Veterans are getting younger. Isn't it too late?
Source: forums.airbase.ru
In the bowels of the Russian military department, a decision was made to extend the service life of Project 949a Antey submarines with their subsequent modernization.
This post has both pros and cons.
What the modernization will consist of is not directly reported, the only information available is that the boats will be re-equipped from Granites to Onyxes and Calibers.
Let's put it this way: this is a long overdue action that can only be assessed positively. Yes, the P-700 "Granite" at one time was simply awesome weapons. Forty years ago. Rearmament to more modern missiles is welcome.
Modernization with the replacement of impact weapons is not such an expensive business. Modifications have undergone only launch containers, which can accommodate 72 cruise missiles. What is more profitable, 24 "Granite" or 72 "Onyx" - the question, of course, is an interesting one. With Onyxes and Calibers, boats will become more versatile and will be able to work on smaller targets.
Yes, 300 kg of the Onyx warhead and 450 kg for the Caliber are not 750 kg for the Granite, however, this is more than enough for the majority of modern ships. We can recall the effectiveness of the Exocet anti-ship missile, which has a warhead mass of only 165 kg, and the list of ships and vessels sunk during the Iran-Iraq wars of this anti-ship missile exceeded a hundred.
Well, we also remember the first loss in the world from anti-ship missiles, which was the Exocet, the British destroyer Sheffield.
Therefore, re-equipment with more modern weapons is a completely justified step.
The only thing that really confuses is the age of the carriers. The youngest, K-150 "Tomsk", has been serving since 1996, that is, "only" 26 years. The oldest, K-132 "Irkutsk" - since 1988, that is, 34 years old.
Yes, it can be said about Irkutsk that the boat has little wear and tear, it has been under repair for 13 (!) years, which no one has carried out. And only in 2019 did we begin to move forward in this regard. Although it’s hard to say which is worse, waiting for repairs or being in working order.
In general, without data on the wear and tear of boats, it is difficult to say how effective this business is - such a modernization. If the housings, cable routes and reactors guarantee another 10-15 years of service - why not?
After all, our overseas potential alignment is about the same: “Ohio” and “Los Angeles” have been serving since the same 80s and it seems like nothing.
Moreover, as part of the modernization, Anteyam is promised to update all electronic giblets, starting with the installation of a new BIUS, Omnibus-M. They promise to install new means of communication and, importantly, a new hydroacoustic complex. Again, there is no data on the GAK, but apparently, it will be the Irtysh-Amphora, because we don’t have anything more modern.
So, first "Irkutsk" will still be repaired, then the turn of "Chelyabinsk" will come.
Well, if so. Well, simply because back in 2018, Deputy Defense Minister Borisov and Deputy Prime Minister Rogozin talked about the same thing. That modernization, re-equipment and so on will begin by 2021.
Fist "Antey": what will be the submarine 949A after modernization
That is, all this has already been in fact. Replacements, modernization, re-equipment ... By 2021, FOUR modernized submarines were to come to the Pacific Fleet.
But something prevented Borisov and Rogozin. And the plans, as we usually do, were reset to zero. And now they are talking about them again.
To what extent can these cheerful and optimistic promises be trusted at all? After all, if you delve well into the information field, then the first proposals for the modernization of boats of projects 949A and 971 began in the now distant 2008. It was then that for the first time they started talking about the fact that the boats in a good way would have to go through the repair of the main systems, the replacement of electronics and automation with new ones and, of course, re-equipment with newer models.
It was 16 years ago. Much has been said about this, it is not worth repeating. It is only worth noting that if the modernization program really started in 2009, then by today it would be easy to have a total salvo of nuclear submarines of about 300-400 Caliber. For comparison: all surface ships of the Russian fleet can fire 150-160 missiles simultaneously.
Many experts at one time criticized the Buyan RTO project, saying that the modernization of nuclear submarines for Caliber is a much more effective business. One can argue, because in the conditions of our "puddles", the Black, Caspian and Baltic, a small rocket ship with "Caliber" is quite a good weapon. Where a nuclear submarine cannot be stuffed.
However, the modernization of nuclear submarines has not begun. Since 2013, they tried to do something with the same "Irkutsk" and "Chelyabinsk", but, judging by the voiced promises, nothing really was done, and therefore they announced that the repair would start again.
And the boats are not getting any younger. And 949 years have passed since the first talk about the "calibration" of Project 16A boats. Well, if "Irkutsk" just stood at the quay wall of the plant for 13 years. And those boats that served? They were subjected to physical stress, equipment was worn out, and so on.
That is, these are not the same boats that were 10 or more years ago. We must understand. How should one understand the fact that no matter how you modernize, the service life cannot be extended by more than 10 years. Well, of course, if, like Marshal Shaposhnikov, half of the new building is not made.
That is, by the time of 2030, the boats (modernized or not) will still be decommissioned. This is normal, they will be around 40-45 years old on average.
What's next?
And then more questions. It seems that there should have been Yasen-M, project 855M, but to replace the Soviet nuclear-powered ships, of which we still have quite a lot (7 boats of project 949A, 9 boats of project 971, 2 boats of project 945, 2 boats of project 945A, 2 boats 671RTMK) we have in the plan 6 (SIX) boats of project 885M.
The calculator is terrible. Instead of 22 boats, we are ready to build 6.
It becomes clear that after 2030 the number of universal nuclear submarines in the Russian fleet will be reduced by three times. We do not consider strategic cruisers, they have a completely different and very highly specialized task.
How much will the combat capability drop? Another calculator.
7 boats of project 949A with "Caliber" - this is a salvo of 504 missiles. 6 boats of project 855M - 300. Everything, you can not count further, everything will only be more sad for longer.
Who is to blame for the fact that Yasen-M is an analogue of the American Seawolf, and costs so much that the country is simply not able to build the required number of these boats purely financially?
The Americans abandoned the Seawulf, and they did the right thing. We have not abandoned Ash, simply because there is nothing else, and cannot be in the near future.
The modernization of Soviet submarines, as well as the modernization of Soviet surface ships, is an absolutely temporary measure. Neither the Peter the Great, nor the Admiral Nakhimov, nor the unfortunate Project 1155 BOD, from which frigates are obtained with the displacement of the destroyer - all these attempts are only a temporary measure to plug holes in the Russian fleet. But the number of holes will only increase as the ships age, and these black holes will absorb billions and billions, giving nothing in terms of the country's defense capability.
Today we can conclude that the Soviet legacy is over. And the “trishkin caftan” in the person of the same “Admiral Kuznetsov”, who, like his French counterpart, costs more to repair and eats money in wagons - this is not maintaining the defense capability of the fleet and the country. It's just a waste of money.
The modernization of Project 949A submarines is a measure that will give another 10 years. Then - then there will be a bottom, which they have been knocking on for a long time.
And all that the Russian leadership in general and the Ministry of Defense in particular needs today is an understanding of the processes that will begin when the modernization of Soviet weapons systems becomes meaningless. And how will we meet this moment - fully armed or with a dozen boats and skeletons of old ships.
In general, I would like the Russian fleet to become at least a semblance of the fleet of Japan, and not Ukraine. But we have no more than 15 years to understand these processes by the country's leadership.
Information