Project 885: Yasen class

I don't put a whole lot of stock into Sputnik International, but this did make me laugh:

Indian Delegation to Visit Russia for Leasing Yasen Class Submarine

Read more: https://sputniknews.com/military/20160915/1045347626/india-russ-a-yasen-submarine.html

Honesroc wrote:I don't put a whole lot of stock into Sputnik International, but this did make me laugh:

Indian Delegation to Visit Russia for Leasing Yasen Class Submarine

Read more: https://sputniknews.com/military/20160915/1045347626/india-russ-a-yasen-submarine.html

The Indians are simply dreaming....

Big_Gazza wrote:

Honesroc wrote:I don't put a whole lot of stock into Sputnik International, but this did make me laugh:

Indian Delegation to Visit Russia for Leasing Yasen Class Submarine

Read more: https://sputniknews.com/military/20160915/1045347626/india-russ-a-yasen-submarine.html

The Indians are simply dreaming....

India allready renting an Akula .

It could be logical.

And Russia needs friends.

Singular_trafo wrote:

Big_Gazza wrote:

Honesroc wrote:I don't put a whole lot of stock into Sputnik International, but this did make me laugh:

Indian Delegation to Visit Russia for Leasing Yasen Class Submarine

Read more: https://sputniknews.com/military/20160915/1045347626/india-russ-a-yasen-submarine.html

The Indians are simply dreaming....  

India allready renting an Akula .

It could be logical.

And Russia needs friends.

A friend that signs "logistics" deals that allow foreign troops to use there bases while also sending troops and weapons to basses that haven't been used for decades on the border of your other friend, doesn't sound like a friend to me.

Honestly, i think India is gonna go the way of Morocco, there gonna try and get all they can from Russia and later present it to there new colonial masters.

AlfaT8 wrote:

Singular_trafo wrote:

Big_Gazza wrote:

Honesroc wrote:I don't put a whole lot of stock into Sputnik International, but this did make me laugh:

Indian Delegation to Visit Russia for Leasing Yasen Class Submarine

Read more: https://sputniknews.com/military/20160915/1045347626/india-russ-a-yasen-submarine.html

The Indians are simply dreaming....  

India allready renting an Akula .

It could be logical.

And Russia needs friends.

A friend that signs "logistics" deals that allow foreign troops to use there bases while also sending troops and weapons to basses that haven't been used for decades on the border of your other friend, doesn't sound like a friend to me.

Honestly, i think India is gonna go the way of Morocco, there gonna try and get all they can from Russia and later present it to there new colonial masters.

India and the US are natural enemies, China and India are natural frieands.

These attempts are desperate moves from the US to generate tensions between India and China.

If the US willing to lease a nimitz class aircraft carrier to India then you can consider anything different .

Nobody will be leasing Yasen for at least two more decades, let's get real here.

If India want a Yasen sub an export version can be manufactured for them once Russian Navy receives it's series.

Honesroc wrote:I don't put a whole lot of stock into Sputnik International, but this did make me laugh:

Indian Delegation to Visit Russia for Leasing Yasen Class Submarine

Read more: https://sputniknews.com/military/20160915/1045347626/india-russ-a-yasen-submarine.html

Russia ought to concentrate on building up the numbers of their modern SSN and SSBN force (which is tiny given their threat environment) and consolidate on their Oscar SSGN force (which seems about to get eliminated). Leasing modern/capable nuclear subs to a foreign, non-allied country that stopped buying Russian defense products long time ago is retarded. It's not the 90s anymore, time to get real.

KiloGolf wrote:

Honesroc wrote:I don't put a whole lot of stock into Sputnik International, but this did make me laugh:

Indian Delegation to Visit Russia for Leasing Yasen Class Submarine

Read more: https://sputniknews.com/military/20160915/1045347626/india-russ-a-yasen-submarine.html

Russia ought to concentrate on building up the numbers of their modern SSN and SSBN force (which is tiny given their threat environment) and consolidate on their Oscar SSGN force (which seems about to get eliminated). Leasing modern/capable nuclear subs to a foreign, non-allied country that stopped buying Russian defense products long time ago is retarded. It's not the 90s anymore, time to get real.

The effective submarine force require air deffece systems as well.

So there is no much sense to build up the submarine force without making air deffense ships, or aircraft/helicopter carriers .

Russia Closing the Gap on US With Cutting Edge Yasen Submarines

Read more: https://sputniknews.com/military/20161003/1045940127/russia-yasen-submarine-virginia.html

George1 wrote:Russia Closing the Gap on US With Cutting Edge Yasen Submarines

Read more: https://sputniknews.com/military/20161003/1045940127/russia-yasen-submarine-virginia.html

Sputnik is obviously staffed by the same clowns who were writing for English RIAN. They use the same inflammatory
anti-Russian propaganda language (e.g. pro-Kremlin parties, as if parties in Canada and the US are not pro the
power hierarchy and fringe 5th column parties are the "real" ones) and they write crap such as the above. The claim
that the Virginia acoustics and sonar are superior to anything that Russia has is a ridiculous joke:

1) They have no access to the classified specs of US subs

2) Unless Americans have some genetic intellectual superiority, there is no reason to think why their subs would be
intrinsically better. Russia has as much experience at building submarines as the USA, if not more considering the
submarines that could go 85 km/hr under water and the Shkval torpedo which indicates that Russian science and
fluid dynamics understanding is more than likely ahead of that of the USA. The whole claim of noisy Russian subs
is an example of obvious propaganda designed to compare Russians to mud hut dwellers who are inferior to the
US ubermenschen. It is simply not credible that Russia would not be able to engineer hulls that minimize acoustic
harmonics. This is a design problem and not the search for new physics. The US did not get their wunderwaffe from
aliens.

Sputnik is obviously staffed by the same clowns who were writing for English RIAN. wrote:

The article......the usual pile of ridiculously uninformed and childish self-reassuring garbage always characterizing western military-relaterd publications, well showing the traits behind which they attempt to mask theirs deep inferiority complex......is not by Sputnik but by National Interest, author Kyle Mizokami.

The level of ignorance shown in the article is simply laughable; enjoy :


http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/americas-virginia-class-submarine-vs-russias-lethal-yasen-17892


If only they would truly realize how much in the reality (instead of theirs phantasious universe) they have fallen behind in the wide majority of most critical military related scientifical sectors

kvs wrote:    Sputnik is obviously staffed by the same clowns who were writing for English RIAN. wrote:

THese SPutnik articles are totallly bull crap. I am being very lenient in my language.
SOme of them state yu-71 .. yu-74 or what not.. ALl articles are supported by commentators like mazumdar.. some other sources in Pentagon .. or even by
Goldman sachs.. while most of the articles quote British Janes information report.. which is the biggest NATO warhawk agency in the world...
some times it would seem that SPutnik takes its information from Janes information articles..

Janes information articles are nothign but Russophobic entities.

Just few days ago RUssian navy launched brand new BUlava's and what they were clamied.. BUlava test failed .. Bulava test failed..

RUssian navy deliberatly self destructed the Bulava .. so as to  increase the doubts and confusion in Washington war hawks calculation..
SO they could not properly analyze the trajectory and  speed (AMD specis) of BUlava missiles..

People im baffled why do you even see sputnik as a credible source of military info.
Its good to report to common man and women that the state of military is good enough to defend from west but... don't expect anything more beyond that.
Improved Akulas were already better then 688i Los Angeles class. Frst Yasen was bult and the experience and customer feedback from using the lead ship is used for the Improved version. If Americans think that the Improved Yasen is still inferior to Virginia class... i call that naivety. Especially when they admitted that Russian Lada class is virtually impossible to detect by passive means. Those same quieting knowledge and technology had to be used for designing an improved yasen for sure.

To be fair, as Mindstorm has stated, they're basically quoting the National Interest, even the more respected Russian language sources on Russian military equipment, have been seen recently quoting the National Interest (Gurkhan, vpk.name, vpk-news.ru, sila.rg.ru).

Mindstorm wrote:If only they would truly realize how much in the reality (instead of theirs phantasious universe) they have fallen behind in the wide majority of most critical military related scientifical sectors      

The US has fallen behind Russia in "wide majority of most critical military related scientifical sectors" ? ? ?

Which sectors are these, I dare ask  coz even the Russian President has never made such a chest thumping, misleading claim.

RTN wrote:

Mindstorm wrote:If only they would truly realize how much in the reality (instead of theirs phantasious universe) they have fallen behind in the wide majority of most critical military related scientifical sectors      

The US has fallen behind Russia in "wide majority of most critical military related scientifical sectors" ? ? ?

Which sectors are these, I dare ask  coz even the Russian President has never made such a chest thumping, misleading claim.

I wish to know what advantages Yasen has over other subs, it really is interesting.

Russia’s 4th Yasen-class submarine completes hydraulic tests

The first Project 885 nuclear submarine Severodvinsk was delivered to the Russian Navy in 2014

MOSCOW, January 23. /TASS/. The fourth Project Yasen-M multipurpose nuclear submarine Krasnoyarsk has completed hydraulic tests of the pressure hull and its structures, the Sevmash Shipyard, the submarine’s manufacturer, told journalists.

"A major construction stage - the hydraulic tests of the strong hull and its elements - has been completed on the nuclear submarine Krasnoyarsk. The submarine has successfully passed the tightness test and its hull has withstood the characteristics laid out by the designer. Further planned work is ongoing to prepare the hull for insulation and assembly works," the Sevmash Shipyard press office said.

The Krasnoyarsk is the fourth multipurpose nuclear-powered submarine in the Yasen-class series (Project 885) designed by the St. Petersburg-based Marine Engineering Design Bureau Malakhit. The submarine was laid out in 2014. Overall, five submarines of this project are under construction at the Sevmash Shipyard in Severodvinsk in north Russia.

The first Project 885 nuclear submarine Severodvinsk was delivered to the Russian Navy on June 17, 2014 and underwent operational evaluation until the spring of 2016. The other submarines are being built under the improved Yasen-M project.


More:
http://tass.com/defense/926821

And what's about the Kazan?

And this information carry small useful information. - however it can be expected .

When will we see pictures of the Kazan?

George1 wrote:

"A major construction stage - the hydraulic tests of the strong hull and its elements - has been completed on the nuclear submarine Krasnoyarsk. The submarine has successfully passed the tightness test and its hull has withstood the characteristics laid out by the designer. Further planned work is ongoing to prepare the hull for insulation and assembly works," the Sevmash Shipyard press office said.

Actually ,there is something interesting.

They have a full sized high pressure test chamber for nuclear submarines?

Singular_Transform wrote:

George1 wrote:

"A major construction stage - the hydraulic tests of the strong hull and its elements - has been completed on the nuclear submarine Krasnoyarsk. The submarine has successfully passed the tightness test and its hull has withstood the characteristics laid out by the designer. Further planned work is ongoing to prepare the hull for insulation and assembly works," the Sevmash Shipyard press office said.

Actually ,there is something interesting.

They have a full sized high pressure test chamber for nuclear submarines?

A hyperbaric test chamber for a complete submarine hull? No chance... Maybe they perform a hydrostatic test where they fill the hull with water and apply test pressure? I know the pressure application is reversed compared to normal operating but such a test must give some assurance that plates and welds are all up to spec....

Its a good question and i'd love to know the answer.

Singular_Transform wrote:

George1 wrote:

"A major construction stage - the hydraulic tests of the strong hull and its elements - has been completed on the nuclear submarine Krasnoyarsk. The submarine has successfully passed the tightness test and its hull has withstood the characteristics laid out by the designer. Further planned work is ongoing to prepare the hull for insulation and assembly works," the Sevmash Shipyard press office said.

Actually ,there is something interesting.

They have a full sized high pressure test chamber for nuclear submarines?

No.

Big_Gazza wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:

George1 wrote:

"A major construction stage - the hydraulic tests of the strong hull and its elements - has been completed on the nuclear submarine Krasnoyarsk. The submarine has successfully passed the tightness test and its hull has withstood the characteristics laid out by the designer. Further planned work is ongoing to prepare the hull for insulation and assembly works," the Sevmash Shipyard press office said.

Actually ,there is something interesting.

They have a full sized high pressure test chamber for nuclear submarines?

A hyperbaric test chamber for a complete submarine hull? No chance... Maybe they perform a hydrostatic test where they fill the hull with water and apply test pressure? I know the pressure application is reversed compared to normal operating but such a test must give some assurance that plates and welds are all up to spec....

Its a good question and i'd love to know the answer.

The test chamber is not impossible, but very expensive, minimum weight of it is above 60 000 tons.

The factory layout doesn't showing anything that can be used as a test chamber for submarines.


The air is a more practical medium to pressurize the hull, however it is a bit more dangerous than the water.

Maybe the hydraulic test is workshop slang ?

Anyway, as I see the cheapest method to test the welding should be to wallpaper the hull and the beams with strain gauges, vacuum the hull, it can give a good indication of the geometrical problems to fix - simply scale up the strains in the beams to the crush deep .
If the submarine pass it then they can test the welding integrity by overpressurize the hull to the crush deep.

When they weld the hull then all stuff should be in the internal that has to be there, means the water is not an ideal medium to test the integrity.

Singular_Transform wrote:

Big_Gazza wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:

George1 wrote:

"A major construction stage - the hydraulic tests of the strong hull and its elements - has been completed on the nuclear submarine Krasnoyarsk. The submarine has successfully passed the tightness test and its hull has withstood the characteristics laid out by the designer. Further planned work is ongoing to prepare the hull for insulation and assembly works," the Sevmash Shipyard press office said.

Actually ,there is something interesting.

They have a full sized high pressure test chamber for nuclear submarines?

A hyperbaric test chamber for a complete submarine hull?  No chance...  Maybe they perform a hydrostatic test where they fill the hull with water and apply test pressure?  I know the pressure application is reversed compared to normal operating but such a test must give some assurance that plates and welds are all up to spec....

Its a good question and i'd love to know the answer.

The test chamber is not impossible, but very expensive, minimum weight of it is above 60 000 tons.

The factory layout doesn't showing anything that can be used as a test chamber for submarines.


The air is a more practical medium to pressurize the hull, however it is a bit more dangerous than the water.

Maybe the hydraulic test is workshop slang ?

Anyway, as I see the cheapest method to test the welding should be to wallpaper the hull and the beams with strain gauges, vacuum the hull, it can give a good indication of the geometrical problems to fix - simply scale up the strains in the beams to the crush deep  .
If the submarine pass it then they can test the welding integrity by overpressurize  the hull to the crush deep.

When they weld the hull then all stuff should be in the internal that has to be there, means the water is not an ideal medium to test the integrity.

Hyperbaric testing by vacuum within the hull will be limited to only 1 bar/atm differential pressure, unless it is somehow combined with external pressure (ie within a pressurised habitat). Either way, a few bar is the best you could achieve, ie 20-30m operating depth, and I doubt you could extrapolate the test data to determine behaviour at max depth with any accuracy.

A test chamber for a full hyperbaric test would need to withstand 1 bar per 10m water depth, so lets say 100bar for 1000m. That requires a LOT of steel.... Testing would have to be done with water, as it would simply be too dangerous with air. Air being compressible, stores energy as pressure increases, and any loss of containment would result in sudden release of that energy that would be lethal. Water in incompressible, so the only stored energy is in the walls of the test chamber (ie as elastic potential energy as the vessel expands under the applied pressure). Sudden loss of pressure due to rupture releases much less energy, several orders of magnitude less when compared with air.

Big_Gazza wrote:

Hyperbaric testing by vacuum within the hull will be limited to only 1 bar/atm differential pressure, unless it is somehow combined with external pressure (ie within a pressurised habitat). Either way, a few bar is the best you could achieve, ie 20-30m operating depth, and I doubt you could extrapolate the test data to determine behaviour at max depth with any accuracy.

A test chamber for a full hyperbaric test would need to withstand 1 bar per 10m water depth, so lets say 100bar for 1000m. That requires a LOT of steel.... Testing would have to be done with water, as it would simply be too dangerous with air. Air being compressible, stores energy as pressure increases, and any loss of containment would result in sudden release of that energy that would be lethal. Water in incompressible, so the only stored energy is in the walls of the test chamber (ie as elastic potential energy as the vessel expands under the applied pressure). Sudden loss of pressure due to rupture releases much less energy, several orders of magnitude less when compared with air.

The submarine hull has to be tested for geometry errors, and for welding/material errors.

Second can be done with simple overpressure.

However the geometrical error can be sorted only with very precise measurement of the geometry of the whole hull (don't think it is possible) or more probable wallpapering the ship with strain gauges, and first vacuum it, after overpressure it.


Example: an inflated balloon can withstand the internal pressure, but immediately collapse if there is any level of relative internal vacuum.

The most important parameter of the submarine body is the local curvature. If the radius is too big, then the given area will collapse under external pressure.

However if the internal is pressurized then the given area will simply deformate.

Means they have to use strain gauges, it can't be avoided.

_The -1 bar will give same idea about the geometrical errors, and with the +100 bar test it will give same good indication about the shape of the hull.

The water (or any liquid ,as a matter of fact) ideal candidate for ressure test, the problem is it wet, means if there is any equipment in the hull ( like if you welded it together) then you can't use it.