Can they load Sineva? As far I know, R-29R and R-29RM have the same diameter, being the last one slightly taller. Sineva is a R-29RM with just a new guidance package.

I would doubt this is practical or even possible.

The R-29RM has a slightly higher diameter than the R-29R (1.9 vs. 1.8m)and it is also longer (14.8 vs. 14.9). So the Sineva will not fit in the Delta III tubes.
But I doubt that Russia keeps these subs just for the Volna with its 50 kg payload capability and its low launch rate. It should be much cheaper to set up a launch tube for the Volna in Plesetzk than keeping this sub.

So, its commercial use as naval satellite launcher is the most likely explanation.

Regards.

So, Martin what’s your hypothesis? A conversion to a massive cruise missile platform, like older Ohio vessels, may be?

I have no hypothesis and Pavel is surely better qualified than me to guess what this all means, but keeping it for the Volna makes no sense. I don´t know what the costs for overhaul and operationial costs for this sub are, but they are surely much above the money you could earn with Volna which costs maybe 1 Mio USD per launch or even less. Any payload which you can send to sky with the Volna you can easily send up piggy back with any other space mission. You have also the Shtil launcher for Delta IV subs which will be active for maybe another decade. Russia also establishes a air launch company for small payloads together with Indonesia. So I don´t see the need to keep the Volna launcher for the costs of a whole Delta III sub. An if you want to keep it, I think its no problem to launch it from land in Plesetzk or anywhere else.
So, what else? Cruise Missiles, Special Forces, test platform, reserve if Bulava delays, russian navy has to much money and doesn´t know where to spend it, who knows?

Kolokol:
Martin:

It might be as simple as the Russian Navy paid for the overhaul and the shipyard delivered. The US Navy has issued contracts that call for a particular class of warship or perhaps only a single vessel to be refurbished; the work is completed but only after the decision is made to place the ship (or class) in reserve. Recently such a situation occurred here with a class of minesweepers. The contract was honored, the ships were delivered and then the flags were struck. I can’t really see any military advantage to keeping a single Delta III in service. This was somewhat unclear. We are talking about a single Delta III, the K-44 Ryazan, right?

Frank Shuler
USA

There are still at least four Delta IIIs still in service in Petropavlovsk. Given the attention that the base in Vil'yuchinsk received after Putin's visit in August and the promises of funding to construct a new base for up to eight Boreys (yeah, right, like they'll actually get around to building eight!), my bet is that the Ryazan will return to Rybachiy and stay in service with her four sisters until either the Borays come on line or they fall apart.

Perhaps for Special Forces Operation and as a Cruise Missile carrier ?

That seems to be the only viable option

It is interesting to watch Russia trying to modernize its strategic infrastructure and yet try to maintain a relic like the 667BDR. What is the status of the Project 941's (those that are left) ?

In my opinion, the Russians are trying to hold on to capability they cannot afford. Perhaps they are indeed retiring the 941's and the BDR is an old reliable alternative.

I think that Delta IV submarines will stay in service till 2025-2030.
Because new sineva missiles can stay in service for at least 15 years. But I doubt that all new sinevas would be build before 2010. Also I once read that russia planing to keep sineva missiles in service till 2030, but because delta IV submarines are only platform for it, that means that some submarines will stay in service till then.
On "ria novosti" I read that delta IV submarines passing radical modernization and they will get new sonar system, new control sytem, and probably entire new weapons system.
Like US ohio class, which will stay in service for another 20 years after modernization. Probably russia doing the same.
In my opinion 2010 russia plan to have 6 modernized delta IV, 3 borei class and dimitri donskoi 941 with bulavas missiles.
Also there is possibility to modernize another two 941 submarines and refit them with bulavas missiles.

Gentlemen, please read this

http://mdb.cast.ru/mdb/2-2007/item1/item2/

Note than another 667BDR is reported as undergoing repairing. Name unspecified. Furthermore, three 667BDRM (Karelia, Bryansk and Novomoskovsk) are reported to be in mid-life upgrade.

Kolokol:

Interesting read. If accurate, do we then assume the four modernized, rebuilt Delta IIIs will have new missiles in place of their existing R-29R (NATO - SS-N-18 Stingray) SLBMs that are near the end of their service life? I can’t believe Russia would make such a big effort keeping the Project 667BDR submarines in the fleet when struggling to rearm the Delta IVs and get the Borey’s to sea. All four surviving Delta IIIs are to be based in the North Fleet, right? So, maintaining a strategic presence in the Pacific with these submarines isn’t a factor. Just doesn’t make sense to me unless the Buluva missile project is in serious trouble and the Delta IIIs are only insurance in case the Project 955 boats are very, very late.

Frank Shuler
USA

The 667BDR will remain in service, nothing strange with this.

I saw some pictures a few weeks ago in arms tass of the upgraded submarine,It looks really good...it's been upgraded heavily.

http://arms-tass.su/

Maybe somebody who knows Russian..can browse the archives, my russian is not so good, and I can't find the page!

Frank, honestly I can’t understand the reason for the repairing of the 667BDR. Pavel told us that is near impossible to refit them whit Sineva. Furthermore, we have a seventieth 667BDRM. It is more logical to refit this vessel with the Sineva just in case a catastrophic delay on the Bulava program. The remaining hypotheses are a) cruise missiles platform b) special purposes submarine.

@ Mr. Shuler -

All the remaining Delta IIIs are based at Rybachiy. The only operational North Fleet boats not supporting the Bulava program are Delta IVs. All of the Typhoons/Akulas/Type 941s whatever you want to call them boats are either being cut up in the framework of a CTR program or supporting the Bulava program as a floating test bed. The Russians recently made noise about basing all eight Borays they may or may not end up building at Rybachiy, presumably allowing them to scrap the Delta IIIs after they deliver a few Borays.

Anonymous:

There is a certain sense of logic in your suggestion I had not previously considered. Today, the role of the refurbished Delta IIIs would certainly be to provide a meaningful, even if limited, nuclear deterrent in Russia’s defense by their patrols. In the future however, perhaps their greater role would be to prepare Rybachiy for the arrival of the "Yuriy Dolgorukiy" Class (Project 955) by allowing infrastructural investment in the submarine base itself and provide crew training and such. Using the Delta IIIs to crew train the sailors’ necessary to transition to the Project 955 boats makes sense. This theory would also suggest to me the Delta IVs will stay in the inventory longer than first thought and the number of Borey’s will probably be less than the eight forecasted by the Kremlin. After four or five boats, I suspect the class will be superseded by yet another submarine series to replace the Delta IVs. Just a guess.

Frank Shuler
USA