Hi All, Started this thread to discuss Russia’s Modern Subs both conventional & Nuclear , Amur , Kilo , Akula-1/2 , and the upcoming Borei SSBN and Severdovinsk SSN.
To start with something on the Akula-2
The Russian Submarines Are Powerful Vessels
Silent deep-sea hunter marks its 20-year-long service
This Russian submarine made Americans to come down with money to aid Russia. This sub has been given various names like “aircraft carrier killer”, or “deep-sea gangster”, or “silent hunter”, to name a few. The multi-purpose nuclear-powered submarine K-284 of Project 971 was commissioned June 16, 1984 crowning the efforts of the Design Bureau Malakhit and the Amurskiy Zavod shipyard in Komsomolsk-na-Amure. In total, 15 boats of that class have been built. In 1996, those involved in the creation of the submarine were awarded the State Prize of the Russian Federation.
For the first time, the shipbuilding yard at Komsomolsk-na-Amure rather than at Severodvinsk or Leningrad had been chosen as the place to lay down a multi-purpose nuclear-powered submarine coded Project 971 Shuka-B. That was an indication of a considerable development of shipbuilding in the Russian Far East.
NATO”s classification “Akula” (Shark) given to the newest submarines of the Russian Navy caused confusion since the name of another Soviet sub, Alfa of Project 705, also began with the letter “A”. The acoustic signature of K-284 was 12-15 dB lower (i.e. 4-4.5 times) than that of 671RTM, the most noiseless Russian submarine of the previous generation. Improvement in this key parameter of underwater technology placed Russia among the world”s top submarine shipbuilders. The Akula”s design and acoustic signature had been honed throughout the mass production stage.
The boats of the project were given personal names, so K-317 was dubbed “Pantera”. The first submarine built in Severodvinsk, K-480, received the name “Bars”, which soon became the class name of all nuclear-powered ships of Project 971. Commander S. V. Efremenko became the first captain of Bars. In December 1997, at the request of the Republic of Tatarstan, Bars was renamed “Ak-Bars”. Some years ago, the attack submarine Gepard was commissioned at Severodvinsk. In 1996, the submarine cruiser Vepr was commissioned at Severodvinsk. She had a new design of the pressure hull and different “stuffing” at the same time retaining the shape of its class. Besides, with her another major advance was made in noise reduction. In the West this sub and the subsequent SSNs of Project 971 were designated Akula-II. Integrated automation cut the crew to 73 (31 officers), that was almost twice as less than that of the American Los Angeles class sub (141 men).
According to some US experts, the degree of stealth of the improved sub of Project 971 has caught up with that of the US Navy multi-purpose fourth generation submarine Seawolf (SSN-21). Speed, diving depth and ordnance make these ships approximately peer . Between December 1995 and February 1996, K-461 Volk (manned by the complement from K-317 Pantera under the orders of captain S. Spravtsev and captain V. Korolyov, assistant division commander acting as senior officer on board), had been operating in the Mediterranean Sea to provide long-distance anti-submarine support for the Admiral Kuznetsov heavy aircraft carrying cruiser. The mission included long-term tracking of several NATO submarines, including an American SSN of the Los Angeles class. According to US Navy sources, at tactical speeds 5-7 knots the acoustic quietness of Improved Akula class boats searched by sonars was lower than that of the most advanced US Navy SSNs such as the Improved Los Angeles class. The then chief of US naval operations Admiral Jeremy Boorda said that the American ships were not able to track the Improved Akula at a speed less than 6 to 9 knots (the new Russian boat was eventually contacted in the spring 1995 off the eastern coast of the USA). According to the Adm. J. M. Boorda, the low noise acoustic profile of the improved Akula-II met the requirements of forth generation subs.
After the end of the Cold War, new stealth nuclear-powered submarines in the Russian Fleet aroused serious concern in the USA. In 1991, this matter was even discussed in Congress. American legislators were offered some solutions to turn the situation around to the advantage of the USA. Proposals comprised demands that Russia disclose long-term underwater shipbuilding programs, or establishment of coordinated limits on the number of attack SSNs for both Russia and USA, or calls to assist Russia to convert shipyards building nuke subs to produce non-defense items.
The international environmental NGO “Green Peace” also joined the efforts against the Russian underwater shipbuilding disguised as a drive to ban nuclear-powered submarines (Russian ones, of course, presented, according to “Greens”, the greatest environmental hazard). In order to eliminate “nuclear disasters”, “Green Peace” recommended Western governments to tie financial aid to Russia with the moves the latter would make to solve this problem. However, as the delivery of new attack submarines to the Russian Navy dramatically slowed down by mid-90s, the issue for USA ceased to be burning, though “environmentalists” (many of whom are known for their tight links to NATO special services), have been pursuing the same policy against the Russian Fleet up to date.
Norman Polmar, Þ well-known US naval analyst, once said that the arrival of submarines of the Akula class and other Russian SSNs of the third generation demonstrated that the Soviet shipbuilders had bridged the gap in the acoustic quieting level unexpectedly fast. Some years later, in 1994, this gap was closed altogether.
What in Project 971 specifically frightened Western analysts? Maybe its innovative solutions such as integrated automation of battle and technical facilities, concentration of ship control and its armament in one place – the main control room, and a state-of-the-art rescue chamber, which demonstrated its efficiency on Project 705 boats?
The following technical data based on open sources may help get the picture: length – 110.3 m; beam -13.6 m; draft – 9.7 m; full displacement – 12,770 tons; maximum diving depth: 600 m; operating depth: 520 m; maximum submerged speed: 33 knots; endurance: 100 days; propulsion: one pressurized water reactor OK-650B (190 MW) with four steam turbines; 1 shaft, 50,000 hps; one 7 bladed propeller with improved acoustic properties and low rotation speed. The Skat-3 MGK-540 sonar system provides digital data processing, enhanced sonar detection and location capabilities. A submarine of Project 971 features double hull construction. The pressure hull material is high strength steel.
An Akula-II class sub can boast highly effective, unique wake-homing capabilities to identify the wake of a submarine many hours after its passing. She is fitted with the Simfonia-U navigation system and Molniya-MTS satellite communications with Tsunami communications antenna and a towed array.
Armed with 40 torpedoes launched from four 533mm (for 28 torpedoes) and four 650mm torpedo tubes, she can also fire Granat cruise missiles, underwater missiles and rocket torpedoes (Shkval, Vodopad, and Veter), torpedoes and torpedo mines. Besides this sub can lay ordinary mines, too.
Currently, all Project 971 multi-purpose nuclear-powered submarines are assigned to the Russian Northern and Pacific Fleets, and by contemporary standards, they are active enough.
In the event of actual conflict, each Project 971 sub is capable to pose a threat to the enemy, draw off its essential forces, and keep the Russian territory intact from strikes.
By: Arabella-Cox - 21st April 2005 at 04:43
Yes, amazing that the article talks about democracy as the solution to economic problems. Kaliningrad is part of a democratic country, but that won’t help it as long as the countries that surround it want it to fail. The economic isolation of the peace loving democratic countries around Kaliningrad will likely kill it… though even if it ends up as just a port and military base I am sure the Russians will try to keep it.
By: ShipoftheLine - 20th April 2005 at 16:15
Kaliningrad – Worst place in Europe
Talking about the Russian navy and its desire to maintain an ice free European Port – have you seen this report on the BBC news website about Kaliningrad:
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/4382145.stm
What a mess – definatelely a place to avoid !!!
By: Austin - 11th April 2005 at 13:23
Russia expects to receive the lead boats of Severodvinsk and Dolgorukiy class in 2006.
Wow Thats a Fantastic News , Although Dolgorukiy is a a positive thing , But she would most likely be without her main armament which is the Bulava SLBM , The most realistic date for the Bulava to enter service is 2008.
Severodvinsk is indeed a nice news , Now Its a widely accepted fact that Akula-2 has bettered the 688I in silencing , Does any one here expecting the Severodvinsk to be as good as the Sea Wolf or the newer Virginia Class of SSN if not better.
Also can we expect the Sev to be with Pump Jet Propulsion rather than the 7 blade skewed prop.
By: snake65 - 11th April 2005 at 13:05
According to an interview of Adm. Victor Kravchenko, Chief of Main Staff of Russian Navy, given to Interfax on 19 March, 2005, Russia expects to receive the lead boats of Severodvinsk and Dolgorukiy class in 2006.
By: snake65 - 11th April 2005 at 08:39
The names of Project 971 replicate the names of WW1 series of Russian subs. Other current attack subs have the names of Russian cities, Severodvinsk is the latest example.
By: Austin - 10th April 2005 at 18:13
Russia To Test St Petersburg Submarine Soon
ST. PETERSBURG, APRIL 8, (RIA Novosti) – The Admiralteyskiye Verfi ship-yard is to conduct the St. Petersburg fourth-generation non-nuclear submarine’s trial run late this May.
Talking to RIA Novosti here today, people at the ship-yard’s press center noted that mooring tests would be completed by that time. Such tests involve the ship-yard’s specialists, as well as those from the Rubin naval design bureau (that had developed the submarine).
The Russian Navy will receive the St. Petersburg submarine in late 2005, that is, after all tests are completed. This submarine’s keel was laid in 1997.
The new submarine’s improved specifications will make it possible to effectively hit underwater and surface targets alike. She will also launch missile salvos. The submarine features new-generation radio-electronic equipment replete with a modern elements base, a permanent-magnet electric propulsion unit (that can operate in just about any mode), as well as a storage battery with an extended service life.
Noise levels have been reduced several times over. The submarine hull also features a new and effective anti-sonar coating. She boasts a comprehensive automated-control system for her weaponry and technical systems, too.
The submarine’s sonar complex features a highly sensitive sound locator in the bow section. The sound locator’s area exceeds that of previous-generation subs’ sound locators several-fold. The navigation complex ensures navigation safety, also making it possible to launch cruise missiles, while the submarine remains underwater for a long time. All retractable systems, except the commander’s periscope, do not penetrate the submarine’s pressure hull.
Peter the Great had established Admiralteiskye Verfi, which is Russia’s oldest ship-yard, November 5, 1704. As of today, this enterprise designs, produces and upgrades civilian ships and warships, too. It has built more than 2,600 ships over the last 300 years.
By: Austin - 8th April 2005 at 05:55
Russia Launches Project 677 submarine
JNI December-2004
By Richard Scott
The first Project 677 ‘Lada’-class diesel-electric submarine has been formally launched from the Admiralty Shipyard in St Petersburg.
Named Sankt Peterburg in honour of the 300th anniversary of the founding of its namesake city, the submarine was launched into the River Neva on 28 October aboard a floating dock.Following test and acceptance activities , formal commisioning in to the Russian Federation Navy is expected in the second half of 2005 (now its commisioned)
Designed by the Rubin Central Design Bureau for Marien Engineering (CDBME) , the 1,765 tonne submerged displacement Project 677 ,( known as Amur in export derivative ) represent the fourth generation of Russian Conventional submarines. Laid down in december 1997, Sankt Peterburgs completion has been repeatedly delayed by funding shortages and more recently by equipment acceptance issues and revision of certain safety aspects. A second unit , an Amur 1650 export varaint, is awaiting funds for its completion at the Admiralty Shipyard.
Displacing 1,765 tonnes standard and 66.8m in length overall , the Project 677 design is somewhat smaller than the third-generation Project 636 ‘KILO’ -class design. Distinguished by Fin Mounted hydroplanes and cruciform control surfaces aft, it also differs from “Kilo” in its adoption of a single-hull design. Construction is from AB-2 steel ( for a max diving depth of 250 m)
According to data released by Rubin CDBME, Sankt Peterburg has a maximum submerged and surface speeds of 21 Kt and 10 kt respectively. Submerged range at 3 kt will be 650 n miles with a maximum submerged endurance of 10 days. Cruising range under diesel power ( while snorkelling ) is put at 6000 n miles.
The Rubin CDBME said that refinements in “hullform, vibration supression and acoustic (hull) coating make the Project 677 three times quiter than Project 636″ . It added that much reduced self noise , combined with a new integrated sonar suite , will enable early detection of surface ships and untra-quite submarines at long ranges”.
Developed by Morphyspribor , the integrated sonar suite combines bow-mounted and towed arrays, plus separate intercept and mine avoidance arrays, under water telephones, noise-monitoring sensors and velocity and range measurement systems.
The Avrora Science and Production corporation has led the development of the Project 677 combat control system. The main control room accommodates all combat management and platform control functions, which interface with the common data transfer system. The Dual Workstation combat information control system and interfaces to weapon and countermeasures discharge management units on a seperate weapon control bus.
Another first for the Project 677 is the incorporation of a non-hull-penetrating optronic search mast , supplied by Elektropribor , in place of conventional search periscope. A conventional attack periscope is retained.
By: Arabella-Cox - 8th April 2005 at 05:51
NATO”s classification “Akula” (Shark) given to the newest submarines of the Russian Navy caused confusion since the name of another Soviet sub, Alfa of Project 705, also began with the letter “A”.
Worse than that, the Russians already call what the west calls the Typhoon class the Akula class.
Names like Bars (Snow Leopard), Vepr (Wild Boar), Pantera (Panther or Cougar), Gepard (Cheetah) seem to suggest land based hunters are used rather than sea based names for SSNs in Russia.
By: Austin - 7th April 2005 at 16:22
Russias 100 years of sub design
Just a Little Old But Worth in Gold
An Interview With Rear Admiral Mikhail Barskov
Q. The Russian Navy’s budget for R&D and armaments has been published in the open press for the first time: For 2004, this figure will be almost 17 billion rubles. Will this be sufficient to maintain combat capability and ensure the Navy can deal with both current and future threats?
A. Over the past few years the navies of the United States and other leading world powers have significantly stepped up their maritime activities, often out of proportion with actual national security threats. Under the pretext of combating international terrorism and protecting human rights, military operations are being conducted in which naval ships and vessels play a decisive role by delivering troops, providing firepower support and furnishing vital supplies to forces stationed on foreign territory.
The role of the Navy as a guarantor of the interests of Russia and its maritime allies has grown substantially because of these circumstances. A budget increase for the development and maintenance of naval armaments and military hardware, in 2004 in particular, has resolved several of the Navy’s equipment problems. The construction of new ships continues; new, advanced arms and military hardware are being developed; and work on the overhaul and reconstruction of existing ships, armaments and other equipment has been stepped up. However, the rate of fleet amortization is not being met. On the whole, state funding for the development and maintenance of naval armaments and military hardware is insufficient to guarantee that the Russian Navy can fulfill the tasks set before it. In comparison, the United States annually assigns over $37 billion for R&D and arms procurements for its navy.
Q. Which shipbuilding programs currently have the highest priority for the Russian Navy? Which component — strategic nuclear forces (MSYaS) or general-purpose forces — gets more of the Navy’s attention today? Are you satisfied with the volume of funding and the speed of construction for corvettes, the SSBN Yuri Dolgoruky and the Severodvinsk nuclear submarine? At what stage is the construction of these two submarines right now?
A. The most pressing tasks for the Russian Navy today are, of course, maintaining the combat capability of the existing MSYaS grouping and the commissioning of the next-generation Yuri Dolgoruky SSBN. The Navy is also paying serious attention to the development of general-purpose naval forces: Sevmash is completing construction of the Severodvinsk-type nuclear submarine, and Admiralty Shipyard is completing the Sankt-Petersburg conventional submarine.
In recent years the amount of funding allocated for the construction of ships under government defense contracts has grown significantly compared to the 1990s, but it is still insufficient to guarantee the completion and commissioning of the submarines on schedule. At this point in time the main hull work has been completed on the Severodvinsk and the Yuri Dolgoruky, and the vessels are being fitted with armaments, other equipment and components.
Q. Will the Project 1154 frigates (the Yaroslav Mudry and the Novik) be completed at the Yantar plant?
A. The Yantar shipyard is currently building two ships for the Russian Navy. A training ship for the Russian Navy is being constructed on the basis of R&D carried out for the Novik, a Project 12441 ship, the construction of which has been suspended pending a Russian government order. The training ship is scheduled to be commissioned by the Navy in 2008. In 2002 work resumed on the Project 11540 ship, which is due to be delivered to the Navy in 2005.
Q. When will the tender be announced for the construction of a next-generation lead frigate? Will the design of the ship rely on Project 11356?
A. The Navy and the shipbuilding industry are currently conducting a set of operations to develop advanced surface ships. The Severnoye Design Bureau plans to complete the general technical project for a next-generation frigate in 2005. This is an original project; the Project 11356 ship will not serve as a prototype. The tender for the construction of the lead frigate for the Russian Navy is scheduled for 2005.
Q. What will happen to the Admiral Ushakov and the Admiral Nakhimov heavy missile cruisers?
A. The Admiral Ushakov was written off in 2001, and the Admiral Nakhimov is undergoing repairs at Sevmash. Its overhaul is due to be completed in 2007.
Q. What impact will the project to upgrade the Admiral Gorshkov heavy aircraft carrier for the Indian Navy have on the construction of the Yuri Dolgoruky?
A. Construction work on the SSBN Yuri Dolgoruky is being financed from the federal budget, while the work on the Admiral Gorshkov will be conducted at the customer’s expense, so the two projects will not directly affect each other.
Indirectly, of course, the implementation of a contract with a foreign customer stabilizes the financial position of a company, thus helping it meet work deadlines for the Russian Navy.
Q. What is the position of the Russian Navy as regards the consolidation of the Russian shipbuilding industry? Does the Navy have its own ideas on the ideal structure for the industry? Which facility would the Navy prefer to see as the center of consolidation? Is there any sense in placing orders at the Yantar plant, given the fact that it is located in the Kaliningrad enclave? What does the future hold for Sevmash and the shipbuilding facilities in the Far East?
A. The Russian State Center for Nuclear Shipbuilding was established in 1992 on the basis of the Sevmash Production Association by a Russian presidential decree. The center was intended to take advantage of the unique research and production potential of the Severodvinsk shipbuilding center, and it has design bureaus, research institutes and industrial facilities that supply key components for nuclear-powered vessels.
For the foreseeable future, Sevmash will remain Russia’s main facility for the construction and maintenance of nuclear submarines and surface warships.
In general, the Navy currently places maintenance orders at shipbuilding facilities in the Far East, though in the future the same enterprises may be contracted to construct promising new ships for the Navy.
The government’s armaments program through 2016 stipulates that a considerable volume of the Navy’s orders be placed with facilities in the Far East.
[/b]
Sign In
April 7, 2005 at 4:18 pm