Military Review

The Chinese edition has put the Russian Federation in second place in terms of strategic submarine fleet

31

The submarine fleet plays a very important role in ensuring dominance of the oceans. But which country has the most advanced and efficient submarines?


As you know, the most powerful submarines of our time are strategic nuclear submarines. If conventional submarines are in service in many countries of the world, the nuclear submarine fleet is the privilege of the powers.

Currently, nuclear submarines are in service with the United States, Russia, Great Britain, France, China and India. Perhaps - from the DPRK. At the same time, Indian nuclear submarines are leased from Russia, and the country itself cannot yet produce its own strategic submarines. In addition, over the creation of an atomic underwater fleet Pakistan, Iran and Brazil operate.

The Chinese edition of Phoenix tried to answer the question of whose nuclear submarines are the most advanced. There is no doubt, the Chinese newspaper writes, that the most powerful strategic submarines are currently in service with the fleets of two countries - the United States and Russia. The US Navy includes the Ohio-class third-generation nuclear submarines capable of carrying 24 Trident II D5 nuclear missiles.

The range of such a missile is up to 11 thousand kilometers, which in fact makes it possible to strike anywhere in the world. However, then the load should be reduced, and the maximum range with full load is 7,8 thousand kilometers. Such a missile can carry up to 12 nuclear warheads. The total number of US Navy Ohio nuclear submarines is 18 submarines.

Russia, unlike the United States, has already put into service four fourth-generation Borei nuclear submarines. They can be armed with 4 solid-propellant intercontinental nuclear ballistic missiles "Bulava" with a range of up to 16 thousand kilometers. Moreover, each such missile carries 8 nuclear warheads.


Missile launch from submarine "Ohio"


As for the indicators of the produced noise, according to the Chinese publication, it is approximately the same for both Russian and American submarines. Russian and American submarines can operate almost unnoticed by the enemy; it is extremely difficult to detect them in the oceans.

As we can see, the ratio of the number of nuclear submarines Ohio and Borei in the US and Russian navies is uneven: 18 versus 4, although the Borei are fourth-generation submarines, and Ohio is the third. In addition, in the United States, work continues on the newest submarine Columbia, which will significantly surpass the Ohio both in armament power and, most importantly, in noiselessness. The US military claims that the noise from Columbia will be almost at the level of the ocean itself.

The Chinese publication concludes that the United States currently possesses the most advanced strategic nuclear submarines, while Russia is in second place in terms of the strategic submarine fleet.

To be honest, this conclusion is a bit strange. If we talk about quantitative superiority, then this is one thing, but we are talking about power, and the Borey is certainly a more modern submarine than the Ohio.

In addition, the Chinese have forgotten about such Russian types of submarines as "Ash" and "Dolphin". The first submarines of the Yasen type, K-561 Kazan and K-573 Novosibirsk, have already been launched, but have not yet been commissioned by the Russian Navy. But they, unlike the American Columbia, already exist, and the commissioning of the head Columbia is scheduled only for 2031. The service life of the Dolphin submarines has also been extended, and so far they are a reliable component of the Russian nuclear submarine fleet.
Author:
Photos used:
Twitter / Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation; USNavy
31 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Woodman
    Woodman 7 October 2020 15: 45
    17
    The Chinese edition "Phoenix" tried to answer the question, whose nuclear submarines are the most advanced.
    When I read the headline "The Chinese edition has put the Russian Federation in second place in terms of strategic submarine fleet" I thought that in second place after China. You can expect everything from the Chinese media.
    1. bessmertniy
      bessmertniy 7 October 2020 17: 08
      -5
      What else can you expect from the corrupt Chinese media? One can only draw conclusions - to whom they are selling themselves. negative
  2. Tsoy
    Tsoy 7 October 2020 15: 47
    13
    Ash SLBM? So the United States also has boats newer than Ohio. And SeaWolfe and Virginia. It makes no sense to argue who is better than Ash or Virginia, since most of the data are either assumptions or assumptions. Information of this level is sealed with seven seals, so the common man can only compare the quantity.
  3. Andrei from Chelyabinsk
    Andrei from Chelyabinsk 7 October 2020 15: 51
    10
    If we talk about quantitative superiority, then this is one thing, but we are talking about power, and Borey is certainly a more modern submarine than Ohio.

    It is also undoubted that the Tridents, which Ohio are armed with, are significantly superior to our "Bulava", and 3 of our Boreas out of 4 are not the fourth generation - they had to abandon many things at that time, limiting themselves to old technologies. So it's more like 3+
    1. Alien From
      Alien From 7 October 2020 16: 08
      0
      I agree with you, we also do not forget their complete superiority in torpedo weapons.
      1. Grits
        Grits 8 October 2020 01: 24
        0
        And also in the noise and acoustics capabilities.
  4. BIABIA
    BIABIA 7 October 2020 16: 13
    -1
    Discovered America. The latter, yes, with a huge lag, alas ...
  5. The comment was deleted.
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. Woland
    Woland 7 October 2020 16: 36
    +2
    Only military actions can show the true alignment. Everything else is from the realm of speculation
  8. Doccor18
    Doccor18 7 October 2020 16: 42
    +3
    Only 14 Ohio are carrying Tridents, and 4 have long since been remade for Tomahawks.
    1. Sergey39
      Sergey39 7 October 2020 17: 41
      -3
      And the Tridents have been in service for 30 years. Deprecated.
    2. Grits
      Grits 8 October 2020 01: 37
      +4
      Quote: Doccor18
      Only 14 Ohio are carrying Tridents, and 4 have long since been remade for Tomahawks.

      Now, if we converted our Sharks, which are in storage, into carriers of Caliber, there would be a worthy answer.
      1. Doccor18
        Doccor18 8 October 2020 09: 37
        -1
        Now, if we converted our Sharks, which are in storage, into carriers of Caliber, there would be a worthy answer.

        I completely agree. It is a pity that these epoch-making ships were so mediocrely lost. It was possible to arm them with Barges or with calibers .. After all, the Sharks are the same age as Ohio, and the latter are still serving ...
        1. Boris Chernikov
          Boris Chernikov 9 October 2020 16: 23
          0
          taking into account the cost of rework, they are not needed for nothing ..
  9. Doccor18
    Doccor18 7 October 2020 16: 42
    -2
    Only 14 Ohio are carrying Tridents, and 4 have long since been remade for Tomahawks.
  10. Old26
    Old26 7 October 2020 16: 51
    +9
    Analysis of the Chinese, it is such an analysis that you can cross out and forget. Avsiom is only the title and no more. There are a lot of digital bloopers. And here "Ash" is completely incomprehensible when it comes to strategists.
    For some reason, the ratio of 18: 4 is mentioned when it comes to "Tridents" and "Boreas". Either the Chinese, or the author, most likely are not aware that the first 4 boats of the Ohio were converted into cruise missile carriers a long time ago and do not belong to strategists. 24 "Trident" American "Ohio" was originally carried. For 10 years (EMNIP within the framework of the START-3 Treaty), 4 mines were deactivated on the boats. It is impossible to carry out missile launches from them and they are used for the unit of combat swimmers, which are on each boat.
    The article briefly mentions our "Dolphins" without mentioning how many of these boats. And besides all there is one more submarine 6BDR "Kalmar".
    And so, in terms of the number of ballistic missiles and their performance characteristics, our strategic submarine fleet is really the second. We have a maximum of 176 SLBMs against 280 American ones. Taking into account not deployed (when the boats are under repair or modernization) - even less. At the beginning of 2020, we had 160 missiles, the Americans had about 220
  11. Bez 310
    Bez 310 7 October 2020 16: 51
    -5
    The article opens the reader's eyes to the state of "strategic"
    submarine fleet "on a global scale". In short, we -
    deep, deep in second place. And what, without the opinion of the "Chinese
    editions "did anyone doubt it?
  12. Bez 310
    Bez 310 7 October 2020 16: 52
    -7
    The article opens the reader's eyes to the state of "strategic"
    submarine fleet "on a global scale". In short, we -
    deep, deep in second place. And what, without the opinion of the "Chinese
    editions "did anyone doubt it?
  13. Old26
    Old26 7 October 2020 16: 52
    +5
    Analysis of the Chinese, it is such an analysis that you can cross out and forget. Avsiom is only the title and no more. There are a lot of digital bloopers. And here "Ash" is completely incomprehensible when it comes to strategists.
    For some reason, the ratio of 18: 4 is mentioned when it comes to "Tridents" and "Boreas". Either the Chinese, or the author, most likely are not aware that the first 4 boats of the Ohio were converted into cruise missile carriers a long time ago and do not belong to strategists. 24 "Trident" American "Ohio" was originally carried. For 10 years (EMNIP within the framework of the START-3 Treaty), 4 mines were deactivated on the boats. It is impossible to carry out missile launches from them and they are used for the unit of combat swimmers, which are on each boat.
    The article briefly mentions our "Dolphins" without mentioning how many of these boats. And besides all there is one more submarine 6BDR "Kalmar".
    And so, in terms of the number of ballistic missiles and their performance characteristics, our strategic submarine fleet is really the second. We have a maximum of 176 SLBMs against 280 American ones. Taking into account not deployed (when the boats are under repair or modernization) - even less. At the beginning of 2020, we had 160 missiles, the Americans had about 220
  14. Old26
    Old26 7 October 2020 17: 14
    +8
    Damn, what's with the resource. Posts are duplicated
  15. The comment was deleted.
  16. Doccor18
    Doccor18 7 October 2020 17: 23
    +4
    And no need to repeat, repeat, twice, twice tongue laughing
  17. Zementbomber
    Zementbomber 7 October 2020 17: 45
    -5
    If we talk specifically about the strategic submarine fleet - i.e. about submarines armed with SLBMs or SLCMs of the submarine-coast class and take into account that the combat effectiveness of strategic submarine forces depends to a large extent on their real KO - in the first place - and by a huge margin - the United States. The second is France. On the third - the Russian Federation, periodically dividing it with Great Britain.
  18. savelii1805
    savelii1805 7 October 2020 17: 58
    -3
    And what's the difference between 16 or 3 submarines, if a full salvo of at least one can completely change the picture of the world
  19. savelii1805
    savelii1805 7 October 2020 17: 58
    -3
    And what's the difference between 16 or 3 submarines, if a full salvo of at least one can completely change the picture of the world
  20. Uncle Vanya Susanin
    Uncle Vanya Susanin 7 October 2020 18: 27
    +1
    Russia took the second place in the world in terms of shipbuilding, congratulations comrades, hurray, hurray, hurray good
  21. The comment was deleted.
  22. The comment was deleted.
  23. The comment was deleted.
  24. _Ugene_
    _Ugene_ 7 October 2020 19: 05
    -1
    in terms of strategic submarine, it is naturally second, but the rest of the fleet and surface and submarine non-strategic alas
  25. mark2
    mark2 7 October 2020 19: 08
    +1
    To be honest, this conclusion is a little strange.

    What they read on the VO website is what they write about.
  26. The comment was deleted.
  27. silver_roman
    silver_roman 7 October 2020 23: 26
    +2
    Sharks have already dragged the BV, what if Ash trees were thrust into the strategists. Ash is MAPL, Borey-ARPKSN. Dolphin is generally an upgrade of the 667BDR Kalmar. in general, everything is in a heap, both people and horses)
  28. Vdi73
    Vdi73 8 October 2020 07: 41
    0
    The Zircon was successfully launched, now the surface fleet needs to be equipped with it so that the American aircraft carriers feel like a big, big, expensive, expensive gurgling grave.
    1. Shahno
      Shahno 8 October 2020 15: 06
      -1
      What is Zircon? I understand that the aircraft carriers are functional and tested, but I don’t understand what I don’t see, I don’t analyze.
      For me, this is PR, political, some other, something like that ...
      Ps. Okay, let's say a miracle happened. Do you clearly believe that the entire fleet can be paralyzed by 10-15 super missiles?
      1. Boris Chernikov
        Boris Chernikov 9 October 2020 16: 27
        +1
        and what is the use of an aircraft carrier if it is out of order? and yes .. "what is Zircon" .. in 2020, set already comme il faut)
  29. Shahno
    Shahno 8 October 2020 14: 54
    0
    Well second. I think this is true. China is like a referee here.