Project 949A: Oscar-II

The problem is that the upgrades take way too long. Just look at the Admiral Nakhimov and it isn't the only example.
The time and dry dock space required might as well be used to build an entirely new ship.
Given more modern and compact missiles you can get the same capability terminal effects as on the Oscar-II but with a smaller hull.
I think the Yasen can easily replace this ship. While the numbers might not be as great as they used to be, it will still be about 2x the amount of attack submarines France or the UK has.

Personally I think the idea with the Husky class of having a shared hull for two different submarine classes isn't exactly totally new. Just look at the Borei class (1-3). Based on the Akula attack submarine hull.

lancelot wrote:The problem is that the upgrades take way too long. Just look at the Admiral Nakhimov and it isn't the only example.
The time and dry dock space required might as well be used to build an entirely new ship.

And you think the designing, building and testing and entirely new class of missile submarine will be cheaper?

While the numbers might not be as great as they used to be, it will still be about 2x the amount of attack submarines France or the UK has.

The Russian navy is already greater than both the navies of thoes satellite states combined, what they need is atleast 50 nuclear submarines to counter the pindostanski plague.

The-thing-next-door wrote:

The Russian navy is already greater than both the navies of thoes satellite states combined, what they need is atleast 50 nuclear submarines to counter the pindostanski plague.

Uff... no, 50 nuclear submarines not possible

Russia keep about 32-35 submarines in the ranks since 15 or more years ago

It is not probable that will have more than 36 nuclear submarines as much in the future:

12 SSBN for nuclear deterrence (parity with USA Navy)
10-12 Yasen for the hunt of USA Carriers
12-14 new SSN for the other tasks

Isos wrote:12 means 6 for each fleet which is enough for a 140m class sub.

With 20 husky that's 16 nuclear sub in each fleet. I doubt they want more than that.

The project is started for a long time now and they already have experience with new stuff on Borei and Yasen M. It won't take a lit to start.

Severodvinsk pr. 885 length 139 m.

pr. 885M length : 130 m,

I bet for 10 885M , 5 each fleet

"Severodvinsk" probably will be overhauled for special purpose as Oscar II "Belgorod".
These two submarines should replace the two Delta´s of special purpose.

By 2030 Russian Navy Should have 32-34 nuclear submarines in the ranks:
12 Borey´s
10 Yasen´s
8-10 Akula´s and 2-4 949AM (Sierra´s unlikely to remain in service beyond 2030)


About new SSN, is not probably to built 20.
There are only 14 SSN in the ranks and two Victor III and two Sierra II are for fill the gap because the lack of Akulas

The most probable is 12 new SSN, 14 as much

The Anteys were never the quietest boats even when they entered service and yet that didn't stop them from achieving their tasks.

They are huge boats with at least three metres between their inner hull and their outer hull where the missiles are fitted so there is plenty of space for sound dampening material and any upgrades to improve the balance of motors and systems and improved shaped props could dramatically reduce noise if that was an issue.

The current upgrades for teh engines for the Bear Bombers involved new engines and improved propellers that reduced vibration by something like 50% which is enormous...

The Navy will include seven Antey submarines by the end of 2023

According to the source, by 2023 six Project 949A nuclear submarines will undergo technical repairs, and the Irkutsk nuclear submarine will be upgraded according to Project 949AM

MOSCOW, December 29. / TASS /. By the end of 2023, the main command of the Russian Navy plans to have seven Antey nuclear submarines (nuclear submarines) of projects 949A and 949AM in the submarine forces of the Northern and Pacific fleets. This was reported to TASS on Tuesday by a source in the military-industrial complex.

"By the indicated date [2023], six nuclear submarines of project 949A will undergo technical repairs, and the nuclear submarine Irkutsk will be modernized according to project 949AM," the agency's source said.

TASS has no official confirmation of this information.

Now the nuclear submarine "Irkutsk" is being repaired and modernized at the Far East plant "Zvezda". Earlier, a TASS source said that the strike capabilities of this submarine after the modernization will at least double - it will be able to carry 48 new Caliber-PL, Onyx and Zircon missiles.

According to open sources, currently five submarines of Project 949A are in the Northern and Pacific fleets, one is under repair. Their main strike weapons are 24 P-700 Granit anti-ship missiles. One boat of this project - "Kursk" - was lost in 2000.

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/10374675

Impact capabilities of the Irkutsk submarine after modernization may double

A source in the shipbuilding industry told TASS that it will be able to carry 48 new Caliber-PL, Onyx and Zircon missiles.

MOSCOW, December 29. / TASS /. The strike capabilities of the Irkutsk Project 949A Antey multipurpose nuclear submarine (NPS) of the Pacific Fleet will at least double after modernization - it will be able to carry 48 new Caliber-PL, Onyx and Zircon missiles ... This was reported to TASS on Tuesday by a source in the shipbuilding industry.

In the course of modernization, Irkutsk will become not just a submarine of Project 949AM (modernized project 949A - TASS comment), but instead of 24 anti-ship missiles Granit will be able to carry 48 fundamentally new missiles Caliber-PL, Onyx and Zircon , that is, the submarine will be able to strike at coastal targets, "- said the agency's interlocutor.

According to him, the return of the nuclear submarine to the fleet's combat composition is expected at the end of 2023. "The presence of a specific nomenclature of missiles on board the submarine will depend on the tasks assigned to it," he said.

TASS has no official confirmation of this information.

Earlier it was reported that in 2020, during the flight design tests of the Zircon rocket, three launches were carried out: two at sea targets, one at ground targets. According to a TASS source in the military-industrial complex, state tests of this rocket will begin in 2021, during which at least seven launches from the frigate Admiral Gorshkov and the Project 885 Severodvinsk nuclear submarine will be performed during the previous stage of flight design tests.

The nuclear submarine "Irkutsk" was laid down at the Sevmash shipyard (now part of the United Shipbuilding Corporation) on May 8, 1985. Launched on December 29, 1987, transferred to the Navy on December 30, 1988. In 1990 she made an inter-fleet transfer to the Pacific Fleet. In 1993 it became known as "Irkutsk". Since 1997 she has been in reserve. In 2001 she arrived at the Zvezda Far East plant for repairs. Repair and modernization began only in 2019. The main strike weapons of the Project 949A nuclear submarine were 24 Granit anti-ship missiles.

https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/10373421

Well it is good to hear that they are upgrading them, but only having 48 missiles is dissapointing.

Perhaps the 72 missiles was like the Yasen's 64 being the theoretical maximum load of calibrs achievable only when the torpedo room is entirely filled with them.

I wonder when they will make a proper missile sub with 80-200 missiles.

They already showed 3 oniks instead of 1 granit so 72 missiles. They have room for some 28 torpedoes in the front which makes them theorically capable of having 100 missiles.

48 is still better than 24 granit. That will also make them multirole subs like Yasen rather than just anti ship subs.

Putin & friends have already hinted clearly what the use of these missile carriers can be, namely to patrol close enough to US so that any of the stupid provocations they are planning on Russian territory will have an immediate and painful response in CONUS proper. They were specific enough to recommend them calculate the time a 9 M missile takes to cover 1000 km.

So to use them as means of conventional or sub-strategic deterrence, the number of missiles per sub is not that critical (48 Tsirkon landing on the most critical spots of Washington is already more than enough to make an statement) as the amount of carriers, that is why it is important that any SS(G)N in decent condition needs to be retrofitted and prepared for the task. They in fact are going to increase the amount of Antey in service by what it seems and add them to the Yasen being built. To put 200 Tsirkon in a not very stealthy sub is not the best idea IMO.

Why do you think it can´t carry a nuclear warhead?

Its range will put the ship or sub in range of enemy fire and they may end up destroying the plateform before it launches its missiles.

Kalibr M with 4000km range or kinzhal + tupolev will be used for an attack on US soil.

People, what about listening to the professionals and decision makers instead of making shit up? They are literally talking of Tsirkon in the terms I mentioned above. A Tsirkon with conventional warhead can indeed destroy main military installations or key infrastructure, or highly reinforced ones if it carries a nuclear warhead. Of course it is an ideal weapon for escalation control and of course it has a huge deterring value. Calculate the area of sea distant 1000 km of the US continental territory to see how easy is to avoid the attack. About the carrier escaping, as said it is not so easy to keep under control that amount of sea and ultimately it is not so relevant because we are talking about the very last steps to avoid a nuclear war.

Arrow wrote:
Such calculations are not good. 9M speed is the maximum speed. During one of the last tests, the missile traveled 450 km in 4.5 minutes. Average speed is around 5M

The guys saying that are the same that warned US about the 9 M, 1000 km range of Tsirkon, you don't know who of them is wrong or right or what are the ultimate capabilities of the missile. Remember, they don't owe you or us any explanation for what they do or say.

PapaDragon wrote:

Hole wrote:Why do you think it can´t carry a nuclear warhead?

It can

But there are better platforms for that

Nothing that can strike a land-target quite that fast and with such a short warning

Just came across this vid, apparently a RuN service film from 1983 for the Pr.949 SSGN. There is a lot of interesting footage in here that I've never seen before

For those skeptical of using Zircon against the US... I would say a conventionally armed or nuclear armed Zircon would have the best chance of penetrating any modern air defences which would make it ideal for hitting targets like the pentagon or other more secret HQs and bases in the US, but also for defeating any ABM radar and equipment and sites in the US which by their very nature would be relatively safe from other ballistic weapon attack, or much lower speed cruise missile attack.

Using conventional warheads it can be considered a smack on the nose that might not be worth getting shot for, but using nuclear weapons it could easily obliterate the ABM defences on land or sea so anything coming over the north pole or south pole towards the US will not have anything get in its way to impact.

Many Americans think they have an ABM system that can keep them safe for whatever reason.

A reminder of just how slim the conning tower looked compared to the rest of her.