Russian Navy: Status & News #4

I think it's 12 totally. So as planned 5 comissioned until 2025 and now extra 7 later.

They started drawing Kalina because the brass wasn't happy with Lada. That changed, perhaps due to the lack of rubles. I don't think it's very likely that design for Kalina already exists, so this project would take a lot of time and resources, which are more needed for Husky, Gorshkov M and Priboy projects.

Russian Navy deprived of ocean status
Why the fleet surface forces are not ready to effectively solve tasks in the far zone

verkhoturye51 wrote:I think it's 12 totally. So as planned 5 comissioned until 2025 and now extra 7 later.

well,  not that bad anyway

12 636 + 12 Ladas till 2027

Tingsay wrote:What?  If the AIP is ready, why not drop Lada and go straight for Kalinas?

Time and risk.  Mind there are still ~22 original 877 Kilos in service and need to be pretty much ASAP replaced.  BTW Japan decided to go with  LiOn instead of AIP for a reason I guess.


Kalina will go into series asmcuh improved model something like a conventional Husky to my educated guess but after all 636 will be delivered first.

Tsavo Lion wrote:Russian Navy deprived of ocean status
Why the fleet surface forces are not ready to effectively solve tasks in the far zone

well NG has always been "liberast pro western outlet". In the USA you dont have such problmes, there is no anti-US newspaper supported by external enemies of state there.

No wonder that they publish always drama queens with pleasure. Personally I love when one guy knows better than all of top brass in navy. Or perhaps he just doesnt understand what is going on?

Can someone give me a rundown of new diesel electric subs?

12 Ladas are planned currently.

I know there are 6 Kilos delivered to Black Sea Fleet and 6 are to be built for Pacific Fleet so that's 12.

Are there more Kilos in the pipeline after that?

well NG has always been "liberast pro western outlet".

No, they can't be accused of that & r actually more hawkish & critical than many in the MOD.
That's why it's called "Independent Military Review".

That's why it's called "Independent Military Review".

Hahahaha... you put a lot of stock in a name... did you know that the utopian paradise of East Germany was called the GDR... the German Democratic Republic... but fair is fair, they were at least as democratic as the republic of the USA... every election they had two choices...

In this case, the substance comes 1st, before the name.
Their authors don't dance to Kremlin's tune like the newspaper Pravda did before 1991.

GunshipDemocracy wrote:BTW Japan decided to go with  LiOn instead of AIP for a reason I guess.

I think that Japanese subs don't need big underwater range as much as Russians, who want to be present in all world oceans. So if Russians need range and are developing AIP, while at the same time constructing Lada class, maybe later boats can be fitted with AIP. So we would have Lada I and Lada II.

PapaDragon wrote:

Are there more Kilos in the pipeline after that?

I think that's it. But that's alright, those poor diesels will have to hunt Virginias up and down in Barents sea so it's better to make more Huskies.

Tsavo Lion wrote:In this case, the substance comes 1st, before the name.

As always and you guys could at least open his link before criticizing. No TASS article ever wrote so nicely about Ivan Gren. It notices positive effects of Syrian campaign and successsful domestic engine production. It's (constructively) critical towards Bykov, but who isn't? The only problem is that it misses the main advantage of Derzky. So what if it carries less weapons if we get more, so desperately needed, range. It's almost a humiliation, having to send anti-sub Udaloy for anti-pirate mission in Red sea because you don't have anything else.

verkhoturye51 wrote:

GunshipDemocracy wrote:BTW Japan decided to go with  LiOn instead of AIP for a reason I guess.

I think that Japanese subs don't need big underwater range as much as Russians, who want to be present in all world oceans. So if Russians need range and are developing AIP, while at the same time constructing Lada class, maybe later boats can be fitted with AIP. So we would have Lada I and Lada II.

Japanese Soryu Class had sterling & lead batteries. 7000nm range. Since 11th ship Japanese decided to switch to LiON due to better range and underwater speed...

Tsavo Lion wrote:In this case, the substance comes 1st, before the name.
Their authors don't dance to Kremlin's tune like the newspaper Pravda did before 1991.

and all US press is doing not for pentagon. This one retired guy expresses his opinion. He can even claim US never landed on Moon. How does it relates to reality is another thing.

In this case, the substance comes 1st, before the name.
Their authors don't dance to Kremlin's tune like the newspaper Pravda did before 1991.

Of course... western defence experts that are totally impartial... except they don't exist do they?

I think that Japanese subs don't need big underwater range as much as Russians, who want to be present in all world oceans. So if Russians need range and are developing AIP, while at the same time constructing Lada class, maybe later boats can be fitted with AIP. So we would have Lada I and Lada II.

Russia already has long range AIP subs... Yasen, Akula, Sierra, Victor etc etc etc.

Russian conventional subs are not long range subs anymore... they don't need Foxtrots when they have nukes for that job.

I think that's it. But that's alright, those poor diesels will have to hunt Virginias up and down in Barents sea so it's better to make more Huskies.

Actually Ladas would be ideal for hunting Virginias... the USN seriously under estimated conventional subs... do you?

Actually Ladas would be ideal for hunting Virginias... the USN seriously under estimated conventional subs... do you?

Underestimate them on 12,7 nmi of underwater range at full speed? Those subs will barely reach Virginia's location when they'll have to surface or get loud. Russia is not Algeria and those subs are needed for distant operations. What about Syria. That's 1300 nmi from Sevastopol. We all know that they are second best option, because Yasens are expensive. I'm not saying that's not good enough for land attacks on Middle East countries, but playing cat and mouse with US SSNs? 21 knots vs 25-30 knots? Let's stay serious. If Russia wants to regain its dominance in the north and make the Barents bastion again, Husky class will have to come in really long series.

If a Virginia goes faster then 10 knots it would be loud enough to be heard from around the Barents sea.

Russia has already sonar systems around that area. In a few years there will be UUV´s for recon and for attack. There are also helicopters. And ships.

Hole wrote:If a Virginia goes faster then 10 knots it would be loud enough to be heard from around the Barents sea.

So there are three scenarios:

1. Virginia in silent mode, Varshavyanka can track it for a limited range, than has to snorkel, allowing Virginia to escape
2. Virginia in silent mode, Varshavyanka can track it for a limited range, than has to turn diesel engine on, defying its position, allowing Virginia to escape
3. Virginia in loud mode, escapes Varshavyanka with superior speed

verkhoturye51 wrote:

Hole wrote:If a Virginia goes faster then 10 knots it would be loud enough to be heard from around the Barents sea.

So there are three scenarios:

1. Virginia in silent mode, Varshavyanka can track it for a limited range, than has to snorkel, allowing Virginia to escape
2. Virginia in silent mode, Varshavyanka can track it for a limited range, than has to turn diesel engine on, defying its position, allowing Virginia to escape
3. Virginia in loud mode, escapes Varshavyanka with superior speed

Ka-27, Il-38, Udaloys, steregouchshy ? Data links ? No ?

I think you can do better in ypur scenarios.

Isos wrote:
Ka-27, Il-38, Udaloys, steregouchshy ? Data links ? No ?

I think you can do better in ypur scenarios.

Second best options. Having enough SSNs capable of doing the jobs themselves will be important part if they want security in the Barents.

And also in the second ex bastion in the Okhotsk sea. Since Arleigh Burke payed a visit recently, it will be interesting to see if & where will Russia respond. A visit to Latin American allies after 10 years would be huge event, perhaps inappropriate now when they want to calm down the relations with the US. As someone suggested, soon to be comissioned Knyaz Vladimir and Kazan could see some state trials related action in the north Atlantic.

Underestimate them on 12,7 nmi of underwater range at full speed? Those subs will barely reach Virginia's location when they'll have to surface or get loud.

At 21kt a Kilo is already going to be noisy.
Creeping up at quiet speed its got up to 750km of range.

Underestimate them on 12,7 nmi of underwater range at full speed?

Are you drunk?

First of all why would any sub operate at full speed anywhere at all?

Second, why do you think the range underwater of the Lada would be less than the 400km a Kilo can manage, let alone the real figure?

Russia is not Algeria and those subs are needed for distant operations.

Nuclear subs are bloody useless in shallow coastal areas... while conventional subs lack long range endurance... see a pattern here?

The Foxtrot was a long range sub but it was built at a time when nuke subs were not available... nuke powered subs replaced conventional subs in the Soviet and Russian navy in the long range roles... since then... Tango and Kilo and now Lada subs have been coastal protection subs to protect Russia.

What about Syria. That's 1300 nmi from Sevastopol.

What about Syria?

The shallow water of the Med means nuke subs are not so fantastic... as shown by the British subs that could not take part in the illegal attack on Syria because of the faked chemical attack...

We all know that they are second best option, because Yasens are expensive.

They are the first choice in shallow coastal waters around Russia.

I'm not saying that's not good enough for land attacks on Middle East countries, but playing cat and mouse with US SSNs? 21 knots vs 25-30 knots? Let's stay serious. If Russia wants to regain its dominance in the north and make the Barents bastion again, Husky class will have to come in really long series.

You views are amusing... do you actually know anything about Russian subs at all?

If the Virginia class subs are racing around at 30knts they are fucked... the Lada captain would spot such a target at very long range and launch a long range torpedo at the Virginia... and the Virginia running at 30knts will be deaf and therefore blind to the incoming torpedo... in fact he might launch a 91E1... 50km range mach 2.5 ballistic rocket that delivers into the water a homing torpedo... the first thing the US captain will know is a torpedo splashing into the water within a km or so of his position... perhaps ahead of him as he roars through the water in his super sub and then boom... of course that is giving him too much credit... at 30knts he wont notice a thing until impact.

1. Virginia in silent mode, Varshavyanka can track it for a limited range, than has to snorkel, allowing Virginia to escape
2. Virginia in silent mode, Varshavyanka can track it for a limited range, than has to turn diesel engine on, defying its position, allowing Virginia to escape
3. Virginia in loud mode, escapes Varshavyanka with superior speed

The Russian sub can lurk at a choke point and wait for western sub traffic... if it is not moving much it is not using power much and can stay submerged longer... I rather don't think the US sub can piss around because there will be surface forces and air power actively looking for it too... we are of course talking about Russian waters where the Lada and Kilo operate.

Also third... 30knts is not fast enough to outrun a Russian torpedo, and certainly not fast enough to outrun a 91E1 missile...

Second best options. Having enough SSNs capable of doing the jobs themselves will be important part if they want security in the Barents.

It is no accident that Kilos go to the Black Sea and Baltic fleet... conventional subs are better in shallow waters.... but the Lada has much better sonar and other sensors and is better designed to operate in deeper water like an SSN... it was one of its design parameters... which set the bar very high... which is why it has had problems in development and production.

Clearly they now have the design they want... and they clearly want a lot of them...

The shallow water of the Med means nuke subs are not so fantastic...

The US SSBNs operated there before the longer range SLBMs came out, & the VMF, Soviet & Russian, had SSN/GNs there too.
US ballistic missile submarines also operated in the Mediterranean Sea from the early 1960s to the late 1970s from Naval Station Rota in southern Spain. Longer-range Trident submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) removed the need to conduct continuous deterrent patrols in the Mediterranean Sea. Even so, US ballistic missile submarines continued to conduct occasional visits to Mediterranean ports with nuclear weapons on board. One such visit, by the Louisiana (SSBN-743) with it load of 24 Trident missiles and an estimated 192 warheads, to Souda Bay on Crete, took place from December 12 to 16, 1999.  The ship’s Command History states that the port visit, which took place December 12-16, 1999, occurred during the “Alert Strategic Deterrent Patrol in support of national tasking” that included a “Mediterranean Sea Patrol.” https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00963402.2016.1124664?src=recsys&
https://fas.org/blogs/security/2016/02/nuclear-weapons-at-sea/

Littorals can be deep or shallow; the Med. Sea is mostly deep:
The Barenz Sea isn't shallow; 7 Kilo SSKs r there in the NF:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilo-class_submarine#Project_877_units

All 8 newly built went to the BS/PF. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kilo-class_submarine#Project_636.3_units

Most of the Black Sea, Japan Sea & littorals around Kamchatka r shallow only near the coasts.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea#/media/File:Map_of_the_Black_Sea_with_bathymetry_and_surrounding_relief.svg

The US SSBNs operated there before the longer range SLBMs came out, & the VMF, Soviet & Russian, had SSN/GNs there too.

Neither Russia nor the US has conventional ballistic subs (SSBK)s so their performance in shallow water is not really relevant as there is no option to use SSBKs.

What I said stands no matter all this information you posted... the close range waters around Russia are shallow, where SSKs make more sense than SSNs to operate.

They are cheaper to build and operate, and smaller and more manouverable than bigger nuke powered vessels.

The Ladas will be more expensive than previous SSKs because their sensors are closer to what is being fitted to SSNs and are intended to work in deep ocean scenarios as well as shallow.

Neither Russia nor the US has conventional ballistic subs (SSBK)s so their performance in shallow water is not really relevant as there is no option to use SSBKs.

I didn't imply using them as such, only that the Med. & other seas were they operate only shallow very close to the coasts. If the Med. was shallow as u posted, SSB/GNs wouldn't be deployed there to be "shot like a fish in a barrel".

.. the close range waters around Russia are shallow, where SSKs make more sense than SSNs to operate.

It mostly not the depths, but the geography of closed seas, & that they r quieter, cheaper to build & maintain, that makes them a better option.

Implementation of naval strategy continues despite NATO, corruption, 5th column, defeatists and all the odds:

"It [the naval shipbuilding program] is being implemented stage by stage. Currently, the serial construction of new-generation green-water warships has been launched and simultaneously blue-water warships are being designed. In the immediate future, the serial construction of blue-water large-displacement surface combatants will be launched," the Navy shipbuilding chief said at the ceremony of accepting the missile corvette Orekhovo-Zuyevo for service in the Russian Black Sea Fleet.

More:
http://tass.com/defense/1035297

It mostly not the depths, but the geography of closed seas, & that they r quieter, cheaper to build & maintain, that makes them a better option.

So you are saying I am wrong that the sea near Russia is shallow, but that conventional subs are in many specific ways better than nukes for the role of coastal defence?

In the immediate future, the serial construction of blue-water large-displacement surface combatants will be launched," the Navy shipbuilding chief said at the ceremony of accepting the missile corvette Orekhovo-Zuyevo for service in the Russian Black Sea Fleet.

Wow... almost what I have been saying... they don't need a blue water navy now... they don't have the infrastructure or support ships to operate one now, but with the development and growth of the navy over the next few years they can build up their navy and start planning blue water vessels for the future when they will find them very useful.

So you are saying I am wrong that the sea near Russia is shallow, but that conventional subs are in many specific ways better than nukes for the role of coastal defense?

I mean those littorals have both shallow areas closer to coasts & larger deeper water areas in the rest of Russian EEZ & its approaches.
But  their AIP-less subs need to stay in those waters to be in range of air cover; they r still better than SSNs for tasks there since they don't need to go too far, quieter & cost less. They used SSKs in the Med. only because they were transiting to the BSF anyway & had to test/demonstrate their LACM capability, not because of the alleged shallow depths there.
However, East of the Barents Sea, along the entire NSR, & in the Bering Sea, SSNs will be needed, even in ice free/coastal waters, as those huge areas r remote with "no services".