Russian Navy : News & Discussion

Russia will build nuclear-powered aircraft carriers

http://www.interfax.com/3/286135/news.aspx

I don’t see where there would be SLBMs in front of the sail. There are no visible doors, and the missile section behind the sail is far wider than the raised section in front of the sail.

The “unfinished” look to the hull may be due to the fact that the boat is only supposed to be like 80% (reported previously, right?) complete. Either way the hull exterior is not nearly as smooth as one would expect from a stealthy SSBN.

84%, reported readiness at launch, or rather roll-out. The surface of her outer hull will be the same as on St.Peterburg,when finished. I’m much more disappointed that they were not able to put 12m long Bulavas in 13.5m hull smoothly. At least, it’s 16 missiles, not 12. Perhaps Nevsky will have a smaller hump:cool:

I don’t see where there would be SLBMs in front of the sail. There are no visible doors, and the missile section behind the sail is far wider than the raised section in front of the sail.

The “unfinished” look to the hull may be due to the fact that the boat is only supposed to be like 80% (reported previously, right?) complete. Either way the hull exterior is not nearly as smooth as one would expect from a stealthy SSBN.

Looking at these released pictures of Borei , It seems to me that it does have some weird shape and design in the bow area , certainly not a beautiful looking sub .

The SLBM also seems to be equally divided along the Front and Aft of the sail , Not so smooth surface , From the initial pictures its seems dissapointing after the hype build around it.

But would still wait till she gets commisioned and we can have a better idea on the over all dimension of the sub

Presumably a spray process (that or they’ve gone Soviet in their engineering and cast it around the entire hull in one shot). .

Which Russian sub has it “cast around the entire hull in one shot” instead of tiles? (I can’t remotely imagine “dipping” an entire submarine)

They have to make for Victors being phased out. Also only roughly half of 945 and 971 are operational.

Allegedly the money is alotted for the first Yasen and construction is going on, the second is still just a number of separate sections, not welded together. If the money flow will not stop for some reason or other, we’ll soon see rollout of Severodvinsk and a second one by 2009-2010. But that will be the last of them.

So just 2 yasen is the best bet , Well for cost effective reason it makes more sense for the russian to have small ~ 6000 tons SSN and in numbers

RSM55 , Can you confirm if the Russians are still going ahead with the Yasen class (Severdovinisk ) SSN and would be building that in Numbers or Will the discontinue with the Yasen class and go with a new 5000 tons class smaller SSN design as was stated some time back

Allegedly the money is alotted for the first Yasen and construction is going on, the second is still just a number of separate sections, not welded together. If the money flow will not stop for some reason or other, we’ll soon see rollout of Severodvinsk and a second one by 2009-2010. But that will be the last of them.

RSM55 , Can you confirm if the Russians are still going ahead with the Yasen class (Severdovinisk ) SSN and would be building that in Numbers or Will the discontinue with the Yasen class and go with a new 5000 tons class smaller SSN design as was stated some time back

More Pics of Borei , Awesome …….

Yuri Dolgorukiy

Nuclear Submarine Dismantlement Progress

To continue the nice little discussion you guys had about the Akson-2, I do have some questions.

Is that a Yankee Stretch or Yankee Pod?
…
But then again, one of the few pics floating around on the east-to-find internet showing the Yankee Stretch is identical to the picture in this thread of the Akson-2.

The picture on the left shows the same submarine as on the right, i.e. the Kazan (Akson-2) aka Yankee Pod:

* sub K-403 (project 667A Nalim class/Yankee class)-> converted in the 80s into project 667AK (Akson-1, hydroacoustic trials for 3rd gen. subs) -> converted into Akson-2 in the 90s -> decomissioned on Dec. 9 2005 (project 09780

*Yankee Stretch: sub K-411 (id.) -> converted into minisub carrier (sometimes called project 667AN – project 09774) in 1990.

Akson-2

To continue the nice little discussion you guys had about the Akson-2, I do have some questions.

Is that a Yankee Stretch or Yankee Pod?

The reason I ask is because I was under the impression that it is a Yankee Pod, as that version was orginally used as a sonar-testbed as far as I know.

But then again, one of the few pics floating around on the east-to-find internet showing the Yankee Stretch is identical to the picture in this thread of the Akson-2.

You can see in the two pictures I have attached. I’ve marked the four major identical features with numbers (besides the obvious bow).

eh? If they were only ever bonding the hull face they were always going to suffer from delaminating problems.

Whatever they were doing before, the filler stuff in the seams is far more obvious on their newer designs.

Mats are presumably just larger tiles – cheaper to manufacturer and cheaper to fit (less adhesive required), but depending on the curvature could be a pain to get in place.

True, I was just trying to get the visual difference across. It’s the same basic principle, no doubt. As I mentioned, they look thinner than conventional tiles though (Perhaps half the thickness? Another reason why I called them matts), so making them conform to the curvature of the hull shouldn’t be that hard.

There aren’t any tiles on the Seawolf and Viginia class subs, IIRC. Instead they have a seamless coating that is applied by some special process that escapes me right now. Gets rid of the missing-tile problem but is obviously a pain to repair if it is damaged by ice or other floating stuff, which is why I can’t see Russia adopting anything similar. The newer Russian subs (677 and 955) seem to have tiles that are bonded together along the edges instead. Interestingly, German and French subs have what looks like thin anechoic “matts” (larger than tiles) that appear to be riveted to the hull (although you don’t often hear about any anechoic coating on them at all, so I’m not sure).

Presumably a spray process (that or they’ve gone Soviet in their engineering and cast it around the entire hull in one shot). Have to get the process right though, as if one area isn’t attached properly (e.g. badly cleaned/primed) then you could have a large section peeling away.

seem to have tiles that are bonded together along the edges instead

eh? If they were only ever bonding the hull face they were always going to suffer from delaminating problems.

Mats are presumably just larger tiles – cheaper to manufacturer and cheaper to fit (less adhesive required), but depending on the curvature could be a pain to get in place.

i doubt india has such a warhead design(300 kt/250 kg). India had 6 tests so far(soviet union 714 with 969 devices) with a reported max yield of 25 kt. This simply can’t be true. This is the same as the story with the agni-III which some put into topol – M category. I believe the us is ahead in warhead design, but russia might be able to produce some lighter warheads(compared to soviet designs) – with new electronics, sensors, materials. why not. I don’t believe the us will replace it’s ohio class submarines with 14 new subs with 24 missiles each in the trident D-5 class. I bet they’ll go smaller too. The real news is that the russians launched a new sub. in 1998 nobody thought that this could happen ever again.

It has been widely and widely reported of India posessing such warheads 250 to 300 kg and boosted …of 250 to 300kt yield, the very Reason of Agni 3’s payload is it will contain MIRV’s in later stages, You’ll get the confirmation that time I guess.

Indian Physics.

How amusing 😮

http://www.ccnr.org/india_tritium.html
Janes intelligence review of around 1998…

While the USA had stopped producing tritium by about 1988 due to safety reasons and ageing facilities, the Indian breakthrough underscores the fact that tritium can now be produced at a fraction of the estimated US$ 7 billion needed to produce the isotope at current costs using the accelerator process, as was done in the USA. The Indian scientists have managed to extract highly enriched tritium from heavy water used in power reactors.

It was an innocuous paragraph at the end of a recently published paper on detritiation that let the cat out of the bag. The paper appeared in a book entitled Heavy Water- Properties, Production and Analysis, which was authored by two BARC scientists, Sharad M. Dave and Himangshu K. Sadhukhan, with a Mexican scientist, Octavio A. Novaro. On p. 461 of the work, it says the following:

The Bhabha Atomic Research Center, Bombay, India, also having developed a wetproof catalyst for LPCE liquid phase catalytic exchange, has employed it for detritiation. A pilot plant based on LPCE cryogenic distillation with about 90 per cent tritium removal from heavy water has been commissioned and is under experimental evaluation. Reportedly, this facility seems to be the only operating LPCE-based detritiation facility in the world. A commercial detritiation plant based on this process is being set up at one of their nuclear power stations.

According to BARC scientists, the new technology is aimed at lowering the tritium content in heavy water circulating around the moderator circuit. They argue that the project is being executed to prevent the many health hazards associated with the leakage of tritium from reactors. When asked what is exactly being done to the highly radioactive tritium so recovered, the scientists refuse to talk – even under conditions of anonymity. When pressed, some ventured to comment that a scenario in which the recovered tritium is being stockpiled for strategic purposes cannot be ruled out

If mods feel this is off topic they can delete it..

Makes you wonder how missing tiles affect flow noise. (And I think I’ve seen missing tiles on pretty much everybody’s subs. Oscars, and I think L.As. Don’t recall any off the newer Seawolfs or Virginias but it wouldn’t surprise me.)

There aren’t any tiles on the Seawolf and Viginia class subs, IIRC. Instead they have a seamless coating that is applied by some special process that escapes me right now. Gets rid of the missing-tile problem but is obviously a pain to repair if it is damaged by ice or other floating stuff, which is why I can’t see Russia adopting anything similar. The newer Russian subs (677 and 955) seem to have tiles that are bonded together along the edges instead. Interestingly, German and French subs have what looks like thin anechoic “matts” (larger than tiles) that appear to be riveted to the hull (although you don’t often hear about any anechoic coating on them at all, so I’m not sure).

How much sonar would penetrate the steel and reflect off the second layer? Maybe an intermediate layer of acoustic control is required to reduce the impact of a second hull. Also of course it may be related to the need to reduce radiated noise.

Adhesively bonded. As to them falling off, thats what you get for using sub-contractors to do a semi-specialist job. The adhesives (generally) are pretty good, but then MOD contract the fit to the cheapest sub-contractor and hey, presto!

Makes you wonder how missing tiles affect flow noise. (And I think I’ve seen missing tiles on pretty much everybody’s subs. Oscars, and I think L.As. Don’t recall any off the newer Seawolfs or Virginias but it wouldn’t surprise me.)

I am not sure sonar would penetrate a substantial steel pressure hull and produce any kind of return from internal structures below, especially if air or hollow spaces are involved. The skeleton support structure, maybe. And of course internal noise reduction and dampening is important. This is a high-frequency sonar for survey and similar things, but maybe this is still representative:
http://www.l-3klein.com/image_gallery/5000_images/canasub/canasub.html

As for getting cheap contractors to superglue tiles to $300 million+ machines of war.. it seems so wrong. Sign of the times maybe.

As far as I can tell anechoic tiles are, and need to be mounted where they can actually intercept active sonar before it bounces of the steel hull, and they form the outermost layer of the submarine hull.

How much sonar would penetrate the steel and reflect off the second layer? Maybe an intermediate layer of acoustic control is required to reduce the impact of a second hull. Also of course it may be related to the need to reduce radiated noise.

Most (?) submarines these days are thus coated with plastic or rubber based tiles or panels that are bolted/mounted on to the pressure hull. And they do fall off… close up of this appears even worse.
http://www.royal-navy.mod.uk/server/show/ConMediaFile.20090

Adhesively bonded. As to them falling off, thats what you get for using sub-contractors to do a semi-specialist job. The adhesives (generally) are pretty good, but then MOD contract the fit to the cheapest sub-contractor and hey, presto!