Project 885: Yasen class

verkhoturye51 wrote:

Only why not to build 12-14 but only 7?

They said they want cheaper alternative (Husky).

sure but before Husky will developed, tested and goes in series RuN needs to wait 10 years? now many subs have extended service life but this wont be forever. Yasens are good subs thus increasing their number does make sense.

sure but before Husky will developed, tested and goes in series RuN needs to wait 10 years? now many subs have extended service life but this wont be forever.  Yasens are good subs thus increasing their number does make sense.

They can, they will, but saying that Russia is behind is pure nonsense. You are comparing an operational third of USN SS(G)Ns with operational third of Russians. 19 vs 11. Now add 17 active RuN SSKs. Do you get it?

From Sutton

Some problems with Kazan
https://flotprom.ru/2019/%D0%A1%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%887/

Tests of the atomic multipurpose submarine "Kazan", the head submarine of the improved project 855M "Ash-M", are not easy, because the project found flaws. About itRIA News said the head of the United Shipbuilding Corporation Alexei Rakhmanov.

"Testing boats are not easy. First of all, we are talking about working out control systems, which are used for the first time on this submarine. In addition, I will not hide, a number of design flaws emerged," he said.

According to him, USC will try to complete the testing of submarines before the end of the year. But it is still unknown whether it will be possible to transfer the submarine to the customer at the same time. "The question remains open," said Alexei Rakhmanov.

Not too surprising given its a big upgrade on Severodvinsk but kinda disappointing given how delayed that one was.

hoom wrote:Some problems with Kazan
https://flotprom.ru/2019/%D0%A1%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%887/

Tests of the atomic multipurpose submarine "Kazan", the head submarine of the improved project 855M "Ash-M", are not easy, because the project found flaws. About itRIA News said the head of the United Shipbuilding Corporation Alexei Rakhmanov.

"Testing boats are not easy. First of all, we are talking about working out control systems, which are used for the first time on this submarine. In addition, I will not hide, a number of design flaws emerged," he said.

According to him, USC will try to complete the testing of submarines before the end of the year. But it is still unknown whether it will be possible to transfer the submarine to the customer at the same time. "The question remains open," said Alexei Rakhmanov.

Not too surprising given its a big upgrade on Severodvinsk but kinda disappointing given how delayed that one was.

This stuff is expected, what is more worrying is complete stoppage of any new submarine construction.

What is going on? Last attack submarine was laid down years ago.

Kazan will not be delivered in 2019

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/6441111

Maybee not even in 2020

"It is absolutely unrealistic to accomplish all this by the end of the year. It is not ruled out that the entire year 2020 will be required and the Sevmash Shipyard will be able to deliver the sub to the Fleet only in 2021," the source said.

More:
http://tass.com/defense/1058768

marat wrote:Maybee not even in 2020

"It is absolutely unrealistic to accomplish all this by the end of the year. It is not ruled out that the entire year 2020 will be required and the Sevmash Shipyard will be able to deliver the sub to the Fleet only in 2021," the source said.

More:
http://tass.com/defense/1058768

And still no new submarines are being laid down, not even SSGN version of Borei (those work and they need replacement for Oscars anyway)

They will soon have a shortage of vessels that will make 90s look like the good old days

There are 5 more Yasens already in construction.
Rather than laying down new ones I'd like to see some of them actually finished.

Likewise there are already 4 Boreis in construction.

More on issues https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3645777.html

"According to the results of mooring tests, as well as the winter phase of factory running tests (completed in January - TASS approx.) It was found that a number of auxiliary units and assemblies of the ship did not meet the requirements of the tactical and technical tasks of the Ministry of Defense, including reliability at the dock, "Sevmash", -. the spokesman said

The source noted that the revision systems will take at least several months, after which the "Kazan" to be a few more times to go to sea, first as part of the factory, and then state tests. " Execute all of this before the end of the year is absolutely impossible. It is possible that this will take the whole year of 2020 and Sevmash will be able to transfer Kazan to the fleet only in 2021, ”he said.

The interlocutor of the agency added that since the beginning of the year the submarine has been on Sevmash for maintenance and elimination of comments.

Arrow wrote:So Russia has a huge problem with building new SSNs. Older SSNs will be withdrawn in 10 years. Russia may stay with 4 new SSNs. Problems from Kazan can be extended for subsequent years. The situation in the Russian atomic submarine fleet looks dramatic.

Can't say that it is a huge problem.


It is normal, Kazan is the first Russian made nuclear attack submarine, most probably the most advanced on the earth.

Problems can be expected, but every issue fixed will speed up the delivery of the next units.

The other aspect is that unlike the US Navy, they are not going for an all nuclear propelled fleet, so the 6-8 odd Ladas they are going to make mean they are not really in a situation where there is a desperate problem.

SSNs are pretty useful but please learn the lesson of the cold war... the Soviets had something like 30 thousand MBTs from WWII T-34s right through to T-80s... what a monumental waste of money and effort it was to store and maintain such a force that they would never likely have actually used anyway... odds are they would have used nukes to obliterate western europe and then the US and those tanks would never have been needed for anything but token roles.

Right now their SSNs and SSKs give them a global presence, but for maintaining trade routes they are not so useful... they would have to sink things before they became feared and that would be a rather bad precedent to set.

A large ship like Kirov on the other hand is just what they want, but on the other side of the planet that would be vulnerable so other ships to operate with it and a carrier will be the chosen options for max performance... alternatively you could just make huge numbers of really big ships but that would be rather more expensive to buy, to build and to operate and to support.

Yes yes yes, America is making hundreds of SSNs... but they are well known for wasting taxpayers money...

Singular_Transform wrote:

Arrow wrote:So Russia has a huge problem with building new SSNs. Older SSNs will be withdrawn in 10 years. Russia may stay with 4 new SSNs. Problems from Kazan can be extended for subsequent years. The situation in the Russian atomic submarine fleet looks dramatic.

Can't say that it is a huge problem.


It is normal, Kazan is the first Russian made nuclear attack submarine, most probably the most advanced on the earth.

Problems can be expected, but every issue fixed will speed up the delivery of the next units.

It's a massive problem, according to original plan half of the subs were supposed to be in service already

It may be most advanced or worst junk ever, it doesn't matter because it's not being delivered, no additional ones are laid down and nothing new is being built

Any expected delivery​ speed increase will not have the chance to take effect because there are not enough subs planned or ordered for something like that to be felt

They can talk about Huskies all they want, it doesn't matter when they can't compete current project

And Huskies are supposed to be inferior platform with supposedly lower price (when was last time price was lower?) which pretty much amounts to throwing in the towel

If only price were a problem they would just have to order more Yasens to get price to go down

PapaDragon wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:

Arrow wrote:So Russia has a huge problem with building new SSNs. Older SSNs will be withdrawn in 10 years. Russia may stay with 4 new SSNs. Problems from Kazan can be extended for subsequent years. The situation in the Russian atomic submarine fleet looks dramatic.

Can't say that it is a huge problem.


It is normal, Kazan is the first Russian made nuclear attack submarine, most probably the most advanced on the earth.

Problems can be expected, but every issue fixed will speed up the delivery of the next units.

It's a massive problem, according to original plan half of the subs were supposed to be in service already

It may be most advanced or worst junk ever, it doesn't matter because it's not being delivered, no additional ones are laid down and nothing new is being built

Any expected delivery​ speed increase will not have the chance to take effect because there are not enough subs planned or ordered for something like that to be felt

They can talk about Huskies all they want, it doesn't matter when they can't compete current project

And Huskies are supposed to be inferior platform with supposedly lower price (when was last time price was lower?) which pretty much amounts to throwing in the towel

If only price were a problem they would just have to order more Yasens to get price to go down

Ok, what is the difference between the KAzan and the F-35, Ford carrier, Zumwalt and so on?

the later examples are accepted for service, but doesn't hit the order specifications.

The Kazan is as good as the ford/zumwalt/f35 , it is the Russian MOD that declaring the problems / late delivery openly, in opposite of the US counterpart.

By the available information it can be a case when the Kazan is in better shape now than say a virginia class submarine.

And it has diving certificate, many US submarine lack that.

Singular_Transform wrote:...By the available information it can be a case when the Kazan is in better shape now than say a virginia class submarine.

Excuse me?

Virginia has been made in double digits already and has far superior track record. Yasen barely has one because they barely exist. One completed and one in tests. That's it.

Singular_Transform wrote:...And it has diving certificate, that is not issue for many US submarine .

Are you clinging to paperwork here?

Not that it matters because USN has far stricter safety regulations.

They haven't lost a sub since USS Scorpion and that was in 1968.

PapaDragon wrote:

Singular_Transform wrote:...By the available information it can be a case when the Kazan is in better shape now than say a virginia class submarine.

Excuse me?

Virginia has been made in double digits already and has far superior track record. Yasen barely has one because they barely exist. One completed and one in tests. That's it.

Singular_Transform wrote:...And it has diving certificate, that is not issue for many US submarine .

Are you clinging to paperwork here?

Not that it matters because USN has far stricter safety regulations.

They haven't lost a sub since USS Scorpion and that was in 1968.

You don't get it.

Say there are order for two truck , one for 5 tons of load capacity, the other is for 10 tons of load capacity, all other parameter the same.

Now, company A deliver the truck with 5 tons certified, but the other fail the delivery , and provide only a truck with 8 tons of load capacity.

The second truck failed the order specification, but does it means it is inferior compared to truck 1 with 5 tons of load capacity ?

Or it means it superior compared to the other truck, but not achieved the design parameters?


Same for safety, it is easy to operate a lift with extreme safety, all that it takes is to use it no more than 10th of design load.

Now, operating it closer to the design load ( diving it deeper /going faster) decrease the safety margin.

hoom wrote:There are 5 more Yasens already in construction.
Rather than laying down new ones I'd like to see some of them actually finished.

Likewise there are already 4 Boreis in construction.

With the first three Boreis being constructed from left over Akula and Oscar hulls it is hard to find cost savings on the Yasen or new Boreis that have a new design. With anything that is completely new there are associated trial and error costs. As both of these programmes were started long ago and the delays bring them closer to obsolescence with every passing year, it might be better to cut the production run and come up with something cheaper.

Vladimir79 wrote:.....

With the first three Boreis being constructed from left over Akula and Oscar hulls it is hard to find cost savings on the Yasen or new Boreis that have a new design. With anything that is completely new there are associated trial and error costs. As both of these programmes were started long ago and the delays bring them closer to obsolescence with every passing year, it might be better to cut the production run and come up with something cheaper.

Cutting production runs and thinking they will come up with something cheaper is precisely how they ended up in this mess. Russia is only country trying this with ships and to nobody's surprise failing miserably.

You can't get economy of scale unless you get the scale part done first.


Borei has sufficient number of hulls, they have Borei-B​ version designed and Khabarovsk-class is Borei derivative.

They need to keep at it and also get Borei-K SSGN in production, they have no reason to drag their feet on this.


As for Yasens they need to fix the crap on Kazan and order more boats in the meantime, whatever issues are with Kazan they will have enough time to catch it on others.


Ohios and Akulas are older than me and are nowhere near obsolescence, Yasens and especially Boreis will be fine for quite a while.

Vladimir79 wrote:
As both of these programmes were started long ago and the delays bring them closer to obsolescence with every passing year...  

Wut? Obsolescence? If you think Borei A and Yasen-M are in any way "obsolescent" what do you think of the SSBNs/SSNs of Western navies??? or Chinese.

Who cares how long ago the programs were initiated (back in the 90 and early 00s when Russia was on her knees). Both have been heavily updated between the initial 3/1 units respectively, and the serial builds are to all intents and purposes different boats. Borei A and Yasen-M are as good as anything the West currently produces.

Not sure why you indulge in these diatribes. Maybe you could try looking for positives once in a while?

PapaDragon wrote:

Vladimir79 wrote:.....

With the first three Boreis being constructed from left over Akula and Oscar hulls it is hard to find cost savings on the Yasen or new Boreis that have a new design.  With anything that is completely new there are associated trial and error costs.  As both of these programmes were started long ago and the delays bring them closer to obsolescence with every passing year, it might be better to cut the production run and come up with something cheaper.    

Cutting production runs and thinking they will come up with something cheaper is precisely how they ended up in this mess. Russia is only country trying this with ships and to nobody's surprise failing miserably.

You can't get economy of scale unless you get the scale part done first.


Borei has sufficient number of hulls, they have Borei-B​ version designed and Khabarovsk-class is Borei derivative.

They need to keep at it and also get Borei-K SSGN in production, they have no reason to drag their feet on this.


As for Yasens they need to fix the crap on Kazan and order more boats in the meantime, whatever issues are with Kazan they will have enough time to catch it on others.


Ohios and Akulas are older than me and are nowhere near obsolescence, Yasens and especially Boreis will be fine for quite a while.

Thats the thing.  They clearly show they know what they are doing with Borei's.  So why not make a SSGN variant of Borei?  Would be cheaper in the long run rather than what they are doing now.  I am not surprised to be honest that Kazan has trouble.  It is second of the design and it was designed during the bad years.  Anyway, if it takes a year to fix the problems, it takes a year to fix the problems.  Maybe design a new SSGN from what they learned.

To Arrow.

No, they wont decomission anything until they have the proper replacement.  Instead, they will overhaul enough times till the new replacement comes into service.  This has been mentioned before not by us but by MoD.  They wont end up putting themselves in a bad position with no submarines of this class.  It is far cheaper and easier to overhaul anyways.

The MoD is the one that isn't impressed with the Auxiliary components. So they decided they will start waiting for a year till it gets fixed. They will not just throw equipment away just because. And no, age has little to do with it. They can replace the nuclear components since they already make it. Rest they can just upkeep.

Big_Gazza wrote:

Wut?  Obsolescence?  If you think Borei A and Yasen-M are in any way "obsolescent" what do you think of the SSBNs/SSNs of Western navies???  or Chinese.

Both programmes are Cold War era designs that were put on the back burner for 20 years. If they can't get over delays at this point they will be obsolete before they get them all into service.

But then the F-22 and Typhoon and Rafale were all cold war designs too... obsolescence is not determined by age, but by how it compares with its current contemporaries... and in the case of the Borei, the Ohio SSBN do not render any modern Borei obsolete...