Military Review

Versus. But is "Ash" worse than "Virginia" as they say?

101
Our respected and highly respected Kyle Mizokami from TNI once again pleased us with a very unoriginal, but peppy and patriotic reflection on the topic that Ash, if he suddenly had to fight with Virginia, would undoubtedly lose.



What Would Happen if Russia and America's Most Powerful Nuclear Submarines Went to War?

Giving a historical digression is simple: the new boat is not so new, since the 885 project has been in development for more than 20 years. It is difficult to argue with this, indeed, the work has been going on since 1977, but we all know what things are done very quickly.

In addition, the Yasen developers faced a difficult task: to create a multi-purpose universal submarine that would have to replace a number of domestic submarines.

It is impossible not to deny the fact that in the Soviet navy there were too many submarines of different projects, which greatly complicated the operation, repair and training of crews. And the presence of a universal missile-torpedo boat could greatly simplify the situation.

Yes, and the Russian submarine fleet would look better. Today's hodgepodge of the remnants of the Soviet Navy does not look weighty. However, we have already discussed this several times.

And so, albeit with a significant deadline, but project 885 was born. It took a long time to build, the Americans are well aware of what caused it, but in the end the boats went into operation. Yes, not 19, as was originally intended, but only 9. And there is something in these numbers that will lead us to certain conclusions.

There is data on Ash, although there is not as much of it as we would like in the part that interests us the most.

Versus. But is "Ash" worse than "Virginia" as they say?
Photo: SEVMASH JSC

The boat is larger than the Virginia in terms of displacement and size, and the crew is smaller than on American boats. This indicates a higher automation of processes, this is recognized by the Americans themselves.

There is an advantage in the reactor. The OK-650KPM reactor is capable of working out the entire life of the boat. This is beautiful because it reduces the need for costly boat repairs. For "Virginia" it was considered good luck to realize the opportunity to make three overhauls during the service life instead of four. Yes, the Russian boat will not do without such repairs, but still, work with the reactor is the most expensive and problematic.

Surface and submarine speeds of Russian and American boats have been compared so many times that it is somehow even inconvenient to return to the topic. It can be noted here that they are actually equal.

The main question is which of the boats is quieter and at what speed. Maximum silent speed is more important than just maximum speed, because the faster the boat can go without giving away, the more useful it is.

They say that in this regard, "Virginia" is cooler. That is, both quieter and faster when it is quiet. But if you look realistically, the data is absolutely classified, and this is fully justified. It is very difficult to judge anything without having normal data on hand, but at a quiet speed, thanks to its water cannons, the Virginia will clearly be faster. It’s hard to say how Ash has in this regard, with its low-noise quiet-running electric motor and innovative propeller. God forbid that it was not worse. Again, gossip-level general data suggests that the Virginia has a quiet speed of 25 knots, while the Ash has 20 knots.

The maximum diving depth is greater for Ash, there is still a difference of 100 meters - this is decent, although not critical.

Hydroacoustic weapons. This is very significant, but again it is not easy to judge. Little more than nothing is known about the Irtysh-Amphora, which stands on the Yasen. Yes, a large spherical antenna in the bow, so that there was no room for torpedo tubes, side antennas for receiving signals from the Ajax sonar, a towed antenna behind the boat. There is no data on the effectiveness of the GAS "Irtysh-Amphora" and, in principle, cannot be yet. As well as there are no reviews or comments on the use of the MRK-50 Albatross.

The "Virginia", like the "Ash", the main acoustic station with a spherical antenna, is also located in the bow. But starting with the boats of the Block III series, the BQQ-10 sonar complex was replaced with a horseshoe-shaped Large Aperture Bow sonar.

Additionally, wide-angle antenna arrays Light Weight Wide Aperture Array are installed on the port and starboard sides, consisting of two blocks of three acoustic sensors each. These wide-angle antenna arrays, which transmit data over fiber optic cable, are primarily designed to detect diesel-electric submarines. Behind the radar detection provides a towed passive antenna array TB-29(A). And finally, the high-frequency sonar installed in the bow of the bridge fairing allows the Virginia to detect and bypass sea mines.

It is generally accepted that American sonar systems are superior to all available in the world. On this I would like to put an end to the reasoning, since there is no way to really compare the sonar systems of boats.

But we can talk about weapons. We know about weapons, if not everything, then almost everything.

And from this angle, "Ash" looks like a complete killer cyborg. 10 torpedo tubes versus 4 for Virginia - this is significant. Many people in the know say that the American Mk.48 Advanced Capability (ADCAP) torpedoes are vastly superior to Russian Fizik-class torpedoes, but there are numbers here that are difficult to level. Even taking into account the possibility of loading the Harpoon anti-ship missiles into the torpedo tube.


Of course, the multiple attack system in case of losing a target on an American torpedo is significant. We have to admit that Russian torpedo designers are still in a state of catching up, but optimists are pinning their hopes on the Physicist-2 / Case. Pessimists believe that it will be very, very difficult to catch up with the Americans.

However, a submarine is not strong with a single torpedo. Especially if it is a multipurpose universal strike submarine.

12 Tomahawk cruise missiles (Block III and Block IV boats) or 24 missiles (Block V boats) look... they don't look very good. "Ax", no doubt, is a good rocket. But it's still really old. Yes, modern upgrades make rockets quite good weaponsbut here's what's good. Satisfying modern requirements, about the same as the Harpoon anti-ship missiles, which can be used to arm the Virginia. Even increasing the number of carried "Tomahawks" to 40 will not greatly improve the situation. "Tomahawk" is good to use on ground infrastructure, for this it is really good. But a ship or a submarine - sorry.

At "Ash" with missiles, everything is somewhat better. 32 "Onyx" or "Zircon" or 40 "Caliber". It can be attributed to patriotism, but the Russian submarine's missile kit allows you to do business against any enemy, no matter on the water or on the ground.

So who is stronger?

Mizokami, of course, gives the palm to Virginia. However, I would not be so categorical. It is very difficult to compare the capabilities of ships that have never demonstrated them. And, in fact, I would not really like such a demonstration to take place in the coming years.

Yes, the Americans are recognized leaders in terms of combating the noise that submarines make. It is a fact. But it cannot be denied that our designers also achieved success in this area and our boats began to catch up with the American ones in this parameter. Yes, the race will be long and difficult, but it is.

hydroacoustic equipment. It is also not easy, because there is no data. The fact that world experts say that Americans are the best in this industry spoils the picture a little, but nothing can be done about it. They are really good.

The torpedo armament of Russian boats is inferior to the American one, but work is underway and it is likely that we will see new models that will be no worse than American ones.

Our missiles are better. And it's hard to argue.

As a result, it turns out that Virginias are best suited to search for and destroy Russian submarines, especially SSBNs, in order to prevent the launch of ballistic missiles from the sides of submarine missile carriers. As an additional option, any Virginia can strike ground targets with cruise missiles and ships with torpedoes.

Actually, the perfect combination of low noise, good sonar equipment and excellent torpedoes. Better, probably, for a submarine hunter and not worth wishing for.

The "Ash" is assigned somewhat different functions. And, accordingly, a wider range of use of the boat with an emphasis on more advanced missile weapons.

And, of course, one of the important components is the number of boats that countries can produce.

3 "Ash" out of 9 planned are already ready. 19 out of 30 planned "Virginia" also plow the seas.

Of course, the boats of the first two Virginia families are simply incorrect to compare with the Ash, but there are only 10 of these boats. Two dozen Virginias of Block III and Block IV modifications are a lot.

So if we talk about who is better in confronting Russian and American attack submarines, then we should seriously take into account that there are three times more American boats. And this means that it will be easier for them to find and deal with Russian submarines.

That moment when quantity can take precedence over quality. Yes, American submarines have their strengths, but there are more. There will always be more of them, this is a given that cannot be brushed aside.

"Ash", in principle, a modern weapon, which is on par with the American "Virginia". This is undoubtedly the success of our shipbuilding, even though the Americans have advantages.

But the number will be very difficult to win back. Although it is worth striving to ensure that the total superiority in terms of the number of modern US submarines over Russia is not so critical. This is a worthy task. And then Kyle Mizokami will have nothing to cover next time.
Author:
101 comment
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, daily additional materials that do not get on the site: https://t.me/topwar_ru

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. KKND
    KKND 14 January 2022 05: 34
    +51
    Both boats are top secret. All characteristics of speed, noise, perhaps even weight and size characteristics are secret - "misinformation" on the Internet.
    But let's discuss which one is better. fool
    1. Aerodrome
      Aerodrome 14 January 2022 06: 35
      +6
      TNI
      always believes that everything American is better.
      1. lucul
        lucul 14 January 2022 14: 08
        +10
        always believes that everything American is better.

        "I asked Ash, where is my Virginia,
        Ash did not answer me, shaking his head .... "
        ))))
    2. Ingvar 72
      Ingvar 72 14 January 2022 08: 11
      +5
      Quote: KKND
      Both boats are top secret.

      I think that those who need it know all the characteristics. Especially "partners". For over the years of wild capitalism, our military-industrial complex is, in any case, saturated with "moles" working for the United States.
    3. tralflot1832
      tralflot1832 14 January 2022 09: 59
      -2
      It is extremely difficult to catch Ashes, the Severodvinsk Gadzhiyevo crossing, where to catch? Or Gadzhiyevo Velyuchinsk. Ours only in "all its glory" showed Prince Vladimir's SSBN. war "arranged in the North and Norwegian seas. The press service of the Federation Council wrote about everyone when returning to base. Except for Prince Vladimir, where he was when he dived in the North Sea.
      1. Kalmar
        Kalmar 14 January 2022 10: 18
        +7
        Quote: tralflot1832
        Or Gadzhiyevo Velyuchinsk

        Doesn't this route go through the Bering Strait? If I remember correctly, submarines pass this strait on the surface due to insufficient depth.
        1. tralflot1832
          tralflot1832 14 January 2022 11: 14
          0
          North of the NSR under ice. Yes, the Barenga Strait is too shallow for a nuclear submarine. Average depth is 30-60 meters.
      2. Submariner971
        Submariner971 15 January 2022 04: 09
        +2
        There are no ash trees in Gadzhiyevo, there are other ships there.
      3. SovAr238A
        SovAr238A 17 January 2022 22: 32
        +1
        Quote: tralflot1832
        It is extremely difficult to catch Ashes, the Severodvinsk Gadzhiyevo crossing, where to catch? Or Gadzhiyevo Velyuchinsk. Ours only in "all its glory" showed Prince Vladimir's SSBN. war "arranged in the North and Norwegian seas. The press service of the Federation Council wrote about everyone when returning to base. Except for Prince Vladimir, where he was when he dived in the North Sea.

        The meaning of the secrecy of the Severodvinsk-Gadzhiyevo crossings?
        Are you going to conduct military service on the same routes?
        Or maybe still go to Keats Up or Norfolk?
        To Subic Bay?
        Brest and Gibraltar?
  2. just exp
    just exp 14 January 2022 05: 44
    -1
    but doesn’t the sonar fire submarines?
    1. KKND
      KKND 14 January 2022 05: 55
      +8
      Quote: just explo
      but doesn’t the sonar fire submarines?

      If it works in passive mode, then no.
      1. Aleksandr65
        Aleksandr65 14 January 2022 12: 51
        0
        Reversible antenna? Let's go to the author...
      2. just exp
        just exp 16 January 2022 03: 53
        0
        I’m aware of the passive mode, and as far as I remember, the active mode fires it at the very least, so there were questions, otherwise you never know something new has appeared in technologies, but I don’t know
  3. The comment was deleted.
  4. just exp
    just exp 14 January 2022 05: 45
    +2
    where do the comments go?
    1. Aerodrome
      Aerodrome 14 January 2022 06: 36
      +11
      Quote: just EXPL
      where do the comments go?

      The "moderators" did not like it .. they determine it to their own taste ...)))
  5. Soldatov V.
    Soldatov V. 14 January 2022 05: 55
    .
    We must not forget about our asymmetric response. This is a developed air defense, these are stations beyond early warning, and missiles of the Strategic Missile Forces. And it's all relatively cheaper. On the example of the Crimean War, yes, they lost the fleet, but the country did not move a centimeter up or down or to the side.
    US nuclear submarines bear the names of states, so to warn that in the event of a Russian attack by a boat of the same name, these states will be destroyed in the first place. soldier
    1. Yuri V.A
      Yuri V.A 14 January 2022 06: 47
      +10
      Let's approach everything with the standards of the times of the Crimean War, and how long can you then sit in isolation next to the ultra-long-range detection station?
      1. Soldatov V.
        Soldatov V. 14 January 2022 08: 19
        -5
        Maybe you are sitting and others are working and serving. In the country of affairs up to the neck, not when to look across the border. At any historical time, Russia constantly faces the same problems. With Crimea as under Catherine II, With the Baltic States as under Peter the Great, With Ukraine as in 1656. With wild Kazakhstan as in the 18th century. We will clash with Turkey more than once. soldier
        1. Yuri V.A
          Yuri V.A 14 January 2022 08: 40
          +6
          Some others should be imprisoned for such work and service. It looks like you have a mess in your head, since you don’t see the difference between problems and methods / ways to solve them
          1. Soldatov V.
            Soldatov V. 14 January 2022 09: 15
            -1
            I reminded you of historical problems, if you studied in a Soviet school, you should remember the methods and ways to solve them. In modern times, they are repeated or come up with something else.
            Porridge is not the worst thing, the main thing is that the brains do not turn into fat or become calcified. hi
    2. Mucose
      Mucose 15 January 2022 02: 07
      -1
      Soldatov V. - You are wrong and a provocateur!, if at least one submarine tries to strike (the name of the state is not important), then the blow will be struck in all states, and not just one (do not dream), the name of which is carried by the submarine.
      So many comrades are trying to hammer into society a limited nuclear war with one state, with super low-yield warheads, a war on only one continent - this will not happen! There will be a complete war and the same will affect you! The article is also not very correct, because. Experts compare Ash-tree M with Sea Wolf.
      1. Soldatov V.
        Soldatov V. 15 January 2022 06: 13
        -3
        To some extent, yes, a provocateur, but rather a propagandist. Here you are excited and oppose nuclear war, imagining how it will be. It is the West that lulls its citizens into thinking that it is possible to defeat Russia by surrounding it with troops by a factor of five, or by crushing it with sanctions, assuming that we will kneel. Genetically, we remember how Western countries behave when they occupy our country.
        How good is the Premier League? If silo-based ballistic missiles arrive in America in 30 minutes, then missiles with nuclear submarines patrolling off the coast of the enemy in 5 minutes.
        This is how they save the world from war. soldier
        1. Serge-667
          Serge-667 16 January 2022 13: 02
          +1
          then missiles from nuclear submarines patrolling off the coast of the enemy in 5 minutes

          There is no such thing in nature for 30 years.
          No one has been defiling along the American coast with missiles since the second generation of SSBNs.
          That is why they invent SLBMs with a range of 10 thousand km, so that they can be fired from their own waters or close to them.
          And the faster the SSBN fires, the greater the guarantee that some of the missiles will fly.
          1. Soldatov V.
            Soldatov V. 16 January 2022 13: 51
            +1
            It may well be. But then the SSBN loses its meaning. Mines and mobile complexes are quite capable of delivering a nuclear strike. And the gun must be put to the temple. This is what the Americans do, and so do we. Maybe the Americans are doing better because of the larger number of nuclear submarines.
            SSBNs can be used both as a disarming first strike and as a retaliatory strike. In the first case, the minimum flight time is crucial. soldier
            1. Serge-667
              Serge-667 16 January 2022 13: 56
              +3
              Judging by the fact that the new Boreas can throw only 17 tons of heat and light at the enemy, against 67 tons in Ohio, apparently yes. Our strategy has changed and SSBNs are now needed only for the first strike.
          2. SovAr238A
            SovAr238A 17 January 2022 22: 39
            0
            Quote: Serge-667
            then missiles from nuclear submarines patrolling off the coast of the enemy in 5 minutes

            There is no such thing in nature for 30 years.
            No one has been defiling along the American coast with missiles since the second generation of SSBNs.
            That is why they invent SLBMs with a range of 10 thousand km, so that they can be fired from their own waters or close to them.
            And the faster the SSBN fires, the greater the guarantee that some of the missiles will fly.

            10 thousand is given only for the fact that it would be possible to answer at any point.
            That's all.
            Are you going home, or just left the base - your potential must be realized
            And for a real war, for a real first strike - boats should be on duty at a distance of up to 2500 kilometers from targets ...
            1. Serge-667
              Serge-667 17 January 2022 22: 55
              +3
              Yes, the only problem is that it is extremely problematic for our SSBNs to approach 1500-2000 miles to the shores of the adversary due to the lack of KPUGs and, in general, at least some formations that provide cover for the area at such a distance, but the YuesNavi with their Ohio graze in the Mediterranean Sea , so it grazes. Even the waters of the Atlantic are not available to us in terms of the BP areas of their SSBNs.
              Therefore, it remains to break the ice with humps (by the way, the question is how Boreas does it without a hump.
              1. SovAr238A
                SovAr238A 17 January 2022 23: 04
                0
                Quote: Serge-667
                Yes, the only problem is that it is extremely problematic for our SSBNs to approach 1500-2000 miles to the shores of the adversary due to the lack of KPUGs and, in general, at least some formations that provide cover for the area at such a distance, but the YuesNavi with their Ohio graze in the Mediterranean Sea , so it grazes. Even the waters of the Atlantic are not available to us in terms of the BP areas of their SSBNs.
                Therefore, it remains to break the ice with humps (by the way, the question is how Boreas does it without a hump.

                Torpedoes.
                We still haven't come up with anything else.
                Of course, there is an option, patrolling where the thickness of the ice is less than 1 meter, which can be broken when surfacing and the hatch covers of the mines to dump the ice ...
                But ...
                Patrolling in areas of thin ice greatly reduces the areas of combat service, the weather services work fine for the Americans. Boats under the ice go all the time.
                The map of ice fields in the Arctic is probably better known than we are.
                No one knows how the ice floe will fall, and where.
                and no one knows how the rocket will go out of the mine if there are a couple of tons of ice on top ...
                That's another problem with a bunch of unknowns.
                1. Serge-667
                  Serge-667 17 January 2022 23: 13
                  +2
                  Patrolling in areas of thin ice, greatly reduces the areas of combat service, among the Americans weather services work great.

                  I'm in the know. If I dig around and find it, I'll post their map of the ice conditions of the 89th model, which the headquarters safely issued to us on the database with the "purpose of actually checking the accuracy of the data")))
        2. SovAr238A
          SovAr238A 17 January 2022 22: 36
          0
          Quote: V.
          To some extent, yes, a provocateur, but rather a propagandist. Here you are excited and oppose nuclear war, imagining how it will be. It is the West that lulls its citizens into thinking that it is possible to defeat Russia by surrounding it with troops by a factor of five, or by crushing it with sanctions, assuming that we will kneel. Genetically, we remember how Western countries behave when they occupy our country.
          How good is the Premier League? If silo-based ballistic missiles arrive in America in 30 minutes, then missiles with nuclear submarines patrolling off the coast of the enemy in 5 minutes.
          This is how they save the world from war. soldier

          Our SLBMs will fly the same 30 minutes, because the places of combat service of our SSBNs are near our coasts.
          And enemy SSBNs are serving near foreign shores.
          Do you understand the difference?
          We have 30 minutes, and the enemies have 5-8 minutes....
          That's all you need to know how to eat now
          1. Serge-667
            Serge-667 17 January 2022 22: 45
            +3
            Well, not 5-8, this is the reaction time, but the same 15-20. But it's also stressful.
            1. SovAr238A
              SovAr238A 17 January 2022 22: 56
              0
              Quote: Serge-667
              Well, not 5-8, this is the reaction time, but the same 15-20. But it's also stressful.

              Exactly 5-8...
              If they are in the North Sea and if they are near the Aleutian or Japanese islands...
              1. Serge-667
                Serge-667 17 January 2022 22: 58
                +4
                Well, why would our rocket from the Barents Sea to the Kura fly for 24 minutes, and there are 5-8 of them in the opposite direction?)
                Again, the Trident, like any solid rocket, does not have a stage cutoff.
                Even according to the KTOF base, she will have to do a complete parabola with the development of a stage.
                1. SovAr238A
                  SovAr238A 17 January 2022 23: 11
                  -1
                  Quote: Serge-667
                  Well, why would our rocket from the Barents Sea to the Kura fly for 24 minutes, and there are 5-8 of them in the opposite direction?)
                  Again, the Trident, like any solid rocket, does not have a stage cutoff.
                  Even according to the KTOF base, she will have to do a complete parabola with the development of a stage.

                  You apparently do not know about flat trajectories.
                  And no high-altitude parabolas.
                  So.
                  Strikes from the Pacific completely, in 8-10 minutes, close all our nuclear missile bases and facilities all the way to Irkutsk.
                  Attacks from the North, Barents, Mediterranean Seas - close everything the same up to Novosibirsk, including the Middle Urals ..
                  Flat trajectories are not just invented and implemented.
                  Yes, it is very energetically irrational.
                  Reduced flight range by 3 times.
                  But in the military sense, it justifies itself a millionfold.
                  1. Serge-667
                    Serge-667 17 January 2022 23: 20
                    +3
                    Reduced flight range by 3 times.

                    I am aware of "flat" trajectories, but I am not aware of a threefold reduction in range.
                    I am not a rocket scientist, I only once studied the theory as part of "submarine missile weapons for nerds." I don't quite understand how breeding is done then. Especially IN.
                    Yes, and it’s not so “flat”, with an apogee of 400 km ...
                    1. SovAr238A
                      SovAr238A 17 January 2022 23: 41
                      +2
                      Quote: Serge-667
                      Reduced flight range by 3 times.

                      I am aware of "flat" trajectories, but I am not aware of a threefold reduction in range.
                      I am not a rocket scientist, I only once studied the theory as part of "submarine missile weapons for nerds." I don't quite understand how breeding is done then. Especially IN.
                      Yes, and it’s not so “flat”, with an apogee of 400 km ...

                      Yes, the bus still works.
                      Just according to the square law, the expansion of the MIRV goes in a much smaller cone.
                      And SLBMs with 3 MIRVs are used.
                      There is no more sense.
                      24 rockets on each Gadget, with 3 MIRVs, is enough for a sudden disarming strike on our bases.
                      That's how they figured it out.
                      They believe that the cycle time of "launch detection, launch confirmation, hit calculation, report to the commander-in-chief / minister of defense, decision-making, ordering a retaliatory strike, receiving an order at the headquarters of the strategic nuclear forces of the Russian Federation, transferring the order to the Strategic Missile Forces and the naval component, transferring to regiments of the Strategic Missile Forces and on the boats of the nuclear strike team, preparation for a retaliatory strike - takes about 15 minutes ...
                      What do they have enough with a margin to defeat our nuclear potential by 85-90%
                      And those missiles that are "outside the flat-firing zone" will clear nuclear weapons storage bases, strategic aviation airfields (which have zero significance and are absolutely useless in a retaliatory strike) and other headquarters and infrastructure facilities ...
                      1. Serge-667
                        Serge-667 18 January 2022 00: 18
                        +2
                        Zhpc .. I need to think ...
    3. UFO
      UFO 15 January 2022 12: 44
      -5
      “Let's create an equal threat” for the West, and this is exactly what it needs from us. For this, they withdrew from the treaties, in order to invite us (if not on a mutual basis of conspiracy of world militarists) to a new level of equal threats, drawing us into a devastating arms race, like the USSR, which we will lose economically. At the same time, the main “trick” of their negotiation show is to divert attention from conceptual thinking and push the old concept of frontal oncoming poison into our subconscious. hit. Whereas another concept of a lightning-fast “dagger” strike to the brain is possible and an equal build-up of “muscles” is not necessary. A few zircons are enough to hit the "brain" on the command post and S550 in terms of the number of satellites to paralyze the control system.
      1. Soldatov V.
        Soldatov V. 15 January 2022 14: 00
        -4
        Your view is interesting, but I want to note. In America, there is a system that, with the help of a supercomputer, monitors our military activity, its potential, evaluates it and offers countermeasures. Assesses from our power to our helplessness. As a rule, it works in a training mode, but in case of danger it is transferred to combat mode, which can independently launch missiles. One can speculate in which case they will start a war.
        All command posts are duplicated by spare ones, but in fact, neither we nor they know how many of them we and they have. soldier
  6. Sergey39
    Sergey39 14 January 2022 06: 09
    +3
    Ash-tree M, in size is shorter by 10m than Ash-tree and naturally surface displacement will be less. And the difference in the surface displacement of Virginia and the first Ash is only 800 tons.
  7. Andrey Moskvin
    Andrey Moskvin 14 January 2022 06: 37
    +5
    Maybe enough to call tomahawks axes already? The ax is "axe".
    1. SovAr238A
      SovAr238A 17 January 2022 22: 42
      +2
      Quote: Andrey Moskvin
      Maybe enough to call tomahawks axes already? The ax is "axe".

      Tomahawk is not an ax?
      Ohio is not Gadget?
      Virginia is not a virgin?
      Shark - not a water carrier?
      Do not try to deny phraseological units generally accepted by someone - even if you don’t like them ..
  8. Lair
    Lair 14 January 2022 06: 55
    +3
    The main disadvantage of Ash is that it is very expensive and difficult to manufacture nuclear submarines, therefore, in our conditions, it is possible to produce them only in small batches (now there are 3 pieces in the fleet, 5 more pieces are under construction, 9 boat - Ulyanovsk decided to rebuild into the Poseidon carrier). Therefore, by 2030 we will have no more than 5 nuclear submarines pr.855M and 1 Severodvinsk pr.855, which is actually an experimental ship and by that time will require medium repairs.
    1. Volder
      Volder 14 January 2022 08: 58
      +2
      Quote: Lair
      9 boat - Ulyanovsk decided to rebuild the Poseidons carrier).
      This is not true. The manufacturer's management denied this fake stuffing. And besides, "Ulyanovsk" is the 7th boat in a row.
    2. SovAr238A
      SovAr238A 17 January 2022 22: 43
      +1
      Quote: Lair
      The main disadvantage of Ash is that it is very expensive and difficult to manufacture nuclear submarines, therefore, in our conditions, it is possible to produce them only in small batches (now there are 3 pieces in the fleet, 5 more pieces are under construction, 9 boat - Ulyanovsk decided to rebuild into the Poseidon carrier). Therefore, by 2030 we will have no more than 5 nuclear submarines pr.855M and 1 Severodvinsk pr.855, which is actually an experimental ship and by that time will require medium repairs.

      About what carrier of Poseidons do you carry a "stream of consciousness"?
      Do you miss Novomoskovsk and Belgorod?
      Have you come up with some kind of Ulyanovsk now?
  9. Viktor Sergeev
    Viktor Sergeev 14 January 2022 08: 03
    +1
    Knowing nothing about the real capabilities of Ash, and probably Virginia, it is very easy to talk. The Americans just have something to write about, the main thing is: our weapons are the best. By the way, ours are not far behind.
  10. Doccor18
    Doccor18 14 January 2022 08: 51
    +8
    But is “Ash” so much worse than “Virginia”, as they say?

    This is secret information.
    So what is the article about?
    We can only speak with certainty about the quantity. A series of 9 885 units for two fleets is about nothing. And all this against the background of American efforts to modernize shipyards and their ability to commission three boats a year ...
  11. Kalmar
    Kalmar 14 January 2022 09: 11
    +6
    12 Tomahawk cruise missiles (Block III and Block IV boats) or 24 missiles (Block V boats) look... they don't look very good

    Here you can also recall that it is planned to place some Virginia Payload Modules on Block V, which, in addition to Tomahawks, will be able to contain promising MRBMs. So far, of course, all this is a pitchfork in the water, but potentially a part of the Virginias can turn into a kind of SSBN light. And, if such IRBMs appear, there are no guarantees that one day they will not receive nuclear warheads.
    1. agond
      agond 14 January 2022 10: 03
      +1
      As they say Virginia has
      displacement 7300t surface, 7925t underwater,
      625t difference means 8% buoyancy
      Virginia has 26 torpedoes and 12 missiles in silos, for a total of 38 weapons.
      We consider the indicator of military economic efficiency, divide 7925t by 38 units
      we get 208 tons of underwater displacement per unit (rocket or torpedo)
      Nuclear submarine Yasen surface displacement 8600t, underwater 13800t, difference 5200t !!!, buoyancy reserve 37%
      Ammunition 8 missiles and 30 torpedoes total 38 weapons.
      Thus, for one unit of weapons (13800t divided by 37 units), we get 363t of underwater displacement.
      We compare the indicators of Virginia 192t / unit and Ash 363 t / unit we see a multiple difference, 1.89 times.
      Naturally, a vicious thought arises that there is too much water in Yasen 5200t
      1. Rostovchanin
        Rostovchanin 14 January 2022 10: 10
        +4
        Where are the figures about Ash???
        The total ammunition load of "Ash" is 30 torpedoes / rocket-torpedoes or missiles used from torpedo tubes and 32 missiles in the TLU. Accordingly, it can be assumed that the Yasenya-M ammunition load will be 24 torpedoes or the same amount of other ammunition for torpedo tubes and 40 missiles. TOTAL 64 units from Ash M. Not 8 missiles, but the number of air launchers
      2. Kalmar
        Kalmar 14 January 2022 10: 15
        +2
        Quote: agond
        Yasen nuclear submarine surface displacement 8600t underwater 13800t difference 5200t !!!, buoyancy reserve 37%
        Ammunition 8 missiles and 30 torpedoes total 38 weapons

        And why does Ash have only 8 missiles, and not 40? Is it correct to stack torpedoes and rockets? And in general, the indicator is somehow strange, I don’t quite understand what exactly it proves or refutes.
        1. Beregovic_1
          Beregovic_1 17 January 2022 19: 06
          0
          I don’t know where the info about 40 missiles comes from. There are 32 pipes in 8 mines. And in these mines it is possible and onyxes and calibers and zircons. One opening shaft has 4 cells, not 5, not 6 and not 2. Both on project 885 and on improved 885m. 32 missiles and 10 torpedo tubes (of which, however, you can also shoot missiles). Sorry that I got in with the answer to your post, and I don’t have the goal of arguing, but this stuff about changing the composition of the weapons of the 885m project heats up to a boil !!!
      3. demiurg
        demiurg 15 January 2022 08: 36
        0
        The reserve of buoyancy is the life of submariners.
        And the weight of submarines is surface displacement.
        So 122 tons per weapon.
        In this regard, babies with a surface displacement of 157 tons and two torpedoes are still out of competition. And if you remember the submarine RI, with Dzhevetsky's torpedo tubes, then there are generally terrible numbers.
        1. SovAr238A
          SovAr238A 17 January 2022 22: 46
          0
          Quote: demiurg
          The reserve of buoyancy is the life of submariners.
          And the weight of submarines is surface displacement.
          So 122 tons per weapon.
          In this regard, babies with a surface displacement of 157 tons and two torpedoes are still out of competition. And if you remember the submarine RI, with Dzhevetsky's torpedo tubes, then there are generally terrible numbers.

          How did the buoyancy reserve help Kursk? Komsomol member?
          And many others...
          No way....
          1. demiurg
            demiurg 18 January 2022 18: 26
            0
            With all my dislike for the hydromajor, he often wrote about emergencies on our submarines. And periodically the reserve of buoyancy saved.
    2. Cympak
      Cympak 14 January 2022 11: 09
      +1
      Here you can also recall that Block V plans to host some Virginia Payload Module, which, in addition to the "tomahawks", will be able to contain promising MRBMs. So far, of course, all this is a pitchfork on the water,

      So far we also have the nuclear submarine "Perm" - first The Zirkons' regular carrier has not yet been launched.
  12. AML
    AML 14 January 2022 09: 47
    +2
    Quote: Andrey Moskvin
    Maybe enough to call tomahawks axes already? The ax is "axe".

    Thanks, Cap.
    An Indian tomahawk is an ax, whatever one may say.
    If you want to understand that you know English at the level of games, then
    Find 10 differences between liberty & freedom, corpse & cadaver.
    1. Andrey Moskvin
      Andrey Moskvin 15 January 2022 00: 56
      -4
      Lumberjack ax and tomahawk are two different things. Fighting and working. Ax. But an ax cannot be called a tomahawk. If I didn't make a mistake in writing.
  13. arkadiyssk
    arkadiyssk 14 January 2022 10: 02
    +13
    "There is an advantage in the reactor. The OK-650KPM reactor is capable of working out the entire life of the boat. It's beautiful, but the Americans have 3 repairs[i] [/ i] "
    Lies. Why, such a wretched lie? This American S9G is designed for 30 years of service, and Virginia has already been sailing for 20 years without reloading, proving this. We also tried to, but all the reports about the "eternal reactor" went only in 2017. Officially, "Severodvinsk" with the VM-11 reactor, i.e. with full reboots, they most likely switched to KTP-6 only on subsequent 885Ms, the same is most likely with the Boreys, the first three with 3rd generation reactors. In principle, this is obvious. the first boats of the series were laid back in near-Soviet times based on the presence of 3rd generation reactors. Moreover, KTP-6 is not designed for 30 years at all, it is just a block reactor together with a steam generator, 30 years are planned only for KTP-7, and this is apparently only starting from Ulyanovsk, which was laid down in 2017.
    1. agond
      agond 14 January 2022 10: 30
      -1
      Quote: Kalmar
      And why does Ash have only 8 missiles, and not 40? Is it correct to stack torpedoes and rockets? And in general, the indicator is somehow strange, I don’t quite understand what exactly it proves or refutes.

      If there are eight mines in the diagram in two rows, then there should be eight missiles, although the dimensions of the mines are unknown, and perhaps there are more missiles there, and the indicator allows you to tie the size of the ammunition load to the size of the submarine, and in general boats are built to roll it excess water in ballast tanks across the oceans back and forth., and then the extra size is money and time, smaller ships are faster and cheaper to build and operate
      1. Rostovchanin
        Rostovchanin 14 January 2022 11: 02
        +5
        What kind of nonsense about 8 mines and 8 missiles, a launch glass in the mine. There are a lot of photos on the Internet with the location of missiles in a glass. There is no publicly available photo of the Ash launcher, but there are a lot of photos with Axes in Ohio
        1. Alexey RA
          Alexey RA 14 January 2022 12: 25
          +4
          Quote: Rostovchanin
          Photo launcher Ash is not in the public domain

          There is something.

          Detail of the launcher SM-343 for anti-ship missiles P-800 "Onyx" PLA pr.885, Obukhov plant, 2013 (photo - Said Aminov, http://saidpvo.livejournal.com).
    2. Submariner971
      Submariner971 15 January 2022 04: 31
      0
      You are right about the reload intervals, I also noticed this in the article ... However, Boreas were laid down already in the late 90s, even the shells of our unfinished 971 Cougar and Lynx were used for the first orders. I am sure that in the first series of Boreev, as well as in the head Severodvinsk OK-650, I agree with you. I don't know about upgraded ones. I had the honor to control the KTP-6 installation from the console back in the mid-90s, which was in trial operation within the walls of one of the specialized research institutes of the Navy. Perhaps "something went wrong", although at that time we were highly praised for the installation ...
  14. malyvalv
    malyvalv 14 January 2022 10: 50
    +4
    It is not clear why it is not planned to compare something that does not plan to face one on one in battle. It's like eternal discussions about which is cooler than Abrams or Armata. In theory, it is necessary to compare how good Abrams is against Chrysanthemum or Ka-52. It is similar to compare how Armata against Javelin or Spike will pull or not. The number of F-35s must be compared with the number of missiles for the S-400 and not the number of Su-57s.
    In the near sea zone, driving Virginia is the task of aviation, frigates and corvettes and not Ash. His task, as part of a group of ships, is to advance far into the ocean and resist the AUG. And the task of Virginia is to protect the AUG. Various tasks.
    1. Serge-667
      Serge-667 16 January 2022 13: 21
      0
      AUGs protect Los Angeles. Virginia is Sea Wolf's budget option.
      1. malyvalv
        malyvalv 16 January 2022 18: 23
        0
        They all have the same tasks.
        "Initially, it was planned to replace the Los Angeles-class nuclear submarine with the Seawolf (it was planned to build a series of 30 submarines), but due to the too high cost and changing strategic priorities, the Virginia-class nuclear submarine was preferred"
        1. Serge-667
          Serge-667 16 January 2022 19: 47
          +1
          Virginias are based primarily in Groton and Pearl Harbor. And only a couple in Norfolk. But in San Diego, where aircraft carriers are a dime a dozen, just exactly LA. Already 5 pieces.
          1. malyvalv
            malyvalv 16 January 2022 21: 03
            0
            Well, probably the Americans believe that the old men will fit to accompany the AUG.
            1. Serge-667
              Serge-667 16 January 2022 21: 18
              0
              Yes, I think, taking into account the fact that they are approximately equal, both of them are being pulled up.
              Half a year ago, the KTOFs drove Virginia quite for themselves in the Indian Ocean.
  15. Cympak
    Cympak 14 January 2022 11: 07
    +6
    3 versus 19. That's the end of all comparisons
  16. Glory1974
    Glory1974 14 January 2022 12: 08
    +7
    DOES NOT fight weapons with weapons. The system is fighting. There are many factors in the system. The KV-1 was invulnerable to the Fritz in 41, but did not become a miracle weapon. The "Tiger" in 43 was a dangerous beast for our tankers, but the course of hostilities had no effect. They built the Tirpitz, but he couldn’t even shoot for his entire service, just like the Yamato. Exactly the same now. How our system (Navy) will work in which case, and how it is with them. And there are many more factors to compare.
    1. smaug78
      smaug78 14 January 2022 12: 23
      -6
      Quote: glory1974
      KV-1 was invulnerable to the Fritz in 41
      only the Fritz did not know about it ...
      1. Glory1974
        Glory1974 14 January 2022 12: 35
        +10
        you don't seem to know about it
        1. smaug78
          smaug78 14 January 2022 23: 46
          +1
          Unlike you, I don’t read the inscriptions on the fence, but the documents ...
          PS Where did the invulnerable KV-1s go and why didn't they take out the Germans?
          1. Glory1974
            Glory1974 17 January 2022 10: 03
            0
            read about the battle of Zinovy ​​​​Kolobanov or the battle near Rassenai, where the Germans could not destroy the KV-1 with regular means. Of course, there is no miracle weapon, I am writing about this. The system works. In the case of the KV, if the 37 and 75 mm tank guns did not take them, then others, for example, 88 mm anti-aircraft guns, did.
            Why, as a result, the production of HF was stopped, read on the net, you can even find it on this site.
  17. Lt. Air Force stock
    Lt. Air Force stock 14 January 2022 13: 10
    +2
    Here is a former US acoustic submariner who served in Los Angeles commenting on the news. You can turn on subtitles and translation. There on the channel he has a lot of videos about Russian submarines.

    About Borey is also interesting.
  18. TermNachTer
    TermNachTer 14 January 2022 13: 18
    -5
    Comparing two weapon systems, about which we know only what they are in nature, to put it mildly, is unproductive. But here, to deny the fact that the Connecticut received such damage that now there is a question of decommissioning characterizes mattress submarines. They are not as good as they are supposed to be.
  19. Petio
    Petio 14 January 2022 16: 10
    +1
    Ash is good, but they were made universal - replacing both 949 and 971. But the downside is that this makes them expensive and cannot be built in large numbers. It may be worth having in addition a smaller torpedo nuclear submarine of 5-6000 tons with the ability to launch Caliber from TA.
    1. Grits
      Grits 15 January 2022 04: 11
      0
      Quote: Petio
      Ash is good, but they were made universal - replacing both 949 and 971. But the downside is that this makes them expensive and cannot be built in large numbers. It may be worth having in addition a smaller torpedo nuclear submarine of 5-6000 tons with the ability to launch Caliber from TA.

      I have always been an opponent of universal aggregates. Since a specialized device will always be cooler than a universal one. Therefore, I still believe that the choice in the USSR of the concept of special-purpose boats was correct. since each of them performed much better the tasks assigned to it than the universal one. Plus, it also forced to increase the number of ships. yes, it was more expensive. But better and easier technologically.
      If we proceed from the analogy of aviation, then we had boats for their intended purpose, separately fighters, attack aircraft and bombers.
  20. The comment was deleted.
  21. sash-sash
    sash-sash 14 January 2022 16: 34
    0
    The boat is larger than the Virginia in terms of displacement and size, and the crew is smaller than on American boats. This indicates a higher automation of processes, this is recognized by the Americans themselves.

    Automation is good! Only the "automation" itself must be advanced and very reliable
  22. Alexey Lamonov
    Alexey Lamonov 14 January 2022 16: 39
    -2
    And who is this clairvoyant who said that Ash is worse than Virginia?
  23. AAK
    AAK 14 January 2022 20: 28
    +3
    "Ash" is quite a worthy replacement for "Antey" (minus 50% in terms of displacement, while a significant plus in armament and noise reduction), but this is not an anti-submarine or anti-ship boat. The Russian Navy needs a series of more than 30 units of a hunter nuclear submarine in the size and characteristics of the Lira, it does not need strike weapons, only good torpedoes (6-8 TA) and PLUR
  24. Angry
    Angry 14 January 2022 20: 48
    0
    By the way ... up to what speed can a towed submarine antenna be used? Is it true that after 12-15 knots it just breaks off and sinks in the depths of the sea?
  25. The comment was deleted.
    1. agond
      agond 14 January 2022 21: 40
      -1
      Quote: Rostovchanin
      There is no publicly available photo of the Ash launcher, but there are a lot of photos with Axes in Ohio

      Ohio has a shaft diameter of 2.4m, a depth of somewhere around 14.5m, a Tomahawk rocket with a diameter of 0.53m and a length of 6.25m, that is, in principle, in a 14m shaft they can fit in two levels .. and we should think about increasing the diameter of Ash mines ., It is especially worth considering why Ash has such a large margin of buoyancy and, as a result, size, because the existence of the square-cube law has long been known to everyone if a physical object is increased in size, then its surface area grows in proportion to the second degree, and the mass increases in proportion to the third degree, by the way, the price object grows in proportion to the mass, that is, the same third power. What drives our designers to design such boats, obviously they do what the merchant said, but how to find an explanation in terms of geometry, mechanics and physics, I have no answer.
  26. Azimuth
    Azimuth 15 January 2022 01: 06
    +2
    Quote: arkadiyssk
    "There is an advantage in the reactor. The OK-650KPM reactor is capable of working out the entire life of the boat. It's beautiful, but the Americans have 3 repairs[i] [/ i] "
    Lies. Why, such a wretched lie? This American S9G is designed for 30 years of service, and Virginia has already been sailing for 20 years without reloading, proving this. We also tried to, but all the reports about the "eternal reactor" went only in 2017. Officially, "Severodvinsk" with the VM-11 reactor, i.e. with full reboots, they most likely switched to KTP-6 only on subsequent 885Ms, the same is most likely with the Boreys, the first three with 3rd generation reactors. In principle, this is obvious. the first boats of the series were laid back in near-Soviet times based on the presence of 3rd generation reactors. Moreover, KTP-6 is not designed for 30 years at all, it is just a block reactor together with a steam generator, 30 years are planned only for KTP-7, and this is apparently only starting from Ulyanovsk, which was laid down in 2017.

    I liked this paragraph better:

    "The very moment when quantity can take precedence over quality. Yes, American submarines have their strengths, but there are more of them. There will always be more of them, this is a given that cannot be brushed aside."

    What quality and superiority in this regard of Ash can we talk about, if before that the author himself rolled it out.
    Unfortunately, we are inferior and have no analogues to many American technologies and capabilities. This lag did not arise now, but even under the USSR.
    With torpedo armament, the situevina is also the same. What's left, Onyxes? - and how will they protect Ash in a collision with a counterpart?
  27. Comrade Kim
    Comrade Kim 15 January 2022 02: 45
    -1
    Quote: Lair
    in our conditions it is possible to produce them only in small series

    In our conditions, this is a feat.
    As long as native billionaires, like specific princelings, measure the length of yachts, there will be no good in the Navy.
    The Abramovichs, Veksels, Mordashovs and UsmanoGutsirievs received the subsoil of Russia for total, almost free use.
    They don’t care about the fact that Ash trees are assembled for a long time like a Stradivari violin, and the Americans build in large series.
  28. Submariner971
    Submariner971 15 January 2022 04: 14
    +1
    I can say for sure that the maximum low-noise speed of 20-25 knots cannot be. I read such nonsense from the Americans - in reality it is much lower.
    1. SovAr238A
      SovAr238A 17 January 2022 22: 54
      0
      Quote: Submariner971
      I can say for sure that the maximum low-noise speed of 20-25 knots cannot be. I read such nonsense from the Americans - in reality it is much lower.

      That is, you think that 20 knots cannot be low noise ...
      Why?
      What causes noise at 20 knots?
      1. Submariner971
        Submariner971 18 January 2022 01: 41
        0
        The gearbox, the steam turbine plant, the pumps that provide it and the steam generator (PPU) - all this gives significant noise at high speeds of the GTZA (and turbogenerators too). And this is despite the multi-stage depreciation of nodes and coverage. Diesel non-nuclear boats are deprived of most of these noises, having other disadvantages.
        1. SovAr238A
          SovAr238A 18 January 2022 10: 14
          -1
          Quote: Submariner971
          The gearbox, the steam turbine plant, the pumps that provide it and the steam generator (PPU) - all this gives significant noise at high speeds of the GTZA (and turbogenerators too). And this is despite the multi-stage depreciation of nodes and coverage. Diesel non-nuclear boats are deprived of most of these noises, having other disadvantages.

          And if there is a full electric propulsion?
          And if there is a natural circulation of the coolant (without turning on the pumps)?
          And there is no inclusion of GTZA?
          1. Submariner971
            Submariner971 19 January 2022 03: 42
            0
            The correct questions are partly, why minus something ... As for the electric movement, only the gearbox can be excluded, theoretically, with its lubrication system. Instead of GTZA, turbogenerators of no less power will be required. The British, for example, have implemented electric propulsion in new boats, but the Americans are in no hurry. There are pros and cons, like everywhere else. As for natural circulation - yes, of course! But even on our third generation, it is implemented to a certain power, not to mention the fourth. I can’t say more ... True, the primary circuit pumps do not add much decibel in comparison.
  29. Al Asad
    Al Asad 15 January 2022 04: 16
    -1
    Something the Americans, with their perfect hydroacoustic stations, are striving to fall in love with underwater rocks ....
  30. AML
    AML 15 January 2022 08: 28
    -1
    Quote: Submariner971
    I can say for sure that the maximum low-noise speed of 20-25 knots cannot be. I read such nonsense from the Americans - in reality it is much lower.


    The car in the data sheet also says that 240km / h. In reality, this is under ideal conditions and such a speed is practically unattainable. Yes, and the speedometer is lying.

    - Doctor, help. My wife is cheating on me and the horns don't grow
    - everything is fine. About the horns is a figurative expression
    - oh thank you doctor, otherwise I thought that there was not enough calcium.
  31. Valery Vl.
    Valery Vl. 15 January 2022 18: 53
    0
    We used to have big problems with electronic equipment and computers. They took up a lot of space. Now, apparently, there are no such problems. They are piezocrystals in Africa as well. It is unlikely that the Americans do them an order of magnitude better. Maybe even ours is better. We have always had great developers and designers, but there was nothing to embody. Microelectronics was in the pen. They built rockets, but our idiots from the Politburo did not have enough money to allocate money for the filling. If you have not seen the computer "Minsk-6" or "Sluice", then you have not seen anything. Malinovsky at one time generally offered to shoot down helicopters with a stick, and Khrushchev called cybernetics pseudoscience. From Stalin onwards, after all, they were all illiterate with us, except perhaps Kosygin. The fool who danced the hopak in front of the general secretary, and then took his post, did not understand that the future would be determined not only by the TNT equivalent of the mother bomb. And all the rest before the arrival of Putin did not shine with a special mind. Is that only in terms of intrigue.
  32. TANKISTONE
    TANKISTONE 15 January 2022 22: 28
    0
    Article from the section: we compare the feuilleton from the magazine "Crocodile" and the "article" from NI. This is the whole Skomorokhov - the number of publications, the topics of publications + the quality of publications = the statistics of the "journalist".
  33. NS NORD
    NS NORD 17 January 2022 15: 57
    0
    Well, well, the demolished nose cone speaks of the quality of American hydroacoustics. Besides, I don't remember the mass battles of submarines, such as the tank battle on the Kursk Bulge. The nuclear submarine is what the nuclear submarine is for, to be invisible, and the ocean will dissolve any number of boats without a trace, especially considering that there used to be about 250 of them. Thus, it is incorrect to compare the technical parameters of the nuclear submarine without understanding the methods and methods of their application. As they say, there is a satellite, but it is not, because space is huge and the satellite is not visible until it gives a signal. In a word, it is possible to detect, but only by chance and when it is already too late and the missile has reached the target. "It is generally accepted that American sonar systems are superior to all available in the world" - it was necessary to clarify that this statement is only suitable for NATO countries, since they have the ability to compare parameters among themselves and, ultimately, see the first sentence.
  34. SovAr238A
    SovAr238A 17 January 2022 22: 29
    +1
    It is strange to refer to a fool who does not know that the Virgin has a lifetime reactor ...
    No fuel change, etc.
  35. Revival
    Revival 18 January 2022 16: 59
    0
    First fanfare, and then the author somehow wilted ...))))
  36. shinobi
    shinobi 19 January 2022 07: 04
    0
    Who is stronger, an elephant or a whale? What I mean is that the fate of the world (what a surprise!) Has always been decided on land. Example: Both world wars. Although naval battles were particularly intense, they did not have a significant impact on their outcome. Who said that something has changed?
    1. agond
      agond 19 January 2022 15: 28
      0
      In general, boats are built for the sake of stealth and naturally covert placement of weapons on them, and the more secretive the boat, the better (if stealth is not the main thing, then it is better to place weapons on surface ships), while the size of the boat (ceteris paribus) is crucial, therefore stealth, stealth and again stealth should be the motto of everyone who needs submarines. If someone says that it is possible to make a large boat quite secretive, he is simply deceiving, this is impossible in principle, there is a size limit, a barrier that cannot be crossed. The larger the volume of a moving object, the more disturbances it creates in the environment, and the higher its reflectivity, that is, the detection distance of a large object is greater than that of a small one. These are the fundamental principles that allow you to reap the correct answer,
      1. shinobi
        shinobi Yesterday, 01: 24
        0
        If the boat has gone beyond the upper temperature layer, 235-265 meters, it is very difficult to find it from the surface in the "acoustic shadow" without special (as a rule, stationary) equipment. it is of little use at such depths. Boats are needed, multi-purpose and missile carriers, especially. But you should not go to extremes either.