Even a cheap arsenal sub will still be at least 600M dollars
And probably twice that when it is fully loaded with missiles...
Borei is the best choice. It is already designed and tested. It has VLS that can be fit with uksk. And it is cheaper to build than the SSBN borei because you can take off all the strategic stuff needed for the use of ICBMs.
The thing is that kalibr are not cheap. I would say around 1 million a piece. 200 of them would mean 150-200 million $ just to fit the VLS. Then you also need some 30 torpedoes which add another 15-20 million $.
but it's nice to have one or two of them. You can release 200 missiles the first hour of the war and destroy strategic targets ASAP.
I don't agree... it doesn't have to be useful for anything else... it is essentially a submersable barge that can move under its own power and carry lots of ready to fire missiles and keep moving at about 3-5 knots...
Fit it with a conning tower with four huge Phased array radars giving full 360 degree coverage and fit it with thousands of TORs and Pantsirs as well as S-350s and it could probably sit on the surface most of the time anyway... as a visible threat... you might not even need to fire a shot...
Well you are getting the idea but you need to think big.
I agree the idea behind an arsenal ship is to not need dozens of them... all the fire power you need on one or possibly two platforms... the cheaper and simpler the better...
When it is not being used for war you could use it as a cargo vessel...
Equipping all available Akulas with 400+ vertical launch cells with a mixture of nuclear Zircon and nuclear Kalibr would allow Russia to within minutes wipe out all of european nato and the pindostanski navy with over a thousand nuclear warheads.
Bories and Akulas will be too expensive and not custom designed for the role...
Akulas don't have space for vertical launch cells, they only have torpedos
Akula SSBN.
With such number of missiles you don't need nuclear warehead. If you want to use nuks use them directly against cities.
Nuclear warheads would essentially make it unusable for conventional warfare...
Regardless there are more than a few hundred populated areas in europe and when engaging enemies with aerospace defences, ineffective as they may be, it is best not to take any chances and saturate them with nuclear Zirkons anyway. After all you do not want to be taking any chances in a nuclear war.
In a nuclear war the goal is extermination, not precision strike...
This is English language forum
It is, but that does not mean we must succumb to western propaganda...
We try to educate.
Well that further adds to that Boreis are just cheap 90's crap, Russia is no longer such a mess and can afford better subs.
An arsenal ship or sub should not cost as much as attack or SSBN type subs... the ship equivalent would be a cargo ship with a crane to manouver crates to allow their contents to be launched....
Building a 2 or 3 bigger less advanced missile submarines would be far cheaper than building 10 Yasens and would offer more firepower.
Because 10 Yasens are more useful than 2 or 3 Anteis....
They don't just have the single role of sinking carrier groups... a job no Soviet or Russian sub has ever had to do so far.
Home
Latest images
Register
Log in
