Project 949A: Oscar-II

K-132 Irkutsk nuclear submarine missile cruiser of project 949A at the Far Eastern Zvezda plant.
One way or another, has been awaiting repair since 1997.

     (I may have already posted it but i don't really remember but who cares It's not something we see everyday...)

Capt(N)
@Capt_Navy
The photos of USN warships made through the periscope of a Russian submarine (Oscar-II class) in autumn 2016 in the Mediterranean Sea.

George1 wrote:K-132 Irkutsk nuclear submarine missile cruiser of project 949A at the Far Eastern Zvezda plant.
One way or another, has been awaiting repair since 1997.

Wow so this was only operational for 9 years and now has been parked for 22 years? That is bizzare.

"Chelyabinsk": 13th year in reserve, 6th in the factory

In September 2013, the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy V. Chirkov announced the planned deep modernization of four SSGN pr. 949A to the level of 949AM with a deadline by 2020 (reference 1). In May 2015, five units were already counted at the headquarters of the Pacific Fleet (reference 2). All these plans, however, were confused by the failure of the concept of a “new ship in the old hull” that had been outlined by the end of 2017 (ref. 3), caused primarily by gross errors in the management of shipyards (the term for modernizing the serial SSN, pr. 971M on Zvyozdochka increased from three to nine years old). The fate of the head 949AM (K-132 Irkutsk, plant number 619) does not cause much concern - work on it is under the control of the Government and the Ministry of Defense, and in 2022 it must be transferred to the fleet. The second one also has good chances (K-442 Chelyabinsk, plant number 638). As regards the third one, there is no complete certainty (K-456 Tver, Plant No. 649 - Ref. 4, notice for the purchase).

The exact date of the Chelyabinsk output to the reserve could not be found, but it is known that in 2008 it was already sky-ready. Quote No. 1 (dated 11.02.2008): “The cruiser went to sea for the first time 17 years ago and has since been practically not repaired. Today, there is a catastrophic lack of funds for maintaining the boat, the set of recruits for the ship has been suspended. At present, the atomic ship is docked does not go to sea "(ref. 5). Quote No. 2 (dated May 15, 2008): “Today ... the cruiser is in distress, does not go to sea, needs major repairs, its further fate is unknown and, most likely, sad” (ref. 6).

In addition, there is information (from material under the same link 5) that the "Federal Law adopted in 2003 [No. 131-FZ of October 6, 2003" On General Principles of the Organization of Local Self-Government in the Russian Federation "], refracted the smooth running The regional government [of the Chelyabinsk region] was banned from financing military units [to provide patronage assistance to military units]. And over time, the cruiser left ... the ships of the first line "(for information: in 2012, patronage connections were resumed). Thus, included in the heading "13th year" is the minimum period of stay of the AIC in the reserve, the beginning of which can be dated 2004-2007.

Chelyabinsk is planned to be modernized under the state contract for the second and third AICs, pr. 949AM. It sounds something like this: "state contract No. R / 1/2/0317 / GK-13-DGOZ dated 07/05/2013 to carry out work on project 949A - nuclear submarine cruiser (2 units) - repair with modernization, concluded by DVZ Zvezda from the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation "(ref. 7 from alexeyvvo, annual report for 2013, p. 156-158). For reference: Irkutsk will be modernized under state contract No. R / 1/2/0117 / GK-13-DGOZ of 04/05/2013.

On the "Zvezda", "Chelyabinsk" arrived 07.09.2014 from Vilyuchinsk aboard a Chinese semi-submersible vessel (ref. . Three years later (08/15/2017), he was caught in the lens by the berth wall with open covers of the Granit rocket launcher launcher (Irkutsk at that time was on a solid base near the boathouse - ref. 11). After more than two years (10/22/2019) in a satellite image of Google Earth (43.1225749, 132.3402585) K-442 can be seen in the same place with a crane and a wider platform ("similar") between the hull and the pier in the bulkhead area, separating the reactor and bow turbine compartments (K-132 had already been rolled into the boathouse by that time).

The procurement plans of the Zvezda DVZ for 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018 and 2019, available on the official website of the enterprise, head. No. 638 ("Chelyabinsk") is not mentioned even once (ref. 12), because of which (coupled with its confinement to the berth) it may seem that the modernization of the cruiser is frozen. However, there is a position on the public procurement website stating the opposite. In the notice of the procurement No. 3101512781 of September 15, 2014 for the dismantling and transfer of the DVZ Zvezda material part of the SM-225 products (more precisely, SM-225A - PU PKRK Granit) in July last year (07/22/2019 ) a change was made to bring the VAT rate specified in the agreement between Zvezda and the Obukhov Plant in accordance with the new version of Article 164 of the Tax Code of the Russian Federation (ref. 13). This fact indicates at least that the plans for updating " Chelyabinsk "remain in force.

With a certain amount of confidence, it can be argued that today at the head. No. 638 a partial defect (some equipment, hull structures, systems, etc.) was carried out, SM-225A and, possibly, some other products were dismantled or dismantled. Raising the ship on a solid foundation and setting it into a boathouse can take place as early as next year - immediately after the withdrawal of Irkutsk (this is impossible now because the two-span boathouse of the Zvezda is occupied by Irkutsk and Magadan - ref. 14). Thus, there is every reason to hope that until the end of the current state armament program (GPV 2018−2027), the Russian Navy will receive two APKR pr. 949AM. At the same time, their venerable age (in 2027, Irkutsk will turn 39 years old, Chelyabinsk 37) will not hurt the eyes, given that the ships have been operating for less than half the calendar life - 13 (plus 5 since 2022) and 17 years old respectively.

https://navy-korabel.livejournal.com/230092.html

I think with the Oscar class the age is not that important. The way the upgraded ships will be armed will make the fact they are a bit noiser then state of the art, completely irrelevant. 72 caliber missiles WOW. One Oscar can take on 2 CBGs with that kinda of armament.

Work in 'Irkutsk' is in full swing

https://navy-korabel.livejournal.com/241940.html

Is there any indication of Russia considering the construction of newer ASHM submarines?

The-thing-next-door wrote:Is there any indication of Russia considering the construction of newer ASHM submarines?

They call them Yasen-class these days

With universal VLS you don't need such special ships as Oscars anymore. You load the missiles you need for the mission and you make it a ship hunter or a land attack sub or a preemptive nuclear strike submarine or a submarine chaser...

Yasen has 32 or 40 cells for any missiles it wants. Kilo has them instead of torpedoes and can theorically carry 18 or so kalibr max (1 kilo with nuclear armed kalibrs become more powerfull than most of countries in the world).

All the future subs will have VLS too.

They even proposed a modified Borei with VLS cell instead of the ballistic missiles.

Isos wrote:

They even proposed a modified Borei with VLS cell instead of the ballistic missiles.

Well they could just convert thoes Akulas that they have lying around to carry Zirkons and they would have the scariest thing in the sea, better than any ASHM armed Borei variant and there is no need to build a new submarine.

Thoes titanium hulls really are wonderful, I guess in the modern age even in Russia we can only have cheap shit.


As fo the Yasen, it does not have half as many missiles as it should, newly built large combat submarines should have 100 missiles absolute minimum, all conventional torpedoes are obsolete, you simply cannot expect a submarine to get that close to an enemy battlegroup.

Poseidon, Zirkon, Kalibr, anti torpedoes and SLBMs should cover everything. There is no need to build small torpedo submarines this is not WWI anymore.

As fo the Yasen, it does not have half as many missiles as it should, newly built large combat submarines should have 100 missiles absolute minimum, all conventional torpedoes are obsolete, you simply cannot expect a submarine to get that close to an enemy battlegroup.

Yes you can. That's why russia puts lot of effort maintaining its submarine fleet since the fall of USSR. They are the best way to deal with carriers.

Sonar ranges are pathetic against submarines, even more in a not so calm sea. On the opposite a carrier can be heard hundreds of km away by the sub.

Modern torpedoes are almost impossible to escape/jam/fool and US active defence against them are innexistant. They tried something like paket-nk that kept detecting fake targets and removed it because it was too dangerous for friendly ships.

Big_Gazza wrote:
Pr 971 Akulas don't have titanium hulls, you're thinking of the Pr 945 Sierras.

Reworking either class to fit VLS would be astronomically expensive...  I break out into a cold sweat even thinking what the numbers would be like...  

Better to revise the best 971s into 971M with general repairs, updated sesnors & combat systems and the ability to launch kalibres thru the torp tubes.  Akulas are still top notch boats and with the upgrades will form a great 2nd echelon of SNNs to support the Yasens and Husky/Laikas.  Most of the worlds navies would give their eye teeth for a shot at adding a 971 or two to their fleets.  India is very happy with the Nerpa/INS Chakra and are wanting more.

I said Akula not Schuka, get your submarine names right.

They already have a few Akulas waiting for repairs that are carrying nothing due to nuclear treaties and Akulas are far bigger than Boreis so they should be used as ASHM carriers instead.

Voronezh will be removed from service

https://navy-korabel.livejournal.com/244963.html

Big_Gazza wrote:

No need to be pissy...  

BTW the Pr 941 Akulas aren't titanium either, and converting them into SSGNs would cost so much it would be better to build a new set of the Borei-K proposed variants.  I love the 941s and i'll be sad to see them go, but i'd rather that the RuN get a set of brand new modern and quiet SSGNs as that would stick it right up the NATOstani bastards to a far harder degree.

What could possibly be so hard about repairing the submarines and adding some new launchers?

It is not like they would need to make any significant modifications to the hull and how quiet these submarines would be is irrelevant as they would be firing missiles from more than 1000 km away from the target.

George1 wrote:Voronezh will be removed from service

https://navy-korabel.livejournal.com/244963.html

As expected, it was one of oldest ones in service and name was already given to fresh Yasen SSGN

What's the value of 18kt of titanium ?

Hole wrote:
There reactors, machinery, electronics and so on are outdated. Replacing all that stuff would cost more then a new Yasen-M.

Why would you need to modernise the electronics it it is going to rely on other units to give it target coordinates anyway.
Only broken things would need replacement.

Ofcourse you mist also take into account that one of these would be better than 6 Yasens in terms of carrier killing capability.

And there were around 9.000 tons of Titanium used for one of these beasts.

I don't see what the hell that has to do with anything, by the time thay are ready to build more submarines of such size cost will not be so much of an issue and titanium hulls can be used for much longer than vastly inferior steel ones, it is after all the missiles that make such a sub effective and thoes can easily be replaced periodically.