Ministry of Defense decided to put the "Shark" on scrap metal?

79


29 September it became known that the world's largest nuclear submarines of the 941 Avenue Shark, which are in service with the Russian Navy, fell victim to underfunding, the Russian-American START-3 agreement and new Russian developments. The Russian Defense Ministry has decided to write off and dispose of these strategic submarine cruisers before 2014. Alternative options for the service of submarines are not considered because of the high cost of their implementation, which means that the boats will go for scrap. According to the Ministry of Defense of Russia, the country's nuclear shield will not suffer from this decision.

The military gave explanations that it was impossible to use nuclear submarines for their intended purpose due to the signing by Russia and the United States last year of a treaty on the limitation of strategic offensive arms - START-3, while at the same time, the conversion of boats would cost the military budget a pretty penny. At the same time, the “Northern Machine-Building Enterprise”, which was engaged in the construction of these submarines, believes that they could be converted into all-season sea trucks or gas tankers.

Typhunov’s career (according to the NATO classification), according to Russian Defense Ministry officials, was destroyed by the new submarines of the Borey project, which are being built on Sevmash and adapted for new Bulava ballistic missiles. Their successful trials make the maintenance of larger and more expensive submarines pointless. The crews of the Borey submarines are 1,5 times smaller than those of the Typhoon, and the costs of maintaining these boats differ. At the same time, the Borey is a more advanced submarine of a smaller size, which is much more difficult to detect, the military argues its decision. The Ministry of Defense believes that any alterations of boats of Project 941 will require the investment of tens of billions of rubles, and it is better to spend this money on the construction of new ships for fleet.
Ministry of Defense decided to put the "Shark" on scrap metal?
The submarine project 941 "Shark"

According to Sevmash experts, the options for rebuilding these submarines to transport oil, liquefied gas or cargo under the northern ice would not be very expensive for Russian polar ports. Meanwhile, Alexander Konovalov, president of the Institute for Strategic Assessment, thinks differently. In his opinion, the time of the “Typhoons” is irrevocably gone. Today it is a giant submarine, the largest in the world, with a triple hull and very expensive to operate. In addition, there are simply no missiles for them. According to him, the disposal of these submarine cruisers will cost the state several hundred million rubles, which is much cheaper than the re-equipment of submarines for any other needs.

Since the middle of the 1990-s, the production of the main armament for these submarines of ballistic missiles of the P-39 series has not been carried out. For the most part, this was due to economic considerations, there was simply not enough money for these purposes. In 1999, the decision was made to replace all solid-propellant P-39 rockets with a new more compact Bulava rocket. A few years later, all the P-39 missiles in the Russian fleet’s arsenal were declared unsuitable for further exploitation due to the failure of their accelerating stages — solid fuel is subject to more rapid decay than liquid.

Since then, the only submarines of the 667 BRDM "Dolphin", which were armed with the P-29RMU2 ballistic missiles known as "Sineva", remained the basis of our country's nuclear deterrence component. Currently, the Russian Navy has 6 of such submarines: the Bryansk, Verkhoturye, Yekaterinburg, Karelia, Novomoskovsk and Tula. Each of these submarines is capable of carrying up to 128 nuclear warheads, and the entire fleet is fully capable of taking on 768 warheads, that is, exactly half of the limit allocated to our country.

So the role of the signing by the Russian side of the START-3 treaty in the fate of the Sharks is also great. This treaty limited the US and Russian nuclear arsenals to 1550 warheads. Moreover, only the new submarines of the Borey project together with the submarines of the Dolphin project can accommodate more than 1100 warheads, which leaves the remaining components of the Russian nuclear triad — the Strategic Missile Forces and the far aviation only 400 charges. There is simply no place for the three remaining nuclear submarines, Project 941, because only one boat of this class is capable of carrying 120-200 nuclear warheads on board, and the entire fleet of boats is able to eat almost ¼ of Russia's nuclear arsenal.
The submarine project 941 "Shark"

Earlier, the Russian Defense Ministry has already disposed of 3 from 6 of existing submarines of this project in accordance with the old strategic arms limitation treaty, START-2. In Russia, it was decided that maintaining the data of a submarine in operational condition costs the Russian budget very expensive - about one 300 million rubles annually were spent on one submarine cruiser.

History emergence

Strategic missile submarine cruisers of the 941 Ave. have been developed at the Leningrad Central Design Bureau "Rubin" since the beginning of the 1970's. The appearance of these boats in the 80 of the last century became a real world sensation. Each boat consisted of 2's separate robust hulls that were connected by transitional locks, 3's robust modules, and 20 launcher shafts that were located between the hulls. All this was also united by a light body. Two strong submarine hull ran parallel to each other. They were located residential crew compartments, control systems and life support, reactors. In one of the three robust modules there was a compartment with 6 torpedo tubes, the other two modules occupied the central post and the aft compartment. The submarine was equipped with a huge rescue chamber, which allowed the entire crew of the submarine cruiser to surface, even from the beyond depth of the dive. The length of the submarine was 172 meters, and width - 23 meters.

The comfort of the submarine at the time seemed just fabulous. The boat was equipped with a small gym and even a sauna in which all the crew members could bathe, including sailors and conscripts. The huge missiles with which the submarines were armed were the most powerful not only in our country, but also abroad. One salvo of the Shark was equal in nuclear power to the 2 divisions of the Strategic Missile Forces, which were armed with the Topol monoblock missiles.



The division of such TAPRK (heavy nuclear submarine missile cruisers) was able to inflict irreparable damage to any enemy. That is why the data of nuclear submarines were allocated to a separate strategic system, which in NATO was called "Typhoon". Under these submarines, a special infrastructure was created in the West Face on the Kola Peninsula, where submarines were based. To ensure their activities in the USSR, special satellites were developed. The money invested in this project was simply enormous, but they developed such a unique strategic system, which was simply not equal in invulnerability and efficiency in the world. Bearing their combat duty "Sharks" should have been under the guise of the Arctic Arctic ice cap, and they could deliver their deadly strikes directly from the North Pole.

The Typhoon project was so secret that the American intelligence services had no information about its implementation. American writer Tom Klensey, close to the Pentagon, was so impressed with this submarine that he even wrote the novel “The Hunt for Red October”, which was later filmed by Hollywood. In this film, Sean Connery played the role of the commander of the Soviet submarine "Shark", who wanted to steal a boat in the United States. The Americans assigned the classification "Typhoon" to the boats of this project, hitting the very point, this was the name of the system that included these submarines.

The submarine project 941 "Shark"


Characteristics of the submarine project 941

The 941 “Akula” TAPRK is the world's largest nuclear submarine developed at Rubin TsKBMT. The task for their development was issued in 1972 year, the first submarine of the series was laid on Sevmash in June 1976 of the year, its launch into water took place in September 1980 of the year. Before its launching into the water in the nose of the submarine, below the waterline, an image of the Shark was painted, and later on the uniform of the crew of the submariners also appeared special stripes depicting a shark.

In total, 1981 submarines of this class were built from 1989 to 6 in the USSR. A feature of their design was the presence inside the light 5 case of habitable durable buildings, 2 of which were the main ones, were parallel to each other and had the largest diameter 10 meters. These two hulls were implemented in the submarine scheme of the catamaran. In the front of the ship, between the 2's solid hulls, there were missile shafts, which were first located in front of the wheelhouse. In addition, the boat also had 3 separate hermetic compartments: a torpedo, control compartment with a central post and aft mechanical compartment.
Submarine project 955 "Borey"

These submarines were able to develop underwater speed in 25 nodes, to dive to a depth of half a kilometer. With a total length of 172,8 m and a width of 23,3 m, these boats had the maximum submerged displacement of 48 000 tons. The autonomy of their voyages was equal to 180 days, and the crew consisted of 160 people, of whom 52 were officers. The structure of the "Shark" were 6 torpedo tubes caliber 533 mm. for various types of torpedoes, including the Vodopad rocket-torpedoes, as well as 20 ballistic three-stage solid-fuel rocket R-39 and R-39U. In 1986, it was decided to develop their improved version - the P-39UTTH Bark missile, but by the 1998 year, after 3 unsuccessful launches, the Defense Ministry decided to abandon the development of this missile, ready for that moment by 73%.

The future of the Russian submarine fleet of the 955 submarine

Submarine Ave. 955 "Borey" (according to the NATO classification Borei or Dolgorukiy after the launch of the first ship of the series). These boats belong to the new series of Russian submarines of the SSBN class (strategic missile submarine cruiser). Before 2017, it is planned to build 8 of such submarines. The length of the submarine is 160 m., The width of 13,5 m., The maximum underwater displacement - 24 000 t. The maximum depth of the dive to 400 m., Submerged speed - up to 29 nodes, the autonomy of the submarine - 90 man, including 107 officers.

Today 3 boats of this series “Alexander Nevsky”, “Vladimir Monomakh” and “St. Nicholas” are being built on Sevmash. Construction of the first in the series of submarines "Yuri Dolgoruky" began 2 November 1996, 15 April 2007, the boat was withdrawn from the workshops, 12 February 2008, it was launched, 19 June 2009, the first submarine went to sea and began to carry out factory running tests . The second ship of the “Alexander Nevsky” series was laid on 19 March 2004 of the year, 6 December 2010 of the year was launched, the deadline for the submarine is determined by the 2012 year.

Defense Ministry denied reports about the cancellation of "Sharks"

The Russian Ministry of Defense did not make decisions on the write-off and disposal of strategic nuclear submarines of the 941 Akula project, reports RIA News with reference to a high-ranking source in the military. According to him, all submarines are in the combat formation of the Russian Navy. How long the world's largest nuclear submarines will be in service with the country, the source of the agency did not specify.
Submarines of the Shark project were built in the USSR in 1976-1989. In total, six ships were built under this project, three of which are currently listed as part of the Russian Navy - Dmitry Donskoy, upgraded to the 941UM, Arkhangelsk and Severstal projects. "Dmitry Donskoy" is currently used as a test ship for testing promising intercontinental sea-based ballistic missile P-30 "Bulava".

According to a RIA Novosti source, the Dmitry Donskoy will in any case remain in the Navy "there is still enough time" and will be a reserve ship for testing the Bulava ballistic missiles. Severstal and Arkhangelsk are currently in reserve and stand at the quay wall of the Severodvinsk shipbuilding enterprise Sevmash. “The problem is that these boats do not have any standard P-39 missiles in service. After 1991, they are not manufactured by Yuzhmash (a Ukrainian enterprise engaged in the production of P-39 and P-39 missiles - note 'Lenta.ru” ) ", - said the source of the agency.

Reserve submarines are currently awaiting a decision about their future. Earlier it was reported that the defense ministry could decide either to upgrade Severstal and Arkhangelsk on the 941UM project, or to write off and dispose of ships. In May, Vladimir Navyx Vysotsky, commander-in-chief of the Russian Navy, said that two reserve submarines of the Shark project would serve in the Navy until 2010. At the same time, he noted that "their modernization opportunities are very large."

29 September 2011 was published by the newspaper Izvestia, citing a source in the Russian Ministry of Defense, that the submarines of the 941 project will be written off and disposed of before the 2014 year. The reason for the decision to write off ships was the end of 2011 scheduled for the end of 2012, the launch of the Borey 955 submarine and the conditions of the US-Russia Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START-3) limiting the number of deployed nuclear warheads of each of the sides of 1550 units.
30.09.2011, 10:17:23 http://lenta.ru/news/2011/09/29/akula/
79 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Sergh
    +22
    30 September 2011 08: 16
    With this, START-3, as it were, didn’t work out again like last time, we cut the missiles, and shoved them in the fridges to better times. Do not fall for this bait again? I don’t like this whole thing.
    1. +4
      30 September 2011 10: 09
      The SNV-3 is just more profitable for us. The Americans have more warheads than we do. We have a lot of outdated and outdated missiles. If, under the treaty, the Americans "reduce" their missiles and we take away our decommissioned missiles. Then we can and should not produce new missiles. violating the agreement to the number of restrictions. However, people who do not understand anything about this are sitting in the mine defense. Sharks of course are better not to be written off, but to be converted into commercial trucks. With their help, you can transport oil from the Arctic. With their safety margin, no oil spills are terrible .Although it depends on which captain to put.
      1. -4
        30 September 2011 10: 31
        Oil will be more expensive than gold wink , but how much it will fit - minuscule! Smart people build ice class tankers at 70000 tons. and then the payback period is 10 years.
        1. +1
          30 September 2011 17: 58
          In smart people, tankers either drown or get damaged and an oil spill occurs.
          Also, sharks can be used for transporters, to deliver covert military supplies anywhere, only money in the modernization must be shoved not a little.
      2. 0
        30 September 2011 18: 32
        And what the hell difference is 1700 missiles or 700? if 100 is enough to turn a ball into a radioactive glass planet, is it provided that it does not smash into pieces? and that all of START 3 clings ...
        1. Motherland
          0
          30 September 2011 18: 43
          No one wants to destroy the ball, nuclear weapons are a fragile balance of the world, and the difference is 1700 will restrain the United States, and 100 may stop their missile defense and please "Russia has a dictatorship so the US and NATO peacekeepers will go there."
        2. 0
          1 October 2011 00: 05
          What prevents remaking into the media of the KR and RCC? in any case, it will be cheaper, if only the amers will not pay for disposal again ...
      3. His
        0
        1 October 2011 15: 17
        In fact, they are not cutting anything, we are now no longer decree. We cannot fully inspect them even, there is no good control, just words. And they guard us. If anything, trumpet on CNN
    2. ytqnhfk
      -1
      3 October 2011 00: 00
      I am a normal economic person, but even having bought a completely new thing, the old one will not be thrown away, I will not put it into "conservation" and as practice shows, after a while it will come in handy for me and while this scheme has never failed I think and it was not worth it to break it always have time to do it takes time !!!!!!!!!!
    3. Artemka
      +1
      2 December 2011 13: 53
      Lord !!! Where else is there to cut them there and it seems so little.
  2. AKM1917
    +1
    30 September 2011 08: 18
    after the collapse of the USSR, the main task of the United States was to destroy the Russian Armed Forces, first of all nuclear weapons - in the USSR they developed the Shark (Typhoon) in 1979, they started production in 80, by the end of the 80s brand new sharks were armed with 60 pieces, in 90 they started feverishly cutting to metal at the same time saying that they are outdated, and analogues in appearance of these boats were never created in the world.
    1. Jaguar
      0
      30 September 2011 15: 39
      you wrote an extra toe to 6
  3. indrik
    +17
    30 September 2011 08: 40
    they refused from ak-74, we cut the apl for iron, rumor - one year, the exploration of the cargo was abolished! It remains to bend down and smear with petroleum jelly ourselves. ps and our tanks are "bad" and our aviation is not very good. (((It seems that the USSR was not conquered only because of the highly moral principles of crap and philanthropy, and not because of the presence of a strong army and navy.
  4. +9
    30 September 2011 08: 51
    The Sharks should have carried out their combat duty under the cover of the ice cap of the Arctic, and they could deliver their deadly blows directly from the North Pole.

    So much for the battle for the Arctic ...
    1. 0
      30 September 2011 10: 17
      How do you imagine the "battle for the Arctic" with unloaded weapons ?? There are no missiles for these boats and will never be (R-39 was removed not only from production, but also from service in general as early as ~ 2000). And by the way, the information is not entirely accurate, one boat of Project 941U will remain in the fleet. http://www.rosbalt.ru/main/2011/09/29/895572.html
      1. +3
        30 September 2011 11: 02
        Thomas, then what's the point of leaving her?
        1. +3
          30 September 2011 11: 38
          As a testing platform for testing promising types of naval weapons.
          1. +4
            30 September 2011 11: 44
            Wouldn’t it be easier to conserve the entire Typhoon system as the Americans do, and then equip it with this very promising weapon and put it into operation?
            1. 0
              30 September 2011 12: 12
              And what to preserve there? 2 pcs.? The Americans use and modernize only one type of "Ohio" submarine - 12 pcs., The British, French, Chinese, also have one type, but why do we need three (667,941,955) ?? A waste of money on duplication. In the future, only 955M should remain.
              1. +2
                30 September 2011 13: 45
                Quote: FoMaS
                And what is there to preserve? 2 pcs.?

                But what about the words from Yuferov's "song" what to throw away

                At present, the Russian Navy includes 6 such nuclear submarines: Bryansk, Verkhoturye, Yekaterinburg, Karelia, Novomoskovsk and Tula
                1. -2
                  30 September 2011 14: 46
                  "Songs" refer to the boats of Project 667BDRM, which have already undergone modernization for the updated R-29RMU2 (Liner) missile, which will be in service until 2030. fellow
                2. gans
                  0
                  30 September 2011 23: 16
                  typhoons left 3 boats - "Dmitry Donskoy", "Arkhangelsk" and "Severstal"
                  these boats are not armed with standard R-39 missiles. After 1991 they are not produced by Yuzhmash (Ukraine) "
  5. +13
    30 September 2011 09: 02
    A lot of yelling about the reduction, about START-3 ...

    Let me remind you of the ancient Roman rule "Who benefits from?"

    Beneficially clearly not for us. This START-3 in general somehow looks like a licking you-know-what-you-know-who.

    About tanks and others generally keep quiet like a fish on ice.

    But all these screams about how bad things are with us make you wonder if this is real. But actions to eliminate the "bad" and purchase "good" abroad suggest a different idea.
  6. +6
    30 September 2011 09: 40
    When I saw her (shark) for the first time, my heart sank !!! An incredible sight turning from trepidation into indescribable pride for us !!! All the sadder the news. It remains to be hoped that Borea and Mace are still worth it!
  7. -1
    30 September 2011 09: 45
    Well, as usual, the noobs came running screaming "boss, it's all gone!", Although the article clearly chewed everything up (not without some errors). Well, I will try to add.
    The creation of a complex with such characteristics was too costly even for the USSR (in many respects due to the defectiveness of TK), the GRC created a rocket at a low technological level (compared to D5), due to the backwardness in the fields of non-destructive testing, element base, high-speed general-purpose computers. This resulted in the creation of a monstrous carrier (let me remind you that the increase in the manufacturing cost from the size and weight of the turbojet engine does not occur linearly, but exponentially), for which it was necessary to make nuclear submarines with unprecedented design solutions, burdened with many problems, such as huge money for construction and operation, noise, a huge thermal footprint. All this was also aggravated by the restructuring of the coastal infrastructure, in particular, 120 ton cranes are needed to load rockets into the mines, of which 2 were built and the state of which at the moment does not stand up to criticism.
    The general conclusion, even the operation of the remaining nuclear submarines, is costing Russia enormous money, which can be directed in a different direction with much greater benefit.

    I also allow myself a few clarifications about some of the errors in the article itself.
    R-29RMU2 was adopted in 2007, before that, the R-29RM was in service.
    About the notorious 73%, nothing more than an excuse from the GRC, designed to show how unfairly Bark was shut down. The readiness of the rocket cannot be judged without at least range tests and without taking into account collapsed cooperation.
  8. +2
    30 September 2011 10: 15
    September 29th. The data on the cancellation of strategic nuclear submarines of Project 941 (the code is “Shark”, according to NATO classification - “Typhoon”) are untrue, a senior representative of the Russian Defense Ministry said on Thursday.
    “The Ministry of Defense did not make such a decision. The boats are in combat formation, ”the agency’s representative said. At the same time, he emphasized that in any case, the Dmitry Donskoy nuclear submarine (project 941U) will remain in the combat structure of the Navy for a sufficient amount of time as a reserve for testing the latest Bulava ballistic missile, RIA Novosti reports.
    He recalled that it was from this carrier until 2011 that all tests of this rocket were carried out. From this year, the tests of the "Mace" are carried out with the standard carrier of this weapon - the nuclear submarine "Yuri Dolgoruky" (code "Borey", project 955)
    At the same time, a representative of the Russian defense department noted that the other two submarines of this project: Severstal and Arkhangelsk are indeed currently located at the pier of Sevmash enterprise (Severodvinsk), where they are waiting for their future fate. “The problem is that these boats do not have standard R-39 missiles in service. After 1991, Yuzhmash (Ukraine) does not release them, ”the source said.
    According to the newspaper VZGLYAD, earlier on Thursday the media disseminated information that by 2014 strategic missile submarines, better known as the Typhoon, will be decommissioned due to a limit under the START treaty.
    The Ministry of Defense allegedly reported that all three boats of this project remaining afloat: Dmitry Donskoy, Arkhangelsk and Severstal - will be cut into metal.
    As reported, the fate of the giant submarines was predetermined by the START-3 treaty, signed by the presidents of Russia and the United States in the spring of 2010. He limited the strategic arsenals of each country to 1 nuclear warheads. Moreover, only on the new boats of Project 550 Borey and the missile carriers of Project 955BDRM Dolphin that are still in service, can more than 667 thousand 1 warheads be placed.
    1. -5
      30 September 2011 12: 22
      This was immediately clear after the words "source in the ministry" in the original novjcnb /

      PS And the sediment remained.
  9. pokermen
    +6
    30 September 2011 10: 15
    30 million dollars a year for maintenance, it’s just ridiculous against the background of billions buried nowhere.
  10. NUT
    NUT
    0
    30 September 2011 10: 28
    in the course of the strip with which we do not drink, we decided to ram up our karmashics with our money
    Why can not these boats be slightly mixed up in China or Argentina at the wholesale price?
  11. +1
    30 September 2011 10: 43
    Rationally - junk, really it's time to landfill.

    Mentally - well you do bastards ... Such ships on metal ..

    Strategically - xs, Borey 1 of 3 of them ... at least they would shoot from the pier. (if there is anything else in the mines).

    And yet, I am sure that they will be sawn out of turn, he himself saw how a ship came to the factory under its own power, sawed it faster than a whole cloud of standing rubbish from the time of 50 years, all because it still went.
  12. svvaulsh
    0
    30 September 2011 11: 02
    Gentlemen strategists from MO! To reduce the cost of cutting the deterrent from the attack, I propose three options:

    1. Make a museum and profit from the sale of entrance tickets;

    2. Make an entertainment center with all kinds of attractions and cafes;

    3. Launch a program of tourist pokatushki with simulated shooting for rich Pinocchio (such as space tourists).
    1. ZEBRASH
      -2
      30 September 2011 14: 02
      I agree with this - at least some benefit. Only the money is still known where to go recourse angry We are waiting for "Boreev" winked
  13. +1
    30 September 2011 11: 13
    As soon as their hands went up?
  14. 0
    30 September 2011 13: 47
    And preservation does not suit, just for needles. Yankee "Missouri" kept on canned food for half a century, and we all at once, maybe it's also Yankee?
  15. 0
    30 September 2011 14: 04
    ".... Today it is a giant submarine, the largest in the world, with a triple hull and very expensive to operate. Besides, there are simply no missiles under them ...."
    I remembered the Mistrals, do we have helicopters under their helipads? If not, then immediately after the purchase it is rational to put them into scrap.
    But seriously, then the strategic offensive arms have already violated. Believe them to nothing. They are too hysterical about the fact that the fool Abama went on about the Russians and put American citizens under attack. As soon as he blows his own, someone will be hardened. and how new to resolve this treaty ... It would make sense to hide it as they are or draw flowers on the sides and, under the guise of a children's playground for officer children, put somewhere a thread for conservation. winked
    Damn, at least to make a museum (on a combat platoon))), but not to disassemble.
    1. -13
      30 September 2011 14: 48
      Haha, I recently started to visit this site to read the delivering comments of reasoning noobs. Cheers no less than, for example, Zhzheshechka some Sharansky.
      1. 0
        30 September 2011 14: 58
        Thank you for your condescension, Your Majesty. Do you always shine with such snobbery? Your tactic - to cheat and condescendingly laugh you still not tired?
        1. -7
          30 September 2011 16: 59
          Well, I see that you have read my comments. And, probably, they noticed that I try not to go into those topics in which there is a complete zero, which I advise you.
          Excuse me, when when our country is rude and lousy from all sides, so that it doesn’t become done, as a rule, without owning any information on the topic, is this normal? With such people, I have an appropriate tone.
          1. 0
            30 September 2011 17: 08
            Quote: Varnaga
            I try not to go into those topics in which a complete zero, which I advise you.

            I’m advisers, do you know where I saw them?
            And about the rudeness and litter the country do not skid. Nobody talks about the country of bad. Maybe the local one and who else ... They say the government is talking about politics, but it and the country have different concepts. Do not distort.

            And what exactly did I say incorrectly in my comment?
            About Mistral?
            About START violations by amers?
            About the fact that the American media howl about concessions to Russia?
            or about the fact that it’s not worth it to be so reckless to please the Americans with their strategic offensive arms to destroy atomic submarines, even if now we cannot find use for them? What exactly?
            1. prunx
              -3
              30 September 2011 22: 46
              solodova, come on you blubber. No decision has been made yet, written in black and white. Alarmists. As for START-3 (are you talking about it?), The number of deployed nuclear warheads in the Russian Federation is less than that stipulated by the treaty, unlike the United States. This is a good reason for us to increase the number of the latest warheads with the latest delivery vehicles. According to the agreement, the Americans will have to significantly empty their nuclear cellars.
              1. oper66
                -1
                30 September 2011 23: 56
                yes they are devastated despite the fact that they were sold a cloud of a tone of weapons grade plutonium aa
                1. prunx
                  -3
                  1 October 2011 00: 46
                  Young man, well, deal with the topic at least a little. Nobody sold plutonium. I heard a jingle, but don’t know where it is?
                  1. oper66
                    -2
                    1 October 2011 01: 10
                    WELL YET ALSO AND ENRICHED URANIUM AND EVERYTHING THAT DISSEMINATED AND MANUFACTURED YES SEPARATE THANKS FOR YOUNG I AM NOT OLD IN MEASURE GRAVED WIFE HELLO IT KNOWS FROM WHO
                    1. prunx
                      -2
                      1 October 2011 10: 05
                      When I wrote "young man" I didn't mean age. And I was not wrong. Why are you exposing your weaknesses? )))
              2. Sanzyro
                -2
                1 October 2011 11: 51
                In addition to charges, delivery vehicles are needed! And here the amers always had a better position, and now even more so!
              3. -9
                3 October 2011 11: 07
                No, I'm talking about START-1, 91 of the year. About START-3, I know. that we don’t have so many missiles yet, we can still build them up. Here it’s true, I have doubts about the openness for us of information about how much of this type of weapons they actually have, and besides, we will soon lose the GRU, as I understand it ... And according to START-3, many in America are in a fever . The panic is that the Russian Misha is sharpening her teeth, and they are being disarmed .. For this, Abamka can be thrown off soon .. So it seems to me that it’s not worth while disposing of the boats, these amers are so unpredictable ...
                If all these strategic offensive arms are discarded for now, then we see that the benefits in combat from the submarines are significantly greater than from surface ships.
                From the history of submarines:
                World War I: if surface ships sank all 217 transports, the submarines sent to the bottom about 6000 ships.
                In the second world submarine lived up to its purpose. They sank about 5000 ships, while surface ones - 336.
                And with such statistics, we get rid of them, but buy Mistral ..
                I am not opposed to the purchase of new weapons, especially if they have a full package of documentation and technology. But it is somehow strange to me that we dismantle our boats so easily, buying expensive strangers, who will probably also need revision.
                It’s good if it’s just groundless rumors, and not a fling of information in order to get an opinion and put the idea itself into society, so that later on it would be possible to carry out this business anyway.
                So there is no panic yet, there is a slight bewilderment.
                1. -7
                  3 October 2011 12: 12
                  By the way, another info about who pays for the disposal of submarines - CANADA !!!
                  http://grani.ru/War/Arms/Nukes/m.90036.html
            2. oper66
              0
              30 September 2011 23: 54
              I’ve said it correctly and don’t be sad, just now the livestock has grown up on the site with respect
  16. sealord
    0
    30 September 2011 15: 20
    The fight for the Arctic is gaining momentum. This test balloon, in the form of "rumors" - releases OUR RIGHT WATER on a zilch, later a few more similar balloons and ... - will be cut or sold. There are many options for using Sharks (all profitable). Now you understand the approximate method of destruction of the enemy's best weapons systems. And what are all the systems of command and control of the Navy.
    1. oper66
      0
      30 September 2011 23: 58
      sharks survived out and new ones don't let out
  17. BOSS
    +3
    30 September 2011 18: 16
    The Ministry of Defense should be allowed to scrap!
  18. Motherland
    +1
    30 September 2011 18: 19
    They want to start up what all the fleets of the world are afraid of! They must be judged for intentional wrecking at the posts.
    1. -4
      30 September 2011 19: 06
      Are you laughing? Whose fleet is afraid of pr.941 ??? wink
      1. prunx
        -6
        30 September 2011 22: 53
        This is such miracle experts. Boo-ha-ha.
        1. Sanzyro
          0
          1 October 2011 11: 57
          It was ... By your standards, probably a long time ago, but it was. The USSR did not have aircraft carriers, we also lost in the number of ships, but our submarine fleet was powerful! And you know, the United States was really afraid to mess around, like this insolent, as it is now!
  19. +1
    30 September 2011 18: 39
    And here the "far-sighted" policy of Mr. MO is manifested. In the West, they will thank him, probably he hopes so. Normal countries, before breaking the old, build a new one. Nomes are always ahead of the rest of the planet. We hasten to fulfill any agreement to please the West, which is in Unlike us, they are in no hurry to do this. They even agree to allocate money for the speedy destruction of our military equipment.
  20. Motherland
    +1
    30 September 2011 18: 47
    And what else to expect, we lost the first stage of the 3 world - "cold war" so to speak "scored a goal for themselves" we are to blame for our naivety of course, it has always been so and in all countries that it was unlucky with the rulers, I think Russia will still show the whole world and our bear will plug the beak of an American chicken, it is clear that the United States is already eating itself.
    1. oper66
      0
      1 October 2011 00: 00
      in hand-to-hand divorce do not annoy the battle ahead or just rlfdrt knock on the can
  21. Volkhov
    -1
    30 September 2011 20: 33
    A good ark, and grain in the mines. Only to expel in the winter of 12 - 13 g. To the Atlantic, otherwise it will spread ice on the shore here. Finally, the sailors will take their wives with them and will be at least sure of something.
  22. L. konstantin
    -1
    30 September 2011 21: 55
    I will say! like a major FSB! This is a strategic mistake! shark or as they say red October in the west! very unique pl. blue and not near !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!

    THEY JUST FOG YOUR BRAINS WANT! A MASTER OF MASTERPOSITION STANDS WITH AUTOGENE TO FUCK EVERYTHING!

    READ MESSAGE !!!!!! THE DIFFERENCE IS EVERYTHING! IF THE FUCKING DON'T KNOW DO NOT WRITE ANY CRAWLING FROM VAKEPEI!
    1. prunx
      -2
      30 September 2011 22: 59
      Sineva, actually, this is such a rocket. not a submarine. Well, do not make me funny, I beg you, Comrade Petrosyan from the FSB. lol lol lol
      1. dimon
        -2
        30 September 2011 23: 06
        The comrade drank beer and decided that the FSB epaulettes fit him :)
        Although, perhaps, if, ash stump, he is from XXX (three-letter organization), he could see a SHARK in Egiped (not to be confused with Vykepei) :)
        Perhaps she was with the blue :)
  23. kazanskii
    -1
    30 September 2011 22: 31
    Will the Ministry of Defense earn a lot of money on the Shark scrap metal? To melt their stars, and then it will be more useful! What's further to expect from them? What else will climb into their sick head?
  24. gans
    +1
    30 September 2011 23: 21
    the decision to cut has not yet been made, "Severstal" and "Arkhangelsk" are currently at the pier of "Sevmashpredpriyatiya" (Severodvinsk), where they await their further fate. "The problem is that these boats do not have standard R-39 missiles in service. After 1991, Yuzhmash (Ukraine) has not produced them."
    1. prunx
      -4
      30 September 2011 23: 33
      Why are you chewing on them here, one third can not read, another third can read, but cannot understand what they read lol
    2. +1
      1 October 2011 01: 00
      R-39 - removed, but you can develop boxes for the blue under the standard rockets, and there you look and youzhmash will catch up ... Who is stopping to do this ??? or for the same mace, or remake under the UAV ... DEBILS !!! (this is about the Defense Ministry in particular and about the government as a whole) ...
      1. prunx
        -3
        1 October 2011 10: 58
        There is much to be done, only a matter of price. In order to convert to new missiles, it is necessary to replace the entire filling, and most importantly - this is the filling, not the body. In any case, dismantling. In my opinion, it’s better to add money and build a new generation boat. There are other arguments. If you use all six boats (having upgraded), then these boats will have a total of 480 warheads, which is almost a third of the nuclear potential in six boats! Given the vulnerability of these boats - noise, significant thermal footprint and dimensions, this will be unreasonable. Let me swim like that until the Boreas are finished, and then cut.
    3. Sanzyro
      -1
      1 October 2011 12: 02
      Cut it! Be a spock! Such actions of the current Ministry of Defense are priority! Now, if you build - there is a jamb ... They will think for a long time until they poherit.
      1. prunx
        -7
        1 October 2011 12: 24
        Of course of course. Sick, just don’t worry. Little chump and spenki.
  25. Sanzyro
    -3
    1 October 2011 10: 15
    It is certainly good to talk about what we still have left ... And rejoice at this! Like a banana republic, chess word. With a smart look, list the names of boats, projects, technical specifications. And if you really look at it all, and not virtually? What do we have in comparison with the USSR ?? How many REALLY operating boats do we have? Such that even now at sea, and not requiring repair and modernization ?! How many boats are on alert? What is the combat readiness of the missiles? Comparing all this with the USA that has already gotten a sore point, I want to cry ... And suddenly it turns out that there is still too much! Unnecessary, unprofitable ... We are so rich that we can afford to cut submarines for scrap! Orders, plans, orders - this is certainly good, but where are the real new boats? Not those that were laid down in the union and stood at the docks for 20 years, but under the new government, they were barely completed through the stump deck and launched into the water with pomp. Our boats go on combat alert 40 times less often than American. 40 TIMES !!! And if it continues like this, then they will soon stop coming out completely ...
    1. prunx
      -3
      1 October 2011 12: 46
      You, first, study which boats we have left, which are built, which are planned to be built, which require repair, which will be cut. Learn the characteristics, compare them. The ability to count money, that is, take into account financial opportunities, is also very important. Analyze this information and draw a conclusion and state in your comment. This is called analytics. And what you do is called spoilage of air, or simply farting. Or maybe you are a provocateur? They like to knock people into the head that everything is bad, there is no hope, everything is lost, don’t resist, do it.
      1. Sanzyro
        0
        1 October 2011 12: 56
        Quote: Sanzyro
        And if you really look at it all, and not virtually? What do we have in comparison with the USSR ?? How many REALLY operating boats do we have?

        I repeat for analysts who cannot read. And yet, it happens - a lie, truly a lie and statistics.
        1. -2
          1 October 2011 13: 25
          Maybe panic is enough ?! We are talking about a specific project 941, at the moment there are 2 pieces left (they have been rotting since 1999 without repair of reactors and there are no missiles), project 941M - 1 piece. modernized and remains. On the one-on-one basis, two boats of Project 955 have been built and have already been launched (Yuri Dolgoruky and Alexander Nevsky, work on the third boat of Project 955M, Vladimir Monamakh, is nearing completion).
          1. Sanzyro
            -1
            1 October 2011 13: 36
            Well?? And where is the optimism ?? Between the lines, I guess? Do you have any idea how many submarines and what class Russia needs to at least ensure parity to our "friends" from the North Atlantic bloc? We are not Burkina Fasso or Zimbabwe to have a dozen rusty boats and a couple of new ones. What are you writing people ?? One will vyaknet - we have one grenade and three good clubs left !! And the whole crowd picks up - FOR% BIS !!!
            1. -6
              1 October 2011 14: 02
              The article deals with boats of the PLABR class, of which 8-10 units are enough for parity. (everything else, in general, does not apply to the article, a continuous communal hurray-patriots, not a "military review", but a political fornication).
              1. Sanzyro
                -1
                1 October 2011 14: 32
                Ltd! Strategist ... I look, I even calculated! By chance, are you sitting in the General Staff ?? And you understand, with your mind, accustomed to solve geopolitical problems, to make them you need certain industries that we no longer have! They were lost together with specialists whom they hadn’t prepared for 25 years!
                1. -3
                  1 October 2011 14: 57
                  They are in prison, but in the general staff. Nobody denies the problems of training specialists (but, they are solved). The number of submarines is determined from the number of enemy boats + binding to START-3, I repeat once again - an article on pr.941.
                  1. Sanzyro
                    -2
                    1 October 2011 16: 25
                    Who is arguing? In principle, everything is solved, but at one time decades took it away!
              2. SAVA555.IVANOV
                -1
                3 October 2011 00: 52
                IF IT WERE NOT COMMUNITIES SOME BITCHES WOULD NOT HAVE ANYTHING NOW TO "BARYZHNICH", NOW IT'S ALL WRITTEN, POLITICS AND OUR INTERNAL PROBLEMS, PROBLEMS OF BIRTH RATE WITH THE PROBLEMS OF THE MICROWARE, AND THE SERVICE "IS IN ARMISH? PROPOSE YOUR OPTION OF A SOLUTION AT LEAST FANTASTIC SO I THINK FULLY HERE YOU CAN SPEAK AND HEAR DIFFERENT OPINIONS, SPEECH IS BASICALLY WHAT THE COUNTRY IS WORKING ON WHICH IS LOOKING ON
  26. Night Wolf
    +2
    1 October 2011 10: 46
    Don't forget about the secrecy regime in our country. I have become convinced more than once that our military leadership is "fooling" everyone and everything. Remember the noise around stationary strategic weapons mines - they liquidated and immediately adopted the Topol mobile system. Before that, the adversaries knew where the missiles were, and now they guess and are forced to spend significant funds to try to track them. We are used to being "poor". American military concerns are forced to advertise their "product", where they often overestimate the characteristics of weapons and hush up its shortcomings, which are many. The guys who served in the peacekeeping forces were convinced in practice that our equipment, both "old" and new, is in no way inferior to foreign counterparts and often surpasses them. On this topic, I think that if you made the decision to cut the Sharks, then there is already a normal replacement, although it is a pity that the Shark is an excellent warship and at least one submarine should be left for the museum.
    1. Sanzyro
      -3
      1 October 2011 10: 57
      What is the secrecy ??? I beg you ... About the sale of our secrets, only the lazy did not write! What does not only Pindos, but to countries such as Romania, Bulgaria, China and other exotic.
      Quote: Night Wolf
      Remember the noise around stationary strategic weapons mines - they liquidated and immediately adopted the Topol mobile system.

      Everything is correct. The Americans were afraid of "Satan"; they did not particularly object to "Topol". Does this surprise you? Slightly straining their mobile, soil complexes, and you see - they are silent ...
      Quote: Night Wolf
      On this topic, I think that if you decide to cut the "Sharks" - then there is already a normal replacement

      It is touched by such gullibility and faith in the infallibility of our leadership! Including the military! And even the frank collapse and destruction of the army is not able to convince other optimists ... feel
      1. prunx
        -7
        1 October 2011 13: 01
        Pooh ... Phew, again, someone called.
    2. zczczc
      0
      3 October 2011 01: 09
      Night Wolf, well, if the privacy regime is still preserved.

      About cutting Sharks - in front of the impending mess in the Arctic, and anywhere, this, of course, reduces our chances.
      1. -1
        10 October 2011 01: 14
        Yes, the regime of secrecy was preserved. The media interviewed Putin and Ivanov, asked the question how many nuclear submarines are in Russia, and how many of them are on the campaign at the moment. Well, they began to lie, not even hiding a smile. I served in the Navy then, we with the seaman fell out and didn’t collect. Now, such fools took and merged all the information so that the blogger Sanzyro slept more calmly.
  27. slan
    -1
    1 October 2011 10: 51
    To promise is not to marry.
  28. Sanzyro
    -2
    1 October 2011 13: 14
    [quote = prunx] You, first, learn which boats we have left, which are built, which are planned to be built, which need repair, which will be cut. [/ quote]
    Yes, really something, but we have enough plans! They don’t go beyond the stands and the paper. [quote = prunx] The ability to count money, that is, take into account financial opportunities, is also very important. [/ Quote] Yes, we only do this! Even those who do not have this position either by profession or by vocation. [Quote = prunx] Analyze this information and draw a conclusion and state it in your comment. This is called analytics. [/ Quote]
    As I understand it, your source of information is Google and Wikipedia. [quote = prunx] Or maybe you're a provocateur? They like to beat people in the head that everything is bad, there is no hope, everything is lost, don’t resist, welcome. [/ Quote]
    A provocateur is just one who instills false hopes and provokes incorrect (based on the situation) behavior. Tell people that everything is fine at a time when behind their backs, quietly destroying their army, is this the first sign of a provocateur ??
    1. prunx
      -5
      1 October 2011 15: 10
      Well, show me at least one line from my comments, where I say that everything is fine with us. Or apologize for slander. I preach objectivity and argue my every word, and am ready to provide a source on the basis of which I compose my own opinion, and do not pretend to any truth. But in your comments, solid demagogy and defeatist rhetoric. What you pointed out.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. prunx
          -3
          1 October 2011 18: 56
          You first answer at the expense of spitting in my direction, my dear. This is the first! Secondly, who knows what. There are people who believe that in 2012 there will be an end to the world, there are not a few of them, so what do you suggest? To throw a tantrum or to look for a grave? Here, basically, a category of near capricious, hysterical, always dissatisfied whiners who were covered by an eclipse of consciousness. Here you are, personally read my commentary, from which one phrase came to you - the last one, for which your reflex worked. And you give me this quote. To what? What semantic load does it carry? emotionally unbalanced person or drunk. Let him turn to a psychologist or narcologist. I prefer such subjects to beat in the face, this procedure brings to life very well. Thirdly, the article is clear, you read and try to understand the essence about which they have already written four times in the comments here, and it’s not clear what can be cheated here? From this we can conclude: either you are blind, or you cannot read, or you are walking away, or you are inadequate, as is your comrade in the FSB. I think the topic is exhausted.
  29. L. konstantin
    0
    1 October 2011 13: 25
    soon we will have nothing left! look really at life! after the restructuring of the arrival of Yeltsin, then united Russia, everything is aggravated for us, everything is collapsing! taxes are rising aligafrenia is added power is passed from hand to hand. (election money laundering) that Putin that Medvev HAPUGI only on the first selling channel everyone praised and boasted! just look dumb! who votes for them !? question! we live in the past technology! truly great people! I repeat GREAT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    1. -1
      1 October 2011 13: 35
      Fesbeshnik lime - have something to say specifically on pr.941?!? or shut your mouth on -removed !!
  30. zczczc
    0
    1 October 2011 13: 36
    Traitors. What else to say.
  31. L. konstantin
    -3
    1 October 2011 14: 03
    Thomas or Thomas knows! while such stupid people are like you! then that problem will remain RUSSIAN. I could easily find you and create problems for you! but I just know that you are not who and calling you is not like! room troll. once there was a case so hiding behind mom and saying that his page was hacked and they wrote something under his name! so calm down LEPRIKON!
  32. slan
    +1
    1 October 2011 15: 49

    The most powerful strategic nuclear submarines (nuclear submarines) of the Akula type (Project 941, Typhoon according to NATO classification) in the Russian Navy to date will be retained in the combat strength of the Russian fleet, the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy told RIA Novosti on Friday Admiral Vladimir Vysotsky.
    Currently, the Russian Navy has three nuclear submarines of this type: Dmitry Donskoy (project 94U), which is currently testing the new Bulava missile system, as well as two boats awaiting repair and modernization at the Sevmash plant - Arkhangelsk "and Severstal.
    "We keep these submarines, they are in the plans of the main command of the Russian Navy," Vysotsky said.
  33. Al2504
    -1
    2 October 2011 04: 52
    It's just barbarians and scumbags!
  34. mishan
    -1
    2 October 2011 18: 31
    INACCURACY in the article:
    "Since then, in fact, only submarines of the project 667 BRDM Dolphin have remained the basis of the naval component of our country's nuclear deterrence."

    In fact, there are 3 more strategists 667BDR Kalmar, 16 missiles each, serving in the Pacific Ocean. It was in such a cruiser that a fishing boat recently crashed.
  35. SAVA555.IVANOV
    -2
    3 October 2011 11: 21
    THIS IS YOU AND THE TRANSPORT FOR DELIVERY OF LANDING TO THE ARCTIC IS HIDDEN, OR FOR TRANSPORTATION AND INSTALLATION OF UNDERWATER ROCKET MODULES FANTASTIC BUT WE DESIGNERS EVERYTHING THOUGH TO THINK THAT IT'S BETTER NOT TO CUT TO CUT)
  36. Patriot
    -3
    5 October 2011 16: 56
    Well, We waited for the fact that, within the framework of the next strategic offensive signed by the iPhone, START-3 began to cut our strategic nuclear submarines.
    It turns out funny, in a situation of active NATO advance to the east, we sign and ratify this next START. But, what is most interesting is that soon after that, the amers put missile defense systems in Turkey and Romania. Really, our "authorities", headed by the liberal medveputami, did not understand this. They clearly decided once again to kill our fighting power. As they say, what is required to prove.
    OUR AUTHORITIES OF THE ENEMIES OF RUSSIA! And, if we also take into account the fact that Mr. Perdyukov decided to destroy the GRU, there is not so much left for our state to live. Dear RUSSIANS. We kindly request to finish off our country and in both next elections to vote for edro and Vava Putkin. SLEEP TO CITIZENS. SLEEP. MUCH STILL A LITTLE REMAINING AND WILL NOT BE YOUR CITIZENSHIP FOR IT WILL NOT BECOME THE COUNTRY
    And, to me personally, a CITIZEN of the Russian Federation is tired of seeing the agony of his country and a handful of enemies of the country tearing it inside out.
  37. CARTRIDGE
    -4
    9 October 2011 23: 32
    Soon there will be 50 warheads between the troops and when we use them up or lose them, NATO's "friend" will strike at us with conventional weapons (why are their ICBMs now being converted into non-nuclear warheads?) That the consequences will be no better, and their OGAIO will be in service until 2030s
  38. Patriot
    -5
    11 October 2011 09: 57
    CARTRIDGE

    Get up Russian People. Wake up. Your country is in mortal danger. The people are dying. At the head of Russia ENEMIES-TRAITORS!

    Get up before it's too late!
    1. +2
      2 December 2011 00: 19
      At the scrap metal ministry of defense and other traitors!
  39. SIA
    SIA
    +2
    30 January 2012 20: 27
    So how to buy 2000 "Iveco" in Italy, did you find the money for that? And how to watch the submarines, and almost immediately into hysterics? We do not need this, we will cut and destroy everything? There is no way to build up the combat potential of the fleet, including the submarine, they are ready to use it completely under the autogen. Bastards !!!