Project 955: Borei class SSBN

Singular_trafo wrote:If you use mobile / ship platform that cost way less,and doesn't decrease the SSBN capacity.

It does because the Borei is already lacking a enough VLS tubes for SLBMs.
16 is a very small number to begin with.

For them big boys like 24-tube Ohios, this could remotely make sense. Especially when they're heading back or near home from patrols.
Still the whole idea is...meh

KiloGolf wrote:

Singular_trafo wrote:If you use mobile / ship platform that cost way less,and doesn't decrease the SSBN capacity.

It does because the Borei is already lacking a enough VLS tubes for SLBMs.
16 is a very small number to begin with.

For them big boys like 24-tube Ohios, this could remotely make sense. Especially when they're heading back or near home from patrols.
Still the whole idea is...meh

16 is more enough to turn any nation into nuclear dust, the next borei's will have 20 not that you even need that many ICBMs for one single nation thats just overkill.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:

Singular_trafo wrote:If you use mobile / ship platform that cost way less,and doesn't decrease the SSBN capacity.

It does because the Borei is already lacking a enough VLS tubes for SLBMs.
16 is a very small number to begin with.

For them big boys like 24-tube Ohios, this could remotely make sense. Especially when they're heading back or near home from patrols.
Still the whole idea is...meh

16 is more enough to turn any nation into nuclear dust, the next borei's will have 20 not that you even need that many ICBMs for one single nation thats just overkill.

I don't disagree, just stressed that Russian subs were for some reason designed to carry only 16 or in future 20 SLBMs.
Despite being as large/heavy as the older Ohios. So that doesn't allow for many alternatives.

USN likes to carry all its eggs in one basket which can be a disadvantage unlike Russia with distributed lethality of SSBNs.

max steel wrote:USN likes to carry all its eggs in one basket which can be a disadvantage unlike Russia with distributed lethality of SSBNs.

Afaik Russia only plans for 13 Boreis, incl. the 16-tube first batch.
USN has 14, 24-tube Ohios with a further 4, 16-tube Vanguards by the RN.

All that is in the water right now.

So what about distributing lethality?

Borei class
Typhoon class
Delta III and Delta IV classes

max steel wrote:Borei class
Typhoon class
Delta III and Delta IV classes

Oh I see, so that's 9-10, 16-tube boomers. Cool.
Still yet to see the lethality distribution or plan of it thereof.

Not sure if the remaining couple of Delta III or one Typhoon are active as rotating patrol SSBNs and not testbeds/conversions.

Instead of relying on one class of sub they have distributed nukes among various ssbn's ( distribution )

max steel wrote:Instead of relying on one class of sub they have distributed nukes among various ssbn's ( distribution )

Cost benefit calculation.

For a nucelar sub you need one reactor fore each ship (at least) and ful crew ect.

Means if you have twenty sub with 1 rocket each, or one sub with twenty rocket then the cost will be say 10% less than if you use the former configuration.

KiloGolf wrote:

max steel wrote:Borei class
Typhoon class
Delta III and Delta IV classes

Oh I see, so that's 9-10, 16-tube boomers. Cool.
Still yet to see the lethality distribution or plan of it thereof.

Not sure if the remaining couple of Delta III or one Typhoon are active as rotating patrol SSBNs and not testbeds/conversions.

The Typhoons have long been pulled from the active fleet, they no longer patrol carrying missiles and Russia is going to decommission the Deltas with each Borei

GarryB wrote:

Afaik Russia only plans for 13 Boreis, incl. the 16-tube first batch.
USN has 14, 24-tube Ohios with a further 4, 16-tube Vanguards by the RN.

Errr... more like 8 Boreis... with the total warheads allowed being 1,500 that means 500 per branch of service... 8 x 16 x 6 = 768 which is already too many...

12 x 6 x 8 = 576 which is a much better number...

Oh so it's just 8. Actually that's a terribly small number of launching platforms on patrol (say max. of 4 at any given time).
Given that there's always a good 50 active USN SSNs out there. Not counting other NATO SSN/SSKs.

Are the Delta IVs being kept online past 2020?
Sounds like Russia is planning to give up some serious ground in the SSBN business.

Russian Pacific Fleet to get Vladimir Monomakh nuclear sub before year end


The Vladimir Monomakh Borey class nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine (Project 955) will complete the voyage to the Pacific Fleet before the yearend, Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy Admiral Vladimir Korolev told TASS on Saturday.

"This year, Borey will be there, like we have promised," he said.

The Russian Navy has started receiving fourth-generation Project 955 Borei-class (Dolgorukiy-class) submarines recently. It has three of them now - the Yuri Dolgoruky, Alexander Nevsky and Vladimir Monomakh. The Prince Vladimir is due for delivery to the Pacific Fleet next year. Four more ships in the class are due before 2020. Thus, the Russian SSBN fleet will comprise 15 submarines, if the Project 667BDR family is decommissioned.

The Project 955 nuclear-powered submarine armed with Bulava intercontinental ballistic missiles is designed to become the mainstay of Russia’s naval strategic nuclear forces for decades to come.

The Project 955 nuclear-powered submarine can carry 16 R-30 Bulava solid-propellant intercontinental ballistic missiles with a range of more than 8,000 kilometers (4,971 miles). The Bulava intercontinental ballistic missile features multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles.

The Project 955 nuclear-powered submarine is equipped with an escape chamber designed to accommodate the entire crew.

Vladimir Monomakh begins transfer to the Pacific

Vladimir Monomakh, the third submarine of the Project 955 class, is said to have left its temporary base in Severomorsk to begin transfer to the Pacific. It is expected to reach its permanent base in Vilyuchinsk in September. There, Vladimir Monomakh will join another Project 955 submarine, Alexander Nevskiy, which completed the transfer in September 2015. (Check Hans Kristensen's excellent post on the upgrades done at Vilyuchinsk.)

Vladimir Monomakh was expected to conduct a salvo launch of Bulava missiles in June 2016, but it has left without launching the missiles. It is possible that it will launch the missiles from the Pacific, but maybe it won't - at the time Alexander Nevskiy arrived in the Pacific it was reported that it will conduct a launch from there, but it didn't.

http://russianforces.org/blog/2016/08/vladimir_monomakh_begins_trans.shtml

The Vladimir Monomakh (project 955) sub has arrived at its permanent base Viliuchinsk in the Kamchakta Peninsula

More:
http://tass.com/defense/902180?_ga=1.55173099.1337049799.1447427261

George1 wrote:

The Vladimir Monomakh (project 955) sub has arrived at its permanent base Viliuchinsk in the Kamchakta Peninsula

More:
http://tass.com/defense/902180?_ga=1.55173099.1337049799.1447427261

Talking about Viliuchinsk interesting view.






This is not for subs but please check sea bottom nicely deep after Kamchatka towards east.

Eight Borey unit to be ordered called Prince Pozharsky

http://flotprom.ru/2016/%D0%A1%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%8816/

PapaDragon wrote:
Eight Borey unit to be ordered called Prince Pozharsky

http://flotprom.ru/2016/%D0%A1%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%8816/

I hope they increase that number to 12. Eight is barely enough for Northern and Pacific. An extra four will allow them to keep patrols in selected seas like south Atlantic, Indian and Southern Pacific.

KiloGolf wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:
Eight Borey unit to be ordered called Prince Pozharsky

http://flotprom.ru/2016/%D0%A1%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%8816/

I hope they increase that number to 12. Eight is barely enough for Northern and Pacific. An extra four will allow them to keep patrols in selected seas like south Atlantic, Indian and Southern Pacific.

10 is the planned number.

KiloGolf wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:
Eight Borey unit to be ordered called Prince Pozharsky

http://flotprom.ru/2016/%D0%A1%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%8816/

I hope they increase that number to 12. Eight is barely enough for Northern and Pacific. An extra four will allow them to keep patrols in selected seas like south Atlantic, Indian and Southern Pacific.

There are also 6 rebuilt, or in the process of being rebuilt, 667BDRM SSBN's which should be good until 2030.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:
Eight Borey unit to be ordered called Prince Pozharsky

http://flotprom.ru/2016/%D0%A1%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%8816/

I hope they increase that number to 12. Eight is barely enough for Northern and Pacific. An extra four will allow them to keep patrols in selected seas like south Atlantic, Indian and Southern Pacific.

10 is the planned number.

That number can go up, why not? Subs are ordered one at a time.

Besides, what follows will probably be upgraded version of Boreis. As long as they keep pace it should be good.

SeigSoloyvov wrote:

KiloGolf wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:
Eight Borey unit to be ordered called Prince Pozharsky

http://flotprom.ru/2016/%D0%A1%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%8816/

I hope they increase that number to 12. Eight is barely enough for Northern and Pacific. An extra four will allow them to keep patrols in selected seas like south Atlantic, Indian and Southern Pacific.

10 is the planned number.

That's much better.
I don't think Russia needs too many SSBNs, 12 would be nice overall. 10 is fair enough.

They basically have 2,5 times the sub deterrence of UK or France (with vastly better SLBM tech).

GarryB wrote:The thing with the Boreis is that they can carry 16 missiles each capable of carrying say 4 warheads plus jammers and decoys and drones...

Jammers are attached to the warhead itself, isn't it?


Also, what do they need drones for in the Borei? Thanks.

GarryB wrote:The thing with the Boreis is that they can carry 16 missiles each capable of carrying say 4 warheads plus jammers and decoys and drones... that means 16 x 4 x X > 500, where X is the number of subs.

8 subs means 512 warheads which would be OK... 10 subs would be 640 warheads, which means either fewer cruise missiles/bombers or fewer ICBMs.

Fortunately the New Start Treaty is weak as... it sets a deployed warhead count for a specific day... the day before and the day after you can have as many warheads deployed as you want and still comply with the treaty.

Or they could just say Bulava carries 2 warheads each...

Russia walked away from the start Treaty.

At least no one seems to enforce it anymore