venezuela! laughing
    2. bayard
      bayard 23 August 2020 12: 58 New
      11
      Better to recycle and build TWO NEW Boreas based media.
      For the same money.
      They estimated the modernization of old (very) submarines into tankers at the cost of building TWO (if not three) "Boreas" !!! Yes, they just have an itch there for dumb projects for the development of the budget.
      Straight SUFFER! yes
      They laid a super-icebreaker on B.Kamen, which this shipyard is completely incapable of building. But the money was allocated. bully
      We laid two UDCs in Zaliv, choosing a company that had never built anything but corvettes as a contractor. yes Without a project, even a sketch! yes But 100 billion rubles. isolated as from a bush. bully
      Now they are aiming at converting the submarine missile carrier into a tanker. belay At the cost of modernizing one as the construction of TWO UDC or two or three "Boreys". bully
      TANKER, Karl !!!
      As two or three "Boreas" !!!
      From an OLD submarine !!!
      Which residual resource will allow you to work for 15 years ... well, 20, if you are VERY lucky ...
      This is what I understand - SIZE !!! fellow
      This is HUTSPA !!! wink
      As in "the last days", when you know that you will not have to answer. No.
      But in the USC there are still many such "wonderful" projects - I drank, I don’t want to, one saga with the desire to build 6 (!!!) nuclear destroyers "Leader" what are they worth ... The USSR, which "did not count money", managed to quietly manage four to build such, and even then - I was disappointed ...
      AND AIR CARRIERS. yes
      A lot of fellow aircraft carriers. yes
      But even corvettes are still normal to build ... does not work. request
      But is this a reason to be discouraged? smile
      No, "WE WILL (they will) DANCE"! yes
      There is still so much unused MONEY in the budget. bully
      1. Alien ...
        Alien ... 24 August 2020 11: 47 New
        -1
        You young people, first ask how much in reality Ash and Borei are standing ... Keep in mind that construction at a state shipyard does not imply profit. That is, in fact, you can build for a bowl of rice ...
        1. bayard
          bayard 24 August 2020 13: 07 New
          +2
          Quote: Alien ...
          You youth

          I received my officer's shoulder straps in the 80s.
          Together with a VERY good Soviet education.
          Quote: Alien ...
          first ask how much Ash and Boreas actually cost ..

          And you, who "doesn't care", know these numbers?
          The cost of the "Borea" is commensurate with the cost of the frigate "Gorshkov".
          But for "Ash" it is almost 2 (!) Times higher.
          Surprised?
          Then ask YOURSELF.
          This will certainly develop you. yes
          Quote: Alien ...
          In this case, keep in mind that construction at a state shipyard does not imply profit.

          Yes, even for the cost! Are the prices announced by the state corporation?
          Named.
          Quote: Alien ...
          That is, in fact, you can build for a bowl of rice ...

          What do you yourself know about production, "young man"?
          Even the Chinese don't work for a bowl of rice now.
          Especially in shipyards where nuclear missile carriers are being built.
          Have you ever heard of such a science - political economy?
          I highly recommend refreshing if forgotten ...
          But I don't think it was known. request
          Quote: Alien ...
          for a bowl of rice ...

          And what disrespect for the work of highly qualified specialists ... No.
          Very bad, comrade sergeant.
          But the fact that you are an Alien clarifies the situation somewhat.
          Maybe you are better off with your "friends"?
          1. Alien ...
            Alien ... 24 August 2020 21: 41 New
            -3
            Officer's shoulder straps, even Soviet ones, mean little. Such nonsense learned with me that mom, do not grieve. Probably, they are sitting on forums now. Experts. Therefore, I say, take an interest. So as not to be indignant later: how is it, they said, what for 20 kopecks ?!
            As for me: I take the western analogue, and divide by 2. And this is at best.

            For the work of highly qualified specialists: disrespect is how much they are paid by people like you ...
            ... By the way, it was not these "specialists" who drowned so terribly necessary dock?
            Essentially: the subject is the result of the "mental" activity of another specialist. He generally has some kind of benefit.
            1. bayard
              bayard 24 August 2020 23: 52 New
              0
              Quote: Alien ...
              Officer's shoulder straps, even Soviet ones, still mean little.

              Perhaps for you.
              For people who think and know, this is primarily the degree of education, competence and the ability to think analytically.
              Quote: Alien ...
              Such nonsense learned with me that mom, do not grieve.

              I sympathize with your mother, she must have sipped ...
              As for me, in my course I was the best in a number of disciplines, a member of the Military Scientific Society since my cadet years. Including on political economy. Olympiads, work for the competition ... a member of the scientific council of his university in the last year of study.
              And the champion of the school in freestyle wrestling in the light heavyweight division.
              And I did push-ups on one fist in the support lying 50 times ... smile
              Quote: Alien ...
              Therefore, I say, take an interest.

              bully Are you talking to me ?
              Speak?
              You say, for example, stupid and incoherent. No.
              Your mom is really sorry. request
              Quote: Alien ...
              So as not to be indignant later: how is it, they said, what for 20 kopecks ?!

              Are you raving
              And your delirium is VERY symptomatic.
              Quote: Alien ...
              As for me: I take the western analogue, and divide by 2. And this is at best.

              Sit down - TWO!
              And that's too MUCH for you. yes
              Would look through Wikipedia at your leisure ... lol ... even there, if memory serves, the price of "Gorshkov" was quoted at the time of delivery - 27 billion rubles.
              Now, of course, inflation is more expensive. Today it is about 35 billion rubles.
              At that time, the price of Borey was about 28 billion rubles. Today, yes, in the modernized version of Borey-A, it is about 40 - 42 billion rubles.
              Ash, respectively, is about TWO times EXPENSIVE than "Northwind". And this is not a paradox, but the result of a greater coefficient of novelty and complexity of the design, a more powerful SAC.
              And no division and division of prices of American samples IN PRINCIPLE, do not matter. We have our own calculation, pricing procedure and pricing laws.
              Modernization and overhaul of one "Shark" in the carrier of the CD, cost MORE than the construction of the NEW "Borea".
              Reconstruction of "Akula" into an indistinct submarine tanker has already been assessed as TWO "Boreya". And this is not surprising, because he would have to cut out the missile silos and most of the living and office premises, replacing them with tanks ... This is the creation of a NEW vessel in the hull of an old rocket ship.
              For what it is absolutely incomprehensible.
              Rather, it is clear just EVERYTHING, but greed and assertive ostentatious STUFF ... impressive.

              It is, of course, difficult for you, but this is your problem. request
              Go divide something up ... on a calculator ... or multiply.
              In one word, have fun.
              And don't upset MOM.
              Mom needs to TAKE CARE.
              .
              Quote: Alien ...
              By the way, it was not these "specialists" who drowned the necessary dock so terribly?

              This was done by "specialists" from Rosneft.
              You didn't even know THIS ... negative How is everything with you - ignorant ... SAD.
              Do not worry ... love bully
              1. Alien ...
                Alien ... 28 August 2020 22: 32 New
                -1
                Judging by the number of letters, there was little sense from you both then and now. By the way, aren't your classmates now offering a two-link tank? laughing Rzhaka ...
                My military education is better than yours, do not reflect ...
                1. bayard
                  bayard 29 August 2020 00: 40 New
                  0
                  Quote: Alien ...
                  I have a better military education than yours

                  I made fun.
                  And the two-link tank was the first to be offered by your compatriots, even at the end of the Union. And my specialization is air defense.
                  And combat command and control of troops.
  6. Alexander X
    Alexander X 23 August 2020 11: 59 New
    +3
    And I like the idea of ​​re-equipping with new weapons.
    And to cut on pins and needles, when there are new nuclear submarines in abundance.
  7. Prisoner
    Prisoner 23 August 2020 12: 00 New
    +3
    The project is by itself expensive, but how long will it take to operate? Not a sailor, but it seems to me that going on the water and going underwater are two big differences. what
  8. Thrifty
    Thrifty 23 August 2020 12: 02 New
    +5
    To convert them into floating spaceports, from them, in any point of the ocean, inexpensive (relatively, of course) satellites can be launched into orbit! To create a light rocket specially for them, place equipment for launching and controlling the rocket, and begin massively inexpensively launching commercial nanosatellites into orbit.
    1. Gust
      Gust 23 August 2020 12: 35 New
      +3
      They will pull the middle rocket too. According to the weight of his BC, taking into account glasses for 2000 tons, it was.
  9. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 23 August 2020 12: 08 New
    20
    It will be really a shame if at least one of these giant submarines does not become a museum. Submarines of such incredible size, most likely, will never be built. Monument to Engineering.
    1. Marconi41
      Marconi41 23 August 2020 12: 20 New
      -4
      Quote: voyaka uh
      It will be really a shame if at least one of these giant submarines does not become a museum.

      "In order not to become such a museum.
      At the right time, you better go to the bottom. "
      I don't like Makarevich, but here he is right.
    2. garri-lin
      garri-lin 23 August 2020 13: 20 New
      +4
      It would be on a pedestal. So that from the side it can be seen how gigantic. A cutaway replica of the reactor to replace the present. Only who will invest in it. Sadness.
  10. Tests
    Tests 23 August 2020 12: 24 New
    0
    voyaka uh (Alexey), dear, they flicker, they flicker strongly. Therefore, your idea to make a monument out of "Sharks" is not the most sensible one. Take something off them and withstand, withstand, withstand until it becomes safe. And only then - this is something you can go to the museum. Dear Bashkirkhan, 202% right. These two ships have been asking for recycling for a long time Both ships
    1. mark1
      mark1 23 August 2020 12: 36 New
      +4
      How strong is the radiation? Is there an excess of the PDN? For some reason I think (perhaps not correctly) that no.
      I would suggest using them as naval combat semi-stationary submersible platforms (or a submersible part of a stationary combat platform) and to guard the NSR (at the entrance and exit)
    2. Cyril G ...
      Cyril G ... 23 August 2020 12: 37 New
      +5
      Quote: Tests
      they glow, they glow strongly.


      Present the measurement results.
    3. Bashkirkhan
      Bashkirkhan 23 August 2020 12: 45 New
      +1
      Quote: Tests
      they glow, they glow strongly.

      Dear Testov, and I'm talking about the same. Rakhmanov balobol, sometimes carries such a blizzard.
    4. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 23 August 2020 13: 43 New
      +2
      To be honest, I didn't think about radiation. sad
  11. Vasyan1971
    Vasyan1971 23 August 2020 12: 26 New
    0
    such a project would be expensive and cost up to 90 billion rubles.

    The idea of ​​such a tanker has not completely died out and we are happy to build it.

    Well it is clear! laughing
  12. iouris
    iouris 23 August 2020 12: 27 New
    0
    But I would leave a couple of launchers.
  13. Lumpen
    Lumpen 23 August 2020 12: 28 New
    -4
    Why transport smuggled oil?
  14. sleeve
    sleeve 23 August 2020 12: 29 New
    +1
    90 ?! rubles ?! "Are we Americans?"
  15. Tests
    Tests 23 August 2020 12: 31 New
    +2
    Yes, this topic, after the rework of "Sharks" in the minds of Rakhmanov (and he is not a shipbuilder at all), about once a year, someone drives in. And he seems to forget what he is broadcasting from someone else's voice. And the old song starts over and over again ... Sad and funny ...
    On "V.o." I already wrote a couple of times that both boats are not at Zvezdochka, but in the port of the Belomorskaya naval base. "Zvezdochka" WOULD deal with "Kirov", yes with "Losharik" ... Although the disposal of "Sharks" long ago both "Zvezdochka" (mainly) and SEVMASH worked, thanks to Uncle Sam ...
  16. Charik
    Charik 23 August 2020 12: 37 New
    -5
    I imagine, such a Shark rises from the depths of the sea somewhere in the Washington area-Biden-Clinton would shake with hysteria-Bush senior and McCain would turn over in a coffin
  17. kig
    kig 23 August 2020 12: 40 New
    0
    at a critical stage.
  18. viktor_ui
    viktor_ui 23 August 2020 12: 41 New
    +1
    Rakhmanov = Rogozin ... Chubais is their daddy.
  19. evgen1221
    evgen1221 23 August 2020 12: 42 New
    +3
    An article on this topic was already recently. I repeat the conclusion of the community-USC wants to cut, and what for a goat accordion. Nobody will accept an underwater tanker even in case of an accident the slightest kirdy to the whole kitten. In short, the dead and dangerous idea of ​​such tankers.
  20. Tests
    Tests 23 August 2020 12: 45 New
    +2
    Kirill G ... (Kirill), dear, I have not been to the headquarters of the White Sea naval base since the summer of 2003. I haven’t been to Severstal since the winter of 1998 or 1999, alas, I don’t remember more precisely. And I don’t serve as a dock in the Northern Fleet. I haven't sat with the commander of Severstal and Arkhangelsk over a cup of tea since last fall. Alas, I can’t help you today.
  21. Alexey Sommer
    Alexey Sommer 23 August 2020 12: 48 New
    0
    Better to convert them into interplanetary tankers. It will be a little more expensive, but that's okay.
    1. da Vinci
      da Vinci 23 August 2020 13: 15 New
      0
      Inspired by a good movie
  22. Griffit
    Griffit 23 August 2020 12: 58 New
    -1
    If it is for military purposes, then the price does not matter. If there is a port equipped for receiving oil and gas, then during an embargo or blockade, it is a great idea. And the consumer's price will be appropriate. For example, an embargo against Iran or if imposed against China. There it is an underwater tanker.
    1. VyacheSeymour
      VyacheSeymour 23 August 2020 14: 33 New
      +2
      For example, an embargo against Iran or if imposed against China. There it is an underwater tanker.

      Captain Nemo, to the rebellious sepoys alone, a hundred
      gold-guns from the bottom of the sea ferried !!!
      But seriously; - Cut off all unnecessary, seal and tow it to the Arctic military bases - let them provide electricity ... - everything is better than throwing thousands of tons of solarium into navigation.
    2. Pilat2009
      Pilat2009 24 August 2020 07: 58 New
      +1
      Quote: Griffit
      If it is for military purposes, then the price does not matter. If there is a port equipped for receiving oil and gas, then during an embargo or blockade, it is a great idea. And the consumer's price will be appropriate. For example, an embargo against Iran or if imposed against China. There it is an underwater tanker.

      If the embargo is through the UN, then sanctions will be imposed on you. And if this is an initiative of the United States, then this is a war. There will be support ships and all means, up to ramming
  23. mark2
    mark2 23 August 2020 13: 08 New
    +1
    Crazy ideas are the harbingers of the technological leap of civilization.
    Once upon a time the ideas of space flight looked like wildness ... Well, fantasies, so sure.
    Perhaps, converting nuclear submarines into underwater tankers does not make much sense, but today's flights into space and the ISS itself make less sense, in my opinion, but this is necessary for the development of science and technology. So even if these new devices, if a decision is made to develop them, will not come in handy in the future, the experience in the construction of heavily loaded underwater transporters may come in handy in the future.
  24. da Vinci
    da Vinci 23 August 2020 13: 12 New
    0
    Better not gas, but moonshine (for example, in the UAE)! lol
  25. K298rtm
    K298rtm 23 August 2020 13: 28 New
    0
    In my humble opinion, it is quite possible to make an excellent museum from one such unit (a branch of the Central Naval). Overtake in St. Petersburg (this is only possible for the 208th), tackle with all sorts of multimedia gadgets, etc. This also, of course, costs money, but you don't have to save on patriotism.
  26. surfdude
    surfdude 23 August 2020 13: 32 New
    -1
    90 yards, somewhere in Italy and the Netherlands, the owners of shipyards building super yachts, seeing this news, froze in anticipation, in anticipation of orders from Russia.
  27. Radomir
    Radomir 23 August 2020 13: 57 New
    +4
    A project for a cruise missile carrier, in my opinion, would be more rational than making a tanker out of warships ... this is some kind of bestiality ...
  28. 16112014nk
    16112014nk 23 August 2020 14: 44 New
    +1
    and we are gladly ready

    Russian "businessmen": ... to cut 90 rubles? Always ready !
  29. Constanty
    Constanty 23 August 2020 14: 49 New
    +5
    Someone is out of his mind. Who needs an underwater tanker with such a small transport capacity and huge, unnoticeable operating costs, and even for such a lot of money?
    I understand if you wanted to reactivate the Shark and replace the old missiles with a whole battery of Calibers, sort of like converting an American Ohio-class ship into a Tomahawk launcher base.

    Oh yes, such a Typhoon would be a serious argument in favor of strength - and those truly unique ships for which I have great fondness would be saved.
  30. VyacheSeymour
    VyacheSeymour 23 August 2020 14: 53 New
    +1
    Nuclear destroyer, NUCLEAR tanker (UNDERWATER !!) ... - what to drive in nails with a microscope ...
    ... But, and if all the rest, going for disposal of the submarine, are gutted, coupled with each other, and attached to the head nuclear power plant ... - Oh, what a good such a liqueur! ... And a storm is not a hindrance to such towing ... - the main routes and deep echelons (just in case) should be clearly prescribed.
  31. Tests
    Tests 23 August 2020 15: 46 New
    +3
    mark1, dear, but here is the most interesting. According to the map, from the pier "Sharks" to the place where opposite Nyonoksa, a year ago, in August 2019, something kicked in the White Sea and people died, about 30 km. Automation, after the explosion last year, at Zvezdochka and SEVMASH showed 16 times more radioactivity for one element, 9 times for another, and twice for grains. From Channel 2 or from RTR, one of the scientists said in August or September 1, they say it's okay, the half-life is only 2019 days, the elements are short-lived ... It would be in the settlement of Sopka testers, or it could be a little further from the seashore - in Nyonoksa, let him count the element that showed 148 times excess in Severodvinsk on his own body, and after the radiation hazard has passed, there will be nothing in trees, in water and soil, in mushrooms, berries, or in a salmon and flounder - that's when we'll talk ... True, a medical student girl who came home to Nyonoksa last year, on vacation, and tried with the military doctors of the Polygon to save the scientists of Rosatom who were injured in the explosion, was recently awarded the medal "For saving the dead ". And the awarding of the scientists of Rosatom is posthumous, everyone knows, but not many of the awarding of doctors and helicopter pilots are ... Experts from the "Arctic" say that they cannot give a guarantee for the cable. Only due to the fact that they did not give a guarantee on the insulation of cables from the "Sharks" the question arose about 16% replacement of all cables, in case of modernization or redevelopment of ships. That is, apart from radiation, there is another problem - replacement of all electrical and electronics ... About the monuments. The cabin of the nuclear submarine "Kazan", modernized according to the "Axon-100" project, stands as a monument in Kazan. Regarding the installation of the Zolotoy Rybka cabin, the nuclear submarine pr.2 Anchar, as a monument in Severodvinsk, there have been talks for many years 661-5, but things are still there. Although, what is surprising, both the GMO and the chairman of the Council of Deputies of Severodvinsk did not serve in the army for a single day, typical EdRossa balobols ...
    1. Dikson
      Dikson 23 August 2020 20: 00 New
      -1
      According to your logic, both on Kuznetsov and on Nakhimov all the cables must be ripped off to the devil ... But they are not going to be written off yet ... Much has been said about the fact that these boats are noisy and it makes no sense .. That is, noisy and luminous, like New Year's trees, the Tu-95 needs to be modernized, but these nuclear-powered ships, in which there are much more missiles, should not be upgraded .. But with the same Calibers .. - Some MRK will not get to Venezuela, to example .. And the Shark - easily ..
      1. K298rtm
        K298rtm 23 August 2020 22: 46 New
        0
        941 project - one of the pinnacles of the USSR submarine building. Excellent controllable, low noise, ice breaks multi-meter, etc. But this is all in the past. Now - only to the museum (in my opinion).
  32. Dikson
    Dikson 23 August 2020 15: 49 New
    +2
    Is it not destiny to upgrade? Well, put a couple of S-500 complexes on it, and a battery of calibers. - get a mobile battery of air defense and fire support in the Arctic .. We sailed in the required square, knocked the satellite out of orbit and dived back ...
  33. exo
    exo 23 August 2020 15: 57 New
    +2
    As a tanker, the idea is obscure. But as a platform for cruise missiles, a smart solution. But, one must take into account the condition of the boats and, unfortunately, the limited capabilities of the USC. This is what we observe in the example of repairs and upgrades of ships.
  34. Petrol cutter
    Petrol cutter 23 August 2020 16: 45 New
    +4
    In my provincial opinion ...
    Cutting such cases ... It's a crime.
    Cutting is always easy. I personally cut with my crooked handles.
    Making new cases is much more difficult and troublesome. Considering the moment that the professionals are leaving. Some on the hillock, some on the boarding house. With the subsequent exit to the hill.
    Drawings will draw you a powerful and beautiful designer. With a bunch of mistakes to do with.
    And who will implement it on hardware? Pope? ...
    I don't know, gentlemen. From what I see every day, more or less well-educated people quit their jobs. Nobody values ​​personnel. The professionalism of the new ones is highly questionable. More precisely, the new ones took the burner for the first time in their hands.
    This is some kind of end ...
  35. Dzafdet
    Dzafdet 23 August 2020 17: 20 New
    0
    Modify for universal CD media. The most realistic option. Everything else is a waste of time ...
  36. Alexey from Perm
    Alexey from Perm 23 August 2020 19: 49 New
    0
    Well, what is there, apparently the fleet is developing when ships are taken out for disposal? Fuck these underwater tankers if surface forces are still visible from the air ..
  37. 7,62h54
    7,62h54 23 August 2020 21: 11 New
    +1
    It seems to me that the cost of owning an underwater tanker will be several times higher than the cost of an ordinary, surface one.
  38. Gunther
    Gunther 23 August 2020 21: 43 New
    +2
    Yes, the lip is not stupid, with this money you can buy 6 new Aframax tankers of ice class ICE-1A.
    I like more the idea of ​​Lean, about a floating spaceport and nanosatellites - to immerse Chubais, Sahipzadovna and other camarilla on them tightly and ... send them to brothers in mind, to Mars.
  39. Pavel57
    Pavel57 24 August 2020 00: 22 New
    0
    Is it not realistic to convert it into a power plant?
  40. pyc.arpeccop tornado 150
    pyc.arpeccop tornado 150 24 August 2020 02: 15 New
    -1
    You can convert old boats into tankers, or you can build new ones. And it is not necessary to declare that this is a tanker. Just to hint that there are options, and in what capacity in the depths something is moving there, this is already a riddle of ingenuity for the opposite side. And the more of these boats, the better. And for especially discerning experts from the US Navy, to complicate the task with the addition of staged special effects, well, there is turning off the simulators of combat modules, patrolling boats with their auxiliary vessels to go on "combat duty", etc.
  41. lelik613
    lelik613 24 August 2020 06: 24 New
    0
    The main reason for the destruction of boats is the inability to maintain them in working order (there is nowhere to get spare parts and consumables).
  42. cosmospetrovich
    cosmospetrovich 24 August 2020 07: 49 New
    +1
    And with whom to complete the crew? Military or civilian specialists? Something I have not heard about civilian specialists capable of operating such boats, besides how to control it at depth, when instead of rigidly fixed silos and missiles, liquid will be poured. Plus, this liquid is flammable, and fires on submarines, alas, are not uncommon ...
  43. seregin-s1
    seregin-s1 24 August 2020 08: 58 New
    0
    Use as floating nuclear power plants. And nothing needs to be redone.
  44. Rzzz
    Rzzz 24 August 2020 09: 07 New
    0
    Convert at least one of them into a museum, and put it next to K-3, which also needs to be completed.
    To operate as intended is already dumb, it hurts old. And the equipment is outdated and worn out, and a significant part of the factories that produced it no longer exist.
    Moreover, these boats will be extremely expensive to operate. Just unthinkable, damn expensive. No commercial use is possible.
    It is better to remake it into a museum "Severstal", it is widely known in narrow circles for the stories of Eduard Ovechkin. (Who has not read it yet - I highly recommend)
  45. The comment was deleted.
  46. xomaNN
    xomaNN 24 August 2020 16: 54 New
    0
    While there is not enough sense to make something sensible from the nuclear submarine 941 of the project, let them stay on the mothballing. The question here is not a civilian conversion, but a possible conversion into a large autonomous missile platform "in ambush." Perhaps sedentary, but toothy
  47. Anton Sverlov
    Anton Sverlov 24 August 2020 18: 24 New
    0
    In fact, the project is not stupid. Any sanctions imposed on, for example, Iran or North Korea can be bypassed. Any blockade, whoever announced it. Indeed ... And why are such boats needed?
  48. Alexandr Zabolotsky
    Alexandr Zabolotsky 24 August 2020 20: 37 New
    0
    And why transport oil if it will be a more profitable project to transport people, it is necessary to convert submarines not into tankers, but into cruise underwater liners. And to cruise along the Northern Sea Route with an ascent at the North Pole, even with the high cost of tickets, there will be no end to those who wish. Remember how Russian icebreakers did something similar. But most importantly, it will raise the global prestige of Russia and popularize the Northern Sea Route, attract investors and increase cargo turnover along our northern transport artery.
  49. nnz226
    nnz226 24 August 2020 21: 08 New
    0
    Nonsense !!! How much will the oil transportation cost in order to "recoup" the cost of rework ???
  50. IC
    IC 24 August 2020 23: 34 New
    0
    Only people who have no understanding either in economics or in matters of merchant shipping can talk about this idea. It was all good to publish earlier in the Journal of Technology of Youth.