"Poseidon" Nuclear-armed Underwater Drone

dino00 wrote:Source: The Navy plans to put up to 32 Poseidon vehicles on combat duty.

It is noted that one of the regular carriers of UUV will be a special-purpose submarine "Khabarovsk"


"It is assumed that the Poseidon carrier will have two submarines each. They will be part of the Northern and Pacific fleets. Each will carry a maximum of eight UUV, that is, the total number of Poseidons on alert can reach 32 units," the agency’s source said.............

Khabarovsk-class (let's call it that for now) will be main carrier but it will have 8 Poseidons instead of 6. This is news.

I doubt it will end on just one submarine in that class so realistic scenario is two. That's 16 torpedoes.

Maybe three subs for 24 Poseidons depending on how Poseidon performs and how fast Khabarovsk is built.

Other torpedoes would either be in maintenance or deployed on other platforms/coast.

GunshipDemocracy wrote:

verkhoturye51 wrote:Meaning that two GUGI boats will have to be transfered to PF? And consequently also Losharik/Paltus midget submarines.

why? there are many SSN/SSGNs still to be converted if wont be specially built for this purpose. 949s seem to be a good candidate. HowLosharik can carry 8 so big vehicles?



Conventional warhead? why waste such  torpedo only for one CVN?

GUGIs are modular AFAIK, they go either with midget boats either with Poseidon. I don't believe midgets are intented for an indepenent use.

All 949s in modernization should get Onyx...reconstructing them to carry Poseidon like Belgorod and Podmoskovye was never mentioned. But they said they want 4 carriers and they already have 4 GUGI boats + Khabarovsk in production. That should be enough. With Khabarovsk they'll have 5 big + 4 miget GUGIs. I don't think they want to have more of them than regular submarines

verkhoturye51 wrote:............

All 949s in modernization should get Onyx...reconstructing them to carry Poseidon like Belgorod and Podmoskovye was never mentioned. But they said they want 4 carriers and they already have 4 GUGI boats + Khabarovsk in production. That should be enough. With Khabarovsk they'll have 5 big + 4 miget GUGIs. I don't think they want to have more of them than regular submarines

Belgorod and Podmoskovye are spy subs and they will only be handling tests (Belgorod will to be more precise)

They will not be used as Poseidon carriers beyond testing phase

Also: who says Losharik can't carry Poseidon? HI Sutton suggested that Sarov will play a major role in the testing of Poseidon and it's 70 m long, while Losharik should be 60-70 m

PapaDragon wrote:

verkhoturye51 wrote:............

All 949s in modernization should get Onyx...reconstructing them to carry Poseidon like Belgorod and Podmoskovye was never mentioned. But they said they want 4 carriers and they already have 4 GUGI boats + Khabarovsk in production. That should be enough. With Khabarovsk they'll have 5 big + 4 miget GUGIs. I don't think they want to have more of them than regular submarines  

Belgorod and Podmoskovye are spy subs and they will only be handling tests (Belgorod will to be more precise)

They will not be used as Poseidon carriers beyond testing phase

Come on, everybody says Belgorod will have Poseidons. It's ex Antey after all, and "the agency says" they are perfect for Poseidon. National Interest guys go as far as suggesting even Podmoskovye could carry at least one, and since also Orenburg has undergone similar reconstruction, all GUGIs could be poseidoned.

Poseidon is a very stupid and expensive idea. It is better to build an additional SSBN or allocate money for the development of the SSBN such as Borey-B, which was canceled. One SSBN has incomparably greater strength than 32 Poseidons.

Arrow wrote:Poseidon is a very stupid and expensive idea. It is better to build an additional SSBN or allocate money for the development of the SSBN such as Borey-B, which was canceled. One SSBN has incomparably greater strength than 32 Poseidons.

It's smart and dirt cheap idea, they will be building SSBNs in numbers they need anyway (14 in total), Borei-B is postponed not canceled (Barei-A works fine), and 32 Poseidons can nuke two US seaboards no problem.

US seaboard roasted 20 minutes or 2 hours from zero hour, it makes no difference. The deed is done either way.

It's about not giving boys in Pentagon any ideas about doing something stupid and getting away scott free. Same philosophy as with Avangard. You are not safe so don't bother trying.

Arrow wrote:Poseidon is a very stupid and expensive idea. It is better to build an additional SSBN or allocate money for the development of the SSBN such as Borey-B, which was canceled. One SSBN has incomparably greater strength than 32 Poseidons.

oh,no no no. On the contrary Poseidon is very cheap. One  torpedo and Los Angeles ceases to exist, one more and no NYC either. Boink. Sweet.  11 more and each and every CSG is destroyed.  Very very cost effective

PapaDragon wrote:It's about not giving boys in Pentagon any ideas about doing something stupid and getting away scott free. Same philosophy as with Avangard. You are not safe so don't bother trying.

that actually might not work if pentagram military have arrow's mindset

verkhoturye51 wrote:Also: who says Losharik can't carry Poseidon? HI Sutton suggested that Sarov will play a major role in the testing of Poseidon...

Sarov MAY have played a role in testing of Poseidon but that's it. Sarov hasn't left pier in months, probably longer according to Sutton himself

And Losharik is slow short-range deep-sea submersible without any combat capability, it's a spy vessel

verkhoturye51 wrote:Come on, everybody says Belgorod will have Poseidons...

Nobody says that except Sutton

verkhoturye51 wrote:It's ex Antey after all...

Which has been completely converted into spy-sub

verkhoturye51 wrote:...and "the agency says" they are perfect for Poseidon

News agency does, it means nothing

verkhoturye51 wrote:...all GUGIs could be poseidoned

And who will handle intelligence work?

verkhoturye51 wrote:...National Interest guys go as far as suggesting even Podmoskovye could carry at least one...

National Interest guys parrot Sutton

Also, here is new Defense Editor for National Interest:

David Axe serves as the new Defense Editor of the National Interest. He is the author of the graphic novels War Fix, War Is Boring and Machete Squad

Failed comic book guy

They could have at least try to get someone like Tod McFarlane, at least he can write comics but I doubt he would be caught dead anywhere near those amateurs (not that they could ever afford him)

Sarov MAY have played a role in testing of Poseidon but that's it. Sarov hasn't left pier in months, probably longer according to Sutton himself

Do you even read any article to the end? Sarov will play it in the future, according to Sutton. After it was moored for years, it entered dry dock, presumably to get it ready for Poseidon testing.

And Losharik is slow short-range deep-sea submersible without any combat capability, it's a spy vessel

It's nuclear propelled and of short range? Well maybe they plan to use entire 40 years of reactor life for patrolling shallow waters around Murmansk and spy on Russia itself

Nobody says that except Sutton

Are you trying to be the next forum clown after the CVN fanatic in the other topic? Lowy institute sounds credible to me. Besides the author is Russian if it makes you feel more of a russophile.

https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/moscows-other-navy
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a22749605/how-can-we-stop-russias-apocalypse-nuke-torpedo/

And who will handle intelligence work?

Keeping an eye on the LA-class hunter killers with Poseidon aboard is absolutely impossible of course.

verkhoturye51 wrote:

Sarov MAY have played a role in testing of Poseidon but that's it. Sarov hasn't left pier in months, probably longer according to Sutton himself

Do you even read any article to the end? Sarov will play it in the future, according to Sutton. After it was moored for years, it entered dry dock, presumably to get it ready for Poseidon testing.

And Losharik is slow short-range deep-sea submersible without any combat capability, it's a spy vessel

It's nuclear propelled and of short range? Well maybe they plan to use entire 40 years of reactor life for patrolling shallow waters around Murmansk and spy on Russia itself

Nobody says that except Sutton

Are you trying to be the next forum clown after the CVN fanatic in the other topic? Lowy institute sounds credible to me. Besides the author is Russian if it makes you feel more of a russophile.

https://www.lowyinstitute.org/the-interpreter/moscows-other-navy
https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/weapons/a22749605/how-can-we-stop-russias-apocalypse-nuke-torpedo/

And who will handle intelligence work?

Keeping an eye on the LA-class hunter killers with Poseidon aboard is absolutely impossible of course.

And there you go again repeating Sutton's crap like a clown

Just because Sutton dropped a turd does not mean you need to jump after it

Poseidon has been undergoing tests for months in North Sea while Sarov hasn't left port in way longer time than that

Whatever role Sarov had in Poseidon tests is long over and real testing platforms have taken over that job (Podmoskovye)

Once it's done Poseidon will be mounted on proper platforms, not test or spy subs

You don't mount cruise missiles on spy ships, you don't mount​ ICBMs on pickup trucks and you sure as hell don't use glorified diesel or midget sub as platform​ for nuclear weapons

Belgorod is not in service.

Sarov can carry one or two Poseidons. Why shouldn´t they use it in wartime?

Hole wrote:Belgorod is not in service.

Sarov can carry one or two Poseidons. Why shouldn´t they use it in wartime?

Podmoskovye

Fixed it

And they wouldn't use it because you want to use stuff that's designed for it, not retrofitted spy subs with miniscule payload and dubious survivability

Why didn't USAF use AWACS planes with bombs bolted on them during Desert Storm? Because they had A-10s good to go.

They could have at least try to get someone like Tod McFarlane, at least he can write comics but I doubt he would be caught dead anywhere near those amateurs (not that they could ever afford him)

Seth McFarlane would do a better job IMHO...

11 more and each and every CSG is destroyed.

some of them will be in port, so they & SSBNs there can be wasted with even less.
The Posidons can be used tactically: nuke a certain area in the ocean/along the coast to deny it to any1 for decades, thanks to high levels radiation. For example, explode 1 under the N. Pole ("sorry, it was an accident!") & force others to use the NSR & pay for icebreaker escort.

Or just as easily sail one through each of the Suez and Panama canals... detonate it somewhere where it could do the most damage...

PapaDragon wrote:

Hole wrote:Belgorod is not in service.

Sarov can carry one or two Poseidons. Why shouldn´t they use it in wartime?

Podmoskovye

Fixed it

And they wouldn't use it because you want to use stuff that's designed for it, not retrofitted spy subs with miniscule payload and dubious survivability

Why didn't USAF use AWACS planes with bombs bolted on them during Desert Storm? Because they had A-10s good to go.

The question was why the russian navy shouldn´t use Sarov in wartime. It is based on a Kilo sub and wouldn´t come closer to the targets then 10.000km.

Hole wrote:

PapaDragon wrote:

Hole wrote:Belgorod is not in service.

Sarov can carry one or two Poseidons. Why shouldn´t they use it in wartime?

Podmoskovye

Fixed it

And they wouldn't use it because you want to use stuff that's designed for it, not retrofitted spy subs with miniscule payload and dubious survivability

Why didn't USAF use AWACS planes with bombs bolted on them during Desert Storm? Because they had A-10s good to go.

The question was why the russian navy shouldn´t use Sarov in wartime. It is based on a Kilo sub and wouldn´t come closer to the targets then 10.000km.

Ok I think PapaDragon wanted to say that Sarov's role isn't a missile carrier, which is true. It could be used in wartime, of course, but for it's normal roles - spying, fixing underwater installations etc. Anyway, like I said missile carrying is technically possible. Will they add this new function on the list of regular roles of Sarov or make a new boat for it? Only time will show, if we'll get any official confirmation on this at all.

The only purpose of Sarov is testing/using the Poseidon.

Hole wrote:........
The only purpose of Sarov is testing/using the Poseidon.

Launched: 17-12-2007
Commissioned: 07-08-2008

They were still best buddies with USA when this sub was launched and Poseidon wasn't even conspiracy theory at a time

Sarov is barely footnote in Poseidon project

It's only important in mind of that guy Sutton (probably because it spends so much time tied to pier doing nothing that he keeps seeing it in satellite images and can't get it out of his head so he makes up stories about it)

GarryB wrote:Or just as easily sail one through each of the Suez and Panama canals... detonate it somewhere where it could do the most damage...

At such shallow depths, it may/will be detected & destroyed. Those canals will be needed by Russia again, esp. the Suez, so it'll be stupid to contaminate them for decades. Easier to use CMs to destroy locks & wreck large tankers to block the waterway for months, if not years.

Development of Avangard was started shortly after Bushistan canceled the ABM treaty. It would be not far fetched to consider that the development of Poseidon also started back then. Sarov was modified in 2008/09 which would fit into that timeframe.

At such shallow depths, it may/will be detected & destroyed. Those canals will be needed by Russia again, esp. the Suez, so it'll be stupid to contaminate them for decades. Easier to use CMs to destroy locks & wreck large tankers to block the waterway for months, if not years.

Keep saying.... these are doomsday devices... Russia is not expecting to survive this, and even if they did it would be 50 years or more just to get back to where we are now.

Like I said before... this missile does not need any air cavities for people... it is likely not many conventional weapons could destroy it... and to put it mildly making it detonate when attacked means a 100MT blast in shallow water near either canal would be devastating too.

GarryB wrote:..Russia is not expecting to survive this, and even if they did it would be 50 years or more just to get back to where we are now.

Even with a full nuclear exchange, Russia due to its size & resources will have more chances of surviving than the US, that has only 2 land borders & 3 long coastlines.
They wouldn't risk using Posidons or other nukes against canals, killing many neutral sailors & hurting their own & their friends' economies for decades. Their own inland waterways canals & dams could be retaliated against in a tit-for-tat.
Detonate a small charge in the middle of North Sea/Mexican Gulf & the oil prices will go up to the level high enough to negate all the losses from American sanctions on Russia & Iran.

Tsavo Lion wrote:

GarryB wrote:..Russia is not expecting to survive this, and even if they did it would be 50 years or more just to get back to where we are now.

Even with a full nuclear exchange, Russia due to its size & resources will have more chances of surviving than the US, that has only 2 land borders & 3 long coastlines.
They wouldn't risk using Posidons or other nukes against canals, killing many neutral sailors & hurting their own & their friends' economies for decades. Their own inland waterways canals & dams could be retaliated against in a tit-for-tat....

There will not any survival in any recognizable for for either country, there will not be any need left for canals, there will not be any friendly nations left in existence and those that do survive will not be friendly with either of them.

Only thing survivors will need are basic farming tools to grow what food they can and to euthanize their deformed offspring with.

If you still have any delusions about surviving nuclear war then you clearly have no idea what nuclear war is.

Long story short, Suez is valid target should they have any Poseidons to spare.

Opinions or needs of other nations, friendly or otherwise, are of no relevance or concern.

Only thing survivors will need are basic farming tools to grow what food they can and to euthanize their deformed offspring with.
If you still have any delusions about surviving nuclear war then you clearly have no idea what nuclear war is. Long story short, Suez is valid target should they have any Poseidons to spare.

I hope we all will never learn what a nuclear war is like! But small mammals, crocs & birds survived the last nuclear winter- so there'll be survivors, & they will use sperm banks if their own is no good!
China, Iran, & Russia will need the Suez more than US/NATO. Occasional cruises by the RN & FN to E. Asia isn't worth nuking it. Keeping it intact will allow ambushes to be set up around it. Even w/o it, the USN 7th fleet CSGs can reach the Arabian/Red Sea in 3-4 days from Singapore, & there 1 forward deployed in Japan. Calibres/Onikses fired from the Caspian & Black Seas/Syria can strike them there/in the Med Sea.