Project 955: Borei class SSBN #2

Same is true for the US with roughly 35 operational subs.
Small number for such a large area as the World Oceans.

The point ALAMO made is about the fact that Russia already has a new generation of subs with new missiles = a safe deterrence.
While the Americans are way behind and even their new "boats" will only receive old missiles.

Hole wrote:Same is true for the US with roughly 35 operational subs.
Small number for such a large area as the World Oceans.

The point ALAMO made is about the fact that Russia already has a new generation of subs with new missiles = a safe deterrence.
While the Americans are way behind and even their new "boats" will only receive old missiles.

The Yasen-M is way more advanced than the Virginia in terms of weapons systems with the Oniks and Kalibr. Once it gets the Zircon and Kalibr-M the gap will grow even more. The only problem is there still aren't that many of them.

The US is still operating a huge amount of Cold War era submarine like the Los Angeles class submarines which should be in the scrap heap.

Arrow wrote:24 SSN Los Angeles and 24 new Virginia class plus 14 Ohio. That's 65 submarines, not 35. In addition, another 10 Virginias are under construction and 1 or 2 Columbia under construction.

He said operational. You can assume of each three submarines only one is operational. The others will be undergoing maintenance, returning back to port, or whatever.

Yes but since russian navy is way smaller than US navy and focuses on its border waters it can't patrol all the oceans.

When the bubble bursts and they actually try to balance a budget and start trying to pay off some of their debt it will be their foreign bases being closed and their military budget that will likely be sacrificed first.

US subs are quite safe even if older and noisier.

Older and noisier means less safe. Having large numbers just means they can lose more and not be at risk of running out any time soon.

On the opposite the US aand chiwawa states keep getting closer to russian bases and can focus there to wat h for russian navy.

Not really important in peace time and in war time they will have measures to lose their tails as they go.

Measures that obviously can't be applied during peace time.

Russia need to build much more Yasen and a new cheaper SSN.

That is under development.

It is already being pushed forward, that a modernization of the US nuke arsenal will cost TRILLION plus.

Not to mention if they are actually serious about fighting real countries then they need to sort out a land based air defence network that HATO shares and uses together... otherwise they are going to be horribly vulnerable in any conflict with Russia or China.

This is a cancer.
Nothing more, nothing less.
We need chemotherapy.

Their presidents only get two terms and during those terms there is no guarantee their party will control Congress or the Senate so actual real meaningful change is unlikely... but they don't even seem to want any change so the chances of it happening are pretty close to zero.

Alexander Nevsky

https://rutube.ru/video/b350b7c00f01a30104c6a71dd7966ffa/

Russia’s nuclear-powered submarine Yury Dolgoruky undergoes scheduled maintenance

https://tass.com/defense/1837641

Ironically I would say US numbers could be bad for them moving forward, because keeping them operational will be expensive and of course their public wont put up with losing a lot of men in submarines so it is not like they can afford to lose lots of them and continue doing what they were doing.

Their next gen subs and ships and missiles and tanks and planes have the problem that a corrupt MIC is doing the work and a corrupt Pentagon doesn't care that they are openly stealing from the US taxpayer, and seems to think throwing even more money will solve their problems.

Their corruption problems are horrific and are not being addressed, so they continue and get worse... so any new project or programme is going to suffer too.

THAAD SAMs cost between 11 and 12 million US dollars per missile, and US anti ship and anti sub weapons wont be cheaper... how many can they afford to make each year... how many will they have in storage ready for a real conflict... I suspect all these enormous numbers of US subs couldn't all put to sea if they wanted to because there likely wouldn't be enough missiles in stock to arm them all except SLBMs.

Talk about a cheaper sub for Russia... why... their subs are not breaking their bank and the quality makes them even more useful...

Of course with Poseidon and Thunderbird they can launch strategic attacks from Russia and not need to leave Russian waters to take out their enemies capitals and other major cities... these are not first strike weapons so they will be to eliminate the enemy population centres to destroy countries...

Edit: I would also add that the number imbalance is mostly fake because they don't count Russian SSKs which are actually rather potent in shallow water and are actually smaller and more capable near coastlines for defence.

A Lada or even Improved Kilo would likely be much more use than a Seawolf or Virginia and also be a fraction of the cost to buy and operate... the Lada being a smaller lighter Improved Kilo with half the crew compliment and better fire power in an improved design... once the design is worked out it would make sense to make as many as they can... their sonar systems are supposed to be excellent and they are very quiet.

The sonar of the Lada means it is useful in deep water too where its small size and limited range makes it less useful than an SSN or SSGN, but its systems and equipment means it can operate in deep water when needed.

Isos wrote:The sail is different, no ? New sensor package ?

It's been different ever since 4th boat, this is Borei-A


It's a damn good news that Boreis are coming along this good, 8 boats in the water and 4 more coming up for total of at least 12

That number right there is full at-sea deterrence, finally

Plus there's always possibility of some more being ordered, it's excellent boat so hopefully they do it