Khabarovsk set out to sea

19 721 45
Khabarovsk set out to sea


On August 17, 2026, images of the Project 09851 special-purpose nuclear submarine Khabarovsk outside its outfitting waters appeared in open sources. The author of the initial publication suggested that the submarine had departed Severodvinsk the day before. No official announcements from the Russian Ministry of Defense, Sevmash, or USC regarding the departure or the start of factory sea trials were published as of August 24.



One photo and two days


The image appeared online on August 17. It shows the submarine's hull outside the factory waters, with support vessels nearby. Nothing else is publicly available: no launch report, no test program.

Italian observer Massimo Frantarelli, publishing the photo, chose a cautious formulation: “It appears that the Project 09851 Khabarovsk-class ... set sail from Severodvinsk yesterday” "Apparently, it left Severodvinsk yesterday." The actual departure date is not confirmed here, and it cannot be considered the date of the filming: the word "yesterday" pushes the event to August 16. War correspondent Alexander Kots writes on August 18, "Today, it went out to sea for the first time for factory sea trials," and a third date appears. A two-day discrepancy at launch stories, which will then be recounted down to the day.

A day after the first publication, the Polish edition MILMAG и Army recognition they present the event differently: a boat “departed Severodvinsk for its first factory sea trials in the White Sea” — embarked on its first factory sea trials. These publications presented the reader with no new primary evidence, but the qualifications changed: the observed fact of the ship's presence at sea was transformed into a statement about the official purpose of the expedition.

The difference here is not philological. Factory sea trials are a prescribed program under which the shipbuilder tests the propulsion system, propulsion, controllability, submersion, and general ship systems at sea. These are followed by state trials: the program is approved by a state commission with the participation of the customer, and the transfer the fleet The process begins after any issues have been addressed and the acceptance certificate has been signed. The process isn't always linear; returns to the shipyard and repeated launches are possible. The program has a document, a delivery team leader—the group of shipyard employees responsible for the ship until delivery—and a list of operational modes. None of this has been publicly confirmed for the Khabarovsk's launch.

The image proves little: the hull is floating outside the outfitting quay, with other vessels nearby. Beyond that, it's a matter of uncertainty—whether the submarine was underway or partially towed, whether it submerged, whether its power was at full capacity, or whether there was anything on board. The date the photo was taken also can't be determined from the image.

The message then spreads in circles. The Russian resource bmpd publishes the same photo, attributing it to Frantarelli and explicitly stating that it's the first entry into the ZHI. Industry Flotprom refers to the American Military Watch Magazine and adds what others omit:

At the time of publication, there was no confirmation from the United Shipbuilding Corporation or the Sevmash Production Association administration regarding the commencement of sea trials for the Khabarovsk.

The gap that foreign publications filled with qualifications, the Russian industry publication simply recorded. news The Sevmash news feed for August doesn't feature the boat at all: it reports the commissioning of a residential building for workers on August 11 and a report on the company's possible involvement in the construction of floating power units on August 18.

Four levels that don't happen together


This is where we see why event qualification is more expensive than it seems. The readiness of such a ship can conveniently be divided into four levels—this isn't an official classification, but a way to distinguish between things that are most often confused.

First: the hull is at sea and capable of going there. Second: the ship's systems are passing the factory testing program. Third: the carrier is capable of receiving and launching the vehicle. Fourth: the submarine, vehicle, communications, and shore support system is capable of combat duty. There is no public data on the third and fourth aspects of the Khabarovsk as of the cutoff date. The second has been reported by industry publications. Images from August 17 refer to the first and confirm the fact of being at sea, not the nature of the voyage.

The gap between the levels is measurable, and there's a measuring device—at the same shipyard. The Project 09852 BS-329 Belgorod, the first Poseidon carrier, was launched on April 23, 2019. It began its factory sea trials on June 29, 2021. 798 days after descentTASS reported the return from the first mission on July 26, 2021, citing an industry source, citing the date of July 24 and a planned second mission in the coming days. The acceptance certificate was signed on July 8, 2022, 374 days after the start of trials. The delivery to the fleet was initially planned for 2020, expected in the summer of 2021 at the end of that year, but took place in July 2022: the deadline was pushed back even after the ship had already set sail.

The comparison is illustrative: the Belgorod was completed using a Project 949A hull, so there's no reason to extend its construction to the Khabarovsk. The value of this series lies elsewhere—it demonstrates what this same milestone turned out to be in practice: not the finish line, but the starting point.

The Khabarovsk's own chronology is as follows. Laid down on July 27, 2014, launched from the slipway on November 1, 2025, and observed at sea in mid-August 2026. Open sources do not reveal how this time was distributed between the workshop and the outfitting quay. Two values ​​are known: from keel laying to launch—4404 days; from launch from the slipway—289, counting from August 17; a day's shift in the date does not change the picture.

What has been officially confirmed is known for certain. On November 1, 2025, Sevmash announced the submarine's departure from the slipway, and the Ministry of Defense published a video. The purpose was formulated as follows: carrier of a "modern submarine" weapons and robotic systems for various purposes." Neither the armament nor the number of launch sites are specified in the official description. Defense Minister Andrei Belousov, addressing the crew and the delivery team, said, "The ship still has to undergo a series of sea trials." As of November 1, 2025, the cycle had not been completed. This statement says nothing about what happened in August 2026.


Where do the numbers come from?


The announcement of its launch comes alongside the specifications. Length: approximately 135 meters, width: approximately 13,5 meters, displacement: approximately 10,000 tons, six launchers, payload: up to 660 tons, speed: 30-32 knots (55,6-59,3 km/h). The specifications appear to be extracted from a data sheet. The origins of these specifications vary, and none have been officially confirmed.

Length and width are measurements from images. Displacement is calculated based on estimated dimensions and architecture, the methodology is not disclosed. Speed ​​is estimated by the American USNI ProceedingsThe number of launch sites is based on TASS reports citing unnamed sources in the defense industry. The payload has been calculated. Flotprom describes the situation as follows: "The technical specifications of the Poseidon carriers are not disclosed. There is no confirmed information about the capabilities drones "Poseidon" is also not there."

It is more convenient to conduct the analysis using one example. 660 tons is not a measured value, but a calculated one: The estimated number of devices is multiplied by the estimated mass of each. Both initial values ​​are estimates, both taken at the upper limit. The result inherits their uncertainty, but takes the form of a precise number with three significant digits and is then circulated in publications as a characteristic of the spacecraft.

The opposite is true for length. Early reconstructions gave a length of 113–120 meters, while later ones, after the full hull was unveiled, gave a length of 135–140 meters. USNI Proceedings gives 371–459 feet, that is, 113,1–139,9 meters: such a spread is more honest than a single “about 135”, it shows what the observer actually has at his disposal.

The number of devices remains the same. The indexes are known: "Belgorod" received four 2P39 launchers for the 2M39 devices of the Poseidon system. For "Khabarovsk," the Russian bmpd writes differently: "it is believed to have six." "It is believed" is correct: external images show neither installations nor loading. Norman Polmar in the January issue Proceedings The announced plans for 2026 are 30 vehicles on four carriers. This is a procurement plan, not the actual combat load of a ship that has already gone to sea.

How estimates become specifications is evident in publications about the device itself. In 2023, kp.ru reported a range of 10,000 km, a depth of 1000 meters, and a speed of 200 km/h. Public estimates are different. The range is over 5000 nautical miles (over 9260 km). Depth is up to 3000 feet (914 m) in some sources, 1000 meters in others. Speed ​​ranges from 70 knots (129,6 km/h) in later estimates to 100 knots (185,2 km/h) in an early Status-6 presentation. Public sources provide estimates for the warhead yield, ranging from 2 to 10 megatons, meaning they don't provide one. Any figure more precise than "about" would be a guess.

Timing and shore


Complaints about the length of the cycle have been publicly voiced in the industry, even by the industry's top executives. The starting point is a document: the Rubin-Sever design bureau, which managed the working documentation for Project 09851 and oversaw its construction at the shipyard, indicated a completion date of 2020 in its 2015 annual report. The same date appears in contract descriptions published by industry sources. Approximately a year after this deadline, on July 30, 2021, at the launch ceremony of the Krasnoyarsk nuclear submarine in Severodvinsk, USC head Alexei Rakhmanov outlined the goal: to reduce the delivery time of serial submarines by approximately 9-14 months. He added: "This is a challenging task, and it will probably not be achieved with the next serial number." He was referring to serial hulls, and the Khabarovsk is the lead hull for its design—the situation for lead submarines is more complex. On June 26, 2024, at a meeting on shipbuilding development, the Russian president stated that experimental design work on equipment, instruments, and components should be carried out in advance: this "will significantly reduce the design and construction time for lead ships."


The coastal part of the complex is less visible than the naval part. Completion of construction of the facilities at the new base for the Belgorod and Khabarovsk was planned for early 2024, according to TASS, citing a source close to the defense ministry, who noted that there was no official confirmation. The tsunami of July 30, 2025, provided an indirect clue: Planet Labs images show The New York Times and in the footage Umbra Space у The Daily Telegraph It's clear that one of the piers at the Vilyuchinsk base cracked after being struck by a wave. The purpose of the pier and its connection to special-purpose carriers are not determined from the images. What's clear is that there were no submarines moored at the damaged pier, and the images show no other damage or increase in radiation levels.

The place of future service is described in advance and in detail.

"The Khabarovsk is expected to serve in the Pacific Fleet," writes Alexander Kots. "The only thing larger than the Pacific Ocean is the planet Earth itself. A submersible with an unlimited cruising range could easily get lost in its depths. And enemies will be left wondering where this thermonuclear monster is headed."

The order to include the ship in the formation and the unit number are not available in open official materials.

The torpedo that the fleet closed


The concept around which the Khabarovsk was built is not the first in Russian practice. From 1949 to 1954, the T-15 torpedo was developed at the Research Institute-400 of the Ministry of Shipbuilding Industry, under the leadership of Chief Designer N. N. Shamarin, at the initiative of V. I. Alferov of the Ministry of Medium Machine Building. It was 23,55 meters long, had a caliber of 1550 mm, weighed 40 tons, and carried a thermonuclear warhead. The T-15 torpedo was to be launched from the first Soviet nuclear submarine, Project 627 Kit, led by Vladimir Peregudov. It was intended to strike enemy coastal areas and carried a single 1550 mm tube with a single torpedo; conventional 533 mm torpedoes were used only for self-defense.

The overall dimensions of the vehicle have changed little since then: publicly available estimates of the Poseidon's length range from 19,8 to 24,4 meters, while the T-15's length is 23,55 meters according to reference data. The diameter is more difficult to compare: the T-15's diameter is listed as 1550 mm, while estimates for the Poseidon vary by approximately one and a half to two meters.


The first serial nuclear torpedo T-5 (caliber 533 mm), developed in the USSR in the 1950s and accepted into service in 1958

The difference lies elsewhere. According to descriptions in reference literature, the T-15 carried a battery-powered electric motor with a range of approximately 30 kilometers; there are also descriptions of a combined-cycle gas engine with a longer range. Regardless of how the debate is resolved, the order of magnitude is the same: the carrier would have to approach the enemy coastline very closely. With the Poseidon, the power source has been transferred from the carrier to the vehicle itself. In October 2025, the Russian president announced that during testing, the vehicle was launched for the first time by a booster motor from a carrier submarine, and its nuclear power plant was activated, with the vehicle "running for a certain amount of time." The carrier submarine was not named, and the intercontinental passage was not publicly demonstrated. But it is precisely the change in power source that makes the old design viable: the range is transferred from the ship to the munition.

From there, the analogy breaks down. The size class and the overall concept—a large, specialized weapon for striking coastal targets—are identical. The power output, endurance, method of use, and the role assigned to the weapon by doctrine are not. Readiness is even less comparable: the T-15 remains a project, while the Poseidon is undergoing testing.

And one more detail of that story. For reasons of secrecy, the T-15 was developed without the Navy's involvement—they only learned about it in December 1953, after the technical specifications for draft project 627 were approved. The torpedo project was closed after review by naval specialists; in the revised technical project of 1955, the 1550 mm caliber torpedo was removed from the armament, replacing it with eight 533 mm torpedoes mounted in the bow, each with a complement of 20 torpedoes. The decision was made neither by the designer nor by the contractor, but by the person who would be deploying the project, and it was made when he was able to evaluate it for the first time. For the Khabarovsk, this point also occurred not at the launching ceremony, but at sea.
45 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    24 August 2026 08: 21
    The tsunami of July 30, 2025, provided an indirect clue: Planet Labs images from The New York Times and Umbra Space footage from The Daily Telegraph show that one of the piers at the Vilyuchinsk base cracked after the wave struck.

    Last year's earthquake (a series of 8,8 Richter magnitude tremors), centered in Avacha Bay, generated a tsunami. However, Avacha Bay itself, with its gates designed to provide natural shelter for the piers of Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky and Vilyuchinsk (on the opposite side of the bay), is a natural source of protection. A southeasterly wind accelerates the wave toward the berthing facilities in the northern part of Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky (the Seroglazka and Avacha areas).
    In Vilyuchinsk, a civilian pier in the Primorsky district (a residential area) was partially destroyed and closed, and submarines are based in the Rybachy district; they are not docked at this pier.
  2. +4
    24 August 2026 08: 25
    First: the hull is at sea and is capable of going there.


    The hull at sea is sea trials: testing seaworthiness, controllability, propulsion system operation, and basic life support systems. The goal is to confirm the submarine is safe and capable of sailing. The images from August 17th capture precisely this phase: the submarine on the surface, transiting/departing for sea, but without disclosing the tasks. Public disclosure is permitted at this stage: the very fact of sailing is not a secret.

    Second: the ship's systems pass the factory testing program.


    Ship systems undergo factory testing—a comprehensive set of checks that includes leak tightness, hull strength, reactor plant operation, electrical power system, pumps, valves, ventilation, communications, and so on. These tests are typically conducted at base and during short missions, documented in reports, and industry publications may cite them as declared without disclosing details.

    Third: the carrier is capable of receiving and launching the device.


    The launch vehicle's ability to receive and launch the payload is a specific payload test. For Khabarovsk, the focus is on compatibility with the wearable vehicle. Here, they test:
    - mechanics of loading/unloading and holding the apparatus;
    - communications connections (power supply, communication, telemetry);
    - launch procedures, including the operation of launch systems and the hydrodynamics of the apparatus’ exit from the container/shaft;
    - interaction of the control systems of the boat and the apparatus.
    Such tests are, by definition, little publicly known. They reveal the system's tactical and technical characteristics, so even indirect reports are rare.

    Fourth: the complex of a boat, apparatus, communications and coastal support is capable of carrying out combat duty.


    This includes:
    - integration of the submarine into the fleet’s combat control system;
    - practicing cycles of transmitting orders, communications, and covert deployment;
    - provision of coastal infrastructure (bases, communication points, monitoring systems);
    - regulations for duty, crew changes, and technical maintenance.

    The fact of taking up combat duty may not be announced publicly at all, or it may be communicated in the most general form.
  3. +4
    24 August 2026 08: 36
    A great ship - a great voyage!
    1. -11
      24 August 2026 09: 36
      This article is a great source for OSINT... In the past, disclosing such information would have gotten you jailed... But now it's the norm, we discuss it, we savor it... Democracy, sir...
      1. +3
        24 August 2026 09: 56
        If they drain it, then it must be done, I suppose.
        Previously, yes, they would have replanted them.
        And so, the information war means no less.
        Of course, IMHO. hi
      2. +7
        24 August 2026 10: 19
        No need to stir things up. The article's sensational title contains all the gossip from the last 70 years, and I wouldn't be surprised if even the photo was generated by AI. It's worse reading than chewing gum, a waste of time...
  4. +7
    24 August 2026 08: 43
    "Poseidon" is good, but "Losharik" is more necessary right now, in my opinion. Mine all the critical pipelines and cables in the North Sea and wait for the next escalation from those who constantly screw us over.
    1. +2
      24 August 2026 09: 41
      but "Losharik" is more needed now,

      At the depth for which the Losharik is intended, neither cables nor pipelines are laid.
      1. +3
        24 August 2026 14: 53
        In fact, cables are laid along the ocean floor at any depth.
  5. + 13
    24 August 2026 09: 09
    A strange project, a strange weapon with an unclear operational philosophy. Eight torpedoes require a dedicated carrier, which took almost a decade to build. The enormous submarine must constantly patrol near enemy coastlines; otherwise, even at incredible underwater speed, the supertorpedo will travel for days, generating a monstrous noise that any sonar operator can hear hundreds of kilometers away. After that, it's only a matter of enemy aircraft. This madness has obscured sensible concepts, such as the Skif bottom-launched missiles, reports of which ceased around 2013.
    1. +6
      24 August 2026 11: 30
      Quote: Dmitry Eon
      A strange project, a strange weapon with an unclear ideology of use, 8 torpedoes require a separate specialized carrier, which took almost a decade to build.

      It's sad when the Supreme Commander-in-Chief is incompetent even in general technical matters...
      1. -1
        24 August 2026 12: 02
        Well, I doubt Trump, Merz, or any Macron are more competent in any area than our leaders. It's a question of their advisors and entourage. The Poseidon torpedo, if it lives up to its stated specifications, is undoubtedly an engineering marvel. It was created by truly capable people, who put in decades of hard and rewarding work, earning them awards and promotions. But it seems they never considered the actual use of this naval weapon.
        1. +5
          24 August 2026 14: 52
          Quote: Dmitry Eon
          I doubt that Trump, Merz, or any Macron are more competent in any topic than our leaders. It's a question of advisers and entourage.


          No, the problem is the system. Either there are checks and balances, where incompetence is compensated for and decisions are made by professionals, or an "irreplaceable leader" out of touch with reality can do anything crazy, while those around him are left to watch in horror. And this applies not only to nuclear torpedoes.
          1. -1
            25 August 2026 10: 22
            I wanted to see where these checks and balances actually work. The term "checks and balances" seems to be of American origin, but in the homeland itself, when the course changes, everything changes, and all these professionals obediently carry out the will of the new showman, the whim of bombing whoever they want, doing whatever nonsense they want, and not bearing any responsibility. And then, after the fact, the showman pardons himself, his henchmen, and his children, as under an absolute monarchy.
            Therefore, I would be very skeptical about the issue of "differences in systems"
    2. +2
      24 August 2026 11: 30
      Well, thank God they retreated into the shadows. "See the gopher?" "No." "Neither do I. But it's there!" And I really hope that this isn't just a carrier for Poseidons, but also for other underwater drones, both reconnaissance and attack.
    3. +2
      24 August 2026 12: 16
      Quote: Dmitry Eon
      strange project

      It's as strange and, in my opinion, completely unnecessary and useless as the Burevestnik. A slow cruise missile, even with unlimited range and flight time, is easily countered by the number of NATO AWACS, regardless of the flight direction. In principle, as a concept and technology development, these projects are valid and quite useful. But as a weapons system, it's more than useless; it's harmful, diverting enormous resources from projects the army truly needs.
    4. +8
      24 August 2026 16: 17
      Quote: Dmitry Eon
      A strange project, a strange weapon with an unclear operational philosophy. Eight torpedoes require a dedicated carrier, which took almost a decade to build. The enormous submarine must constantly patrol near enemy coastlines; otherwise, even at incredible underwater speed, the supertorpedo will travel for days, producing a monstrous noise that any sonar operator can hear hundreds of kilometers away. After that, it's simply a matter of enemy aircraft.

      Roughly speaking, instead of 96-160 warheads capable of covering the entire enemy territory, not just the coast, and which are currently not intercepted (or instead of a precious SSN to cover SSBNs), we received 8 devices that, to be used, still need to somehow penetrate the enemy's ASW system—either on a carrier or independently. Even after separation, interception of our Poseidon is entirely possible—by those same bourgeois Poseidons, dropping payloads on a collision course.
      And patrolling the enemy coast with single submarines... the K-219 immediately comes to mind.
    5. 0
      24 August 2026 19: 07
      ..I agree..THIS could be a first strike weapon..but as a doomsday weapon it's debatable...when would a Poseidon launch be possible...only after a strike on the Russian Federation, but...in the event of aggression, less exotic types of nuclear weapons would be immediately deployed (such as ballistic missile submarines + mobile launchers + silos + cruise missiles from the Tu-160)...and by the time the Poseidons reach the American coast, the war will be over..
  6. The comment was deleted.
  7. +2
    24 August 2026 10: 06
    Quote: South Ukrainian
    Mine all critical pipelines and cables in the North Sea
    Who are you expecting this from? wink
  8. +2
    24 August 2026 11: 52
    For our oligarchs, pressing the nuclear button means losing all the trillions of dollars they've accumulated over the course of their existence. Put yourself in their shoes: an alarm sounds, broadcast over the ship's intercom, a torpedo attack, launch preparations begin. The first one is launched, the machine maintains depth and speed, the second one is launched. And where's the boom in the US? Your children suddenly become beggars, and they can't buy a hamburger anywhere anymore. Your beautiful wife in New York is burned to death in a nuclear fire, and you, a pauper, are sitting in a bunker shaking.

    Come on, here's the button, go ahead and press it.
    1. +1
      24 August 2026 14: 30
      Quote: u4gr8Kk6p8
      Come on, here's the button, go ahead and press it.
      Brzezinski famously remarked about the Russian "elite" and "nuclear buttons," but back then, that figure was $500 billion in foreign banks, while by 2019, the Russian "elite" had more than $1,5 trillion in the West. While they may not be the ones pushing the buttons, when the main agents of foreign influence are the fatcat oligarchs, and, according to Deripaska, the real power lies with big business, with the president their appointee, a "top manager," one can't help but feel uneasy. The USSR was destroyed, capitalism was taken over, Russia is a cash cow and a squeeze lemon, assets are being shipped abroad. Why does the West dislike Russia? It seems they should be kissing it, because they want it from our bourgeoisie: "Everything is for you, sunrises and mists, seas and oceans for you," gas, oil, titanium, uranium, whatever you want, but no... Why? Perhaps because the question remains about the main Soviet legacy, the Soviet nuclear missile shield. How can we surrender it, if it's a serious issue, without anyone suspecting it, without resorting to bayonets and pitchforks? The best thing to come up with is a protracted conflict against the entire EU and US economy, naturally, through Ukraine. Russians are killing Russians; the West doesn't need a strong Ukraine, much less a nuclear Russia.
      If things reach a breaking point, the warehouses and arsenals are emptied, the ruins are scorched earth, and the flags on the graves are gone. The last remaining nuclear trump card will be one that, in the name of peace and humanism, can no longer be used, surrendered to a shameful ultimatum. "Poseidon," a semblance of which, like the "Tsar Torpedo," was rejected even under the Communists, and here we have the bad guys in the coveted bourgeoisie and their masters of global capitalism. Strange...
    2. 0
      28 August 2026 14: 21
      There is a "period of immediate military danger." During which not a single "beautiful wife" will remain in New York.
  9. +1
    24 August 2026 14: 40
    What kind of "psychic reasoning" is this author? It's all very simple: the only photo shows a tugboat towing the Khabarovsk nuclear submarine along the fairway from the port of Severodvinsk, and they've already left the port waters for the White Sea. This is the standard exit and entry procedure for large-capacity nuclear submarines and ships at the port of Severodvinsk.
    1. 0
      24 August 2026 14: 45
      The Project 955A submarine was taken as a basis and rebuilt as the Poseidon, reducing its size and displacement.
  10. +2
    24 August 2026 14: 49
    Am I the only one who doesn't understand why a torpedo with a virtually unlimited range and a kilometer-deep diving depth needs a carrier at all? Why not launch it directly from the shore?
    1. +4
      24 August 2026 16: 01
      Quote: squid
      Why not launch directly from the shore?

      It will sink because. For it to start and operate, it needs to be launched at a certain depth and speed. Generally speaking, we could come up with something similar for Poseidon that would allow it to be launched from the shore, but thinking about it isn't our method.
    2. +3
      24 August 2026 18: 51
      Everything is correct, and I am throwing pebbles from the steep bank of the distant Laperouz Strait
      1. +3
        25 August 2026 13: 22
        Here, with a shore-based launch, there will be even more questions. If even submarines can lose orientation, what can we say about a robotic torpedo? How will sea currents, different water densities, and, finally, unaccounted for underwater rocks affect it? This isn't a missile flight, but rather a satellite navigation system. Could it be that the torpedo will either sink somewhere unknown, or, after circling, return? From the very beginning, it all seemed like disinformation, a crude "leak" (photo below). They spent money, promoted it for domestic effect, and their "partners" are hardly so naive. A "miracle weapon," with a "elite" henpecked by the West, where even the Central Military District does everything with an eye on their brazen partners, who are no longer afraid to supply weapons to the Ukrainian Armed Forces and come to Kyiv to discuss how to kill more Russians. No one bothers them.
    3. 0
      28 August 2026 14: 24
      Because an aircraft carrier needs to be shot down from 100 km, not 5000.
  11. +3
    24 August 2026 16: 05
    The torpedo project was abandoned after an expert review by naval specialists; in the revised technical design of 1955, the 1550 mm caliber tube was removed from the armament, replaced by eight bow-mounted 533 mm torpedoes with a complement of 20 torpedoes. The decision was made neither by the designer nor by the customer, but by the person who would be deployed with the product, and it was made when he was able to evaluate it for the first time.

    The Navy, having reviewed the project, simply asked a simple and logical question: how could this submarine penetrate the Atlantic anti-submarine warfare system and approach within 30 km of the shore, armed with only two conventional torpedoes?
    1. 0
      24 August 2026 18: 57
      Quote: Alexey RA
      The Navy, having reviewed the project, simply asked a simple and logical question: how will this submarine be able to pass through the anti-submarine warfare system in the Atlantic and approach within 30 km of the shore?
      hoping for monstrous luck, like in "Heroes of Bangor", from Dudko...?! winked
  12. -3
    25 August 2026 11: 24
    And again the masses criticize Poseidon.
    Without even having superficial information about what it is.
    The only reliable information is the dimensions and the nuclear power plant.
    All.
    The top speed is incredible. And who said you can only walk at top speed? Who said you can't sneak up on someone?
    The warhead is heavy. And who said it was just one warhead and not multiple submunitions?
    Who even said that Poseidon is a product and not a platform that can be made in different versions?
    Who even said that Poseidon doesn't have a habitable version with Losharik's capabilities?
    Who said that Poseidon cannot return to the carrier after completing the task.
    We know very little about Poseidon. And some of what we know may well be misinformation.
    I see Poseidon as a carrier of hypersonic missiles with nuclear warheads. That same Dead Hand along the coast. Where the population density is highest. How many Zircons can Poseidon carry?
    4? 6?
    Will missile defense systems be able to intercept a hypersonic missile launched from the ocean 800 kilometers from the coast?
    1. +1
      25 August 2026 15: 00
      Quote: garri-lin
      The top speed is incredible. And who said you can only walk at top speed? Who said you can't sneak up on someone?
      The warhead is heavy. And who said it was just one warhead and not multiple submunitions?
      Who even said that Poseidon is a product and not a platform that can be made in different versions?
      Who even said that Poseidon doesn't have a habitable version with Losharik's capabilities?
      Who said that Poseidon cannot return to the carrier after completing the task.

      And who told you that even one of the versions you presented justifies the creation of "Poseidon"?
      1. -1
        25 August 2026 19: 08
        A deep-sea manned or unmanned vehicle capable of carrying out complex work at depth is definitely worth it.
        Under the pack ice.
        Sabotage on drilling rigs. Cables and pipelines.
        We know almost nothing about Poseidon.
        But for a simply huge torpedo it is too big.
        1. +2
          25 August 2026 19: 16
          Quote: garri-lin
          A deep-sea manned or unmanned vehicle capable of carrying out complex work at depth

          This is a 2,000 t nuclear-powered Losharik capable of diving up to 6 km.
          Quote: garri-lin
          Under the pack ice.
          Sabotage on drilling rigs. Cables and pipelines.

          All that's left is to find the drilling rigs under the pack ice:)))))
          In general, building a massive nuclear submarine for sabotage is nonsense, and a death sentence isn't enough. In peacetime, such sabotage is utter nonsense, and if necessary, it could be accomplished by other means. A huge carrier for several submarines is as necessary for such a mission as James Bond needs an armored train. In wartime, they're simply unnecessary.
          1. -1
            25 August 2026 21: 25
            And in a period of growing hybrid wars?
            A carrier is a carrier, and a device is a device. The carrier can simply deliver the device closer and then move on to the next target.
            And I'll repeat it. We know too little about Poseidon to criticize it so indiscriminately. Such a large-scale and lengthy project would have been suffocated by competitors long ago, if it weren't justified.
            1. +1
              26 August 2026 08: 31
              Quote: garri-lin
              And in a period of growing hybrid wars?

              I understand you like the phrase. It sounds mysterious – "hybrid warfare!" :))))
              Unfortunately, the huge carrier (and there are two of them, besides the Khabarovsk there is also the Belgorod) of several Poseidons is not justified in any way.
              Quote: garri-lin
              Such a large-scale and lengthy project would have been strangled by competitors long ago, if it had not been justified.

              You're simply unaware of how the budget is formed and spent. Better yet, recall how the construction of the "peace doves" went. 22160
              Quote: garri-lin
              We know too little about Poseidon to criticize him so indiscriminately.

              We know too much that our fleet lacks everything. And that today, the security of the naval component of our strategic nuclear forces is not ensured.
              The Northern Fleet has several bases: Zapadnaya Litsa, Vidyaevo, the Gadzhiyevo base in the Kola Bay, and Severomorsk and Severodvinsk in the White Sea. For all this, there are two modern minesweepers capable of at least some sweeping of bottom mines. Anti-submarine aircraft are practically nonexistent, with only a few Il-38Ns in the entire theater, even though the aircraft is obsolete from the last century. The Northern Fleet has no corvettes or modern surface-to-surface ships.
              And the Northern Fleet will ensure the operation of 7 SSBNs, and the eighth one, the Dolgoruky, is under repair.
              And two "elephants" for the Poseidons...
              1. -1
                26 August 2026 10: 56
                I don't like the phrase. But the essence is conveyed accurately.
                It’s both a war and not a war, and we seem to trade and exchange blows on the territory of third countries.
                And it is not entirely clear who is a friend and who is an enemy.

                I have a rough idea of ​​how the budget is formed. A dove of peace from another era. Back then, the electorate's rose-colored glasses were firmly planted. You could cut corners without fear. And the scale of the work was different.

                We also know that the state cannot increase the rate of production of rank 1 and 2 surface ships.
                Even with funding, this is problematic. There are no personnel for the entire chain.
                And we build submarines, more or less.
                Good submarines. Maybe they should make what they can. Lots of different ones? Why switch to something they're clearly not good at and thereby lose production?
                So, both "elephants" are old hulls converted to suit the new design. Would completing them in their original form have significantly increased the country's defense capability?
                I do not think.
                1. +2
                  26 August 2026 11: 31
                  Quote: garri-lin
                  We also know that the state cannot increase the rate of production of rank 1 and 2 surface ships.

                  Minesweepers and small anti-submarine ships are not 2nd rank.
                  Quote: garri-lin
                  And we build submarines, more or less.

                  Exactly. And given the extreme shortage of multipurpose submarines, we need two Yasen-class submarines far more than the Belgorod and Khabarovsk.
                  Quote: garri-lin
                  So, both "elephants" are old hulls converted for a new project.

                  No. Belgorod is a remake, and Khabarovsk is a new one.
                  1. +2
                    27 August 2026 13: 27
                    I thought for a long time about what to answer. And decided not to continue.
                    I've been on this site for a while now and I find your comments thoughtful and balanced. Especially since yours are more practical in this regard, while mine are philosophical and theoretical, and in this case, it's impossible to arrive at a general truth. I simply think Poseidon isn't as simple as people think.

                    With respect.
                    1. +4
                      27 August 2026 15: 07
                      The ability to stop a discussion before it devolves into a nasty argument is invaluable. I don't agree with your opinion, but you have every right to it. I respectfully accept and support your decision. Perhaps in the future, on other issues, we can reach a consensus; that would be a pleasure.
                      Until next time!
  13. 0
    26 August 2026 08: 58
    Quote: Per se.
    If launched from shore, there will be even more questions. If even submarines can lose orientation, what can we say about a robotic torpedo?


    Excuse me, but then why the 10000 km range? You can lose your bearings at sea even at 100 km.
    1. 0
      28 August 2026 14: 29
      Range is a secondary effect. The main thing is speed and depth of immersion. Because there's an immeasurable amount of energy on board.
  14. 0
    26 August 2026 09: 01
    Quote: Andrey from Chelyabinsk
    It will sink because... For it to start and work, it needs to be launched at a certain depth and speed.


    I highly doubt it. If they could build a nuclear reactor, a warhead, and a guidance system, why couldn't they handle a stationary launch? Especially since liquid is incompressible, meaning depth within the maximum shouldn't matter.
  15. 0
    28 August 2026 01: 04
    It's strange to read this discussion, the heated debates, the authors' logic... If a military doctrine is adopted, according to which Putin declared that Russia will never be the first to use its strategic weapons. Only in response to an attack... A rhetorical question can be asked about all this: what will happen to our Burevestniks, Poseidons, nuclear submarines, silo-based launchers, and mobile launchers in their garages? Most of these will be destroyed by the enemy where they are located—at their berths, in their garages, at launch sites, and at airfields... The only resources left to inflict "unacceptable damage to the enemy" will be the occasional surviving missiles or a nuclear submarine on alert in the ocean, if the enemy hasn't detected it before...