Do we surmise that the future Russian Navy will be composed of only these three strategic submarines? And that only twelve Bulava SLBM will outfit each boat? A farther assumption would be that the goal here is to maintain always one submarine on patrol thus armed with 48 warheads. Thoughts?

The RuN plans to have 3 Borei Class SSBN by 2010 , Eventually they would be replacing their Delta 4 and Typhoon with Borei class SSBN , as the ex Navy Chief Vladimir Kuroyedo had stated eventually Russia plans to stabilise on a force of 12 ~ 15 SSBN and 50 SSN.

It seems the number of SLBM carried by Borei is quite speculative in nature figures varry from 12 to 16 to as high as 20 , We will come to know once she is out , But quoting one source (Thanks To Maxpain at Keypubs for the info) Borei

The above link on Borei says
Project 955 "Borey" ("Borey")
Yury Dolgorukiy - building started at 2nd november 1996, should be finished in 2004, but not finished yet.
Aleksandr Nevskiy - building started at 19th march 2004, should be finished in 2008.

955 "Borey" project is SSBN class submarine. Designers from SKB "Rubin" said, that it'll be "most silent submarine in the world".

Crew 107 men
Diving depth - "work depth" 380, max depth450 m
Sea endurance 100 days
Length 170 m
Beam 13.5 m
Draught 9 m
Surfaced displacement 14720 tones
Submerged displacement (full load) 24000 tones
Surfaced speed 15 knots
Submerged speed 29 knots
New type atomic engine (98000 h.p.)
2 propellers
12 "Bulava-30" missiles, 4 533-mm and 2 650-mm torpedo tubes (for UGST and SOET-60M torpedoes, RPK-6 rockets (totally 18); cruise misslies and mines), 10 anti-aircraft missiles "Igla-1".

Submarine has a floating rescue camera for all crew.
Newest electronics will be used in sub construction, including submarine informational & combat control system.
Hydroacustical complex MGK-540 "Skat-3" will detect enemy submarines before they will be able to "see" "Borey""

From another book:

"Especially for work with 955 "Borey" SSBNs several control centers will be built:
- in Nizhniy Novgorod (100-150 km eastern than Moscow)
- in Krasnodar (west-southern region)
- in Khabarovsk (on Pacific ocean seaside, near border with China)
- in Molodcheno (Belarus)
- in Tashkent (Uzbekistan capital)
Signals from this stations will be got by submarine on the depth 20 meters.
One more station - "Zevs" - will be built on Kolskiy peninsula (near Murmansk), and signals from this station will be got on the depth 200-300 meters (!)"

I would be very skeptical about the plans to have 12-15 submarines. I think it is more likely that the construction of Borey submarines will stop after a third or fourth ship. This would indeed allow to keep at least one submarine on patrol (if that would be considered necessary by the time all these subs are built, I should add). I'm not sure about the number of warheads though. Does it really matter?

As for "control centers", as far as I understand, some of them have been in operation for quite a while - the Zevs on Kolsky peninsula, for example.

I would suspect that three or four submarines in this class would be logical. Any need to expand the fleet beyond those numbers would probably result in a "new" class being constructed. It seems like the RS Yuri Dolgorukiy has been under construction for the last fifteen years; it sat on the building blocks with no activity for years at a time. Series production of the missile planned to arm the submarine was cancelled due to technical reasons and replaced late with the Bulava. The submarines underwent extensive reworking to support the new Bulava. Relatively speaking, this class will be old when it reaches blue water. The number of missiles carried and their warhead load-out is significant. Warhead yields are not. Control centers? Are these communications facilities? Curious...

Frank Shuler
USA

I think it's already old. But it's been ten years, not fifteen.

Janes first reported the submarine under construction in 1992. By the time it is "commissioned" next year and gets its missiles in 2008...

Frank Shuler
USA

I see no reasons why construction should stop for Borei , unless there is some financial crunch for stopping it , The upgraded Delta IV should start decomissioning by 2015 as they are by then 30 years old and Russian flog their SSBN more than US as they do many sustained under ice operation add to the fact they are not that well maintained.

The status of Typhoon is still unclear, Will they upgrade and maintain the 3 Typhoons for another decade and a half or so ????

Borei is a logical choice to replace the Delta's and Typhoon in the long run , Borei might under go some changes after the 3rd sub , based on the experience gained by maintaining the first 3 , perhaps we could see a Borei 2 with modification.

If the US can maintain a standard fleet of Ohio SSBN , I see no reasons why the Russians wouldnt do the same.

Post 2010 if they could roll out 1 SSBN in two years , It could take care of the Delta's decomisioning and bring qualitative improvement in the fleet.

The Communication facilities mentioned are the VLF facility except for Zevs , which happens to an ELF facility for strategic communication.

It seems the Borei has gone through some redesign after Bark SLBM failure and most likely they would have to redesign the subs itself ( as patch work redesign may not be possible to accomodate a new type of SLBM ) the Bulava and keep pace with technological development and changes

Janes mostly get their stuff from god knows where and they are clueless and just keep speculating , As I relised they did it for the Indian ATV program.

All possible but not likely. Due to financial constraints and internal politics, Russia is now only adding 8 or so Topol-M ICBMs to their annual inventory, with hundreds of missiles to replace. I see the future number of Russian strategic warheads falling into the hundreds; not thousands. Think of it this way, a Borey-class submarine could hold 48 American cities (Chinese, French etc.) at risk. Powerful deterrent.

Thanks for the follow up on the comm facilities. Interesting.

Frank Shuler
USA

48 American Cities ???

If I am not wrong each Bulava is capable of carrying 10 MIRV , So theoritically if one assumes that Borei can carry 12 SLBM then it comes to 120 warhead each sub . Or am i wrong to assume about the MIRV capability of Bulava.

Also what internal politics are you referring too ??? Can you Please elaborate .

Thanks
Austin

Speculation on my part. Most Russian posted information has stated the RS Yuri Dolgorukiy carries twelve tubes for SLBM. The Bulava missile, itself is a navalized version of the Moscow Institute of Heat Technology's SS-27 Topol-M, is thus limited by launch size/weight. This solid fueled missile lacks the mass of, say a SS-N-23 (Delta IV class) rocket that has four warheads. I suspect the Bulava will carry four warheads, decoys, and a maneuverable RV that will make it hard to shoot down. Impressive system, all the way.

Internal politics in that, Russian generals are never going to allow Russian admirals that much control over national nuclear policy and its associated budget. That's why the Russian Navy will never get 50 new nuclear fleet submarines, no mater what is stated. Too many competing requirements as Russia rebuilds its military.

Frank Shuler
USA

50 submarines? Certainly not. Not even 15...

Agreed. I suspect the future Russian Navy will have 12 nuclear fleet boats and the before mentioned 3-4 Yuri Dolgorukiy-class strategic missile submarines. Even these "strategic" submarines may well be assigned conventional, non-nuclear missiles as well for operational flexibility. I wouldn't be surprised in the least for any follow-on class of nuclear fleet boats, post-Severodvinsk and Akula, to be co-built with another country, India comes to mind.

Frank Shuler
USA

In VMF of Russia there will be four types of the submarines
31.01.2006 09:49 MCK
[version for the press] " [ converted from Russian To English]

Saint Petersburg, on January 31 - the basis of submarine forces of the navy of Russia they will in the near future compose four types of submarines, stated the commander-in-chief of VMF of Russia Admiral the Vladimir Of [masorin] on Tuesday before beginning the scientific- practical conference, dedicated to the 100- anniversary of submarine forces.

“By basis to [strategiche]

submarines will become the complex “Of [borey]”, in The [severodvinskoe] enterprise is placed multipurpose nuclear-powered submarine with the cruise missiles, the road tests of head diesel-electric submarine complete and let us place one additional nuclear-powered submarine”, stated [Masorin], without refining the type last [APL].

It also reported that in 2006 into the system will enter the head diesel-electric underwater of Law

into the system will enter the head diesel-electric submarine “Saint Petersburg” of project 677 “of harmony”. According to him, this spring, when is opened Gulf of Finland, this boat will leave into the Baltic sea to the completing stage of tests. [Masorin] also reported that on March 19 on “[Sevmashe]” ([Severodvinsk]) will be placed the strategic nuclear-powered submarine “Vladimir the monomials” of the project “Of [borey]”. At present in time at this plant are built two boats of this project - “Yuri [Dolgorukiy]” and “Alexander Nevskiy”.

About this reports “Interfax”.

Whats the additional Nuclear powered sub Masorin is referring to ?? Is is a New Type

I dont see India how can help Russia in designing a N Sub , India's own ATV program is so dependent on Russian Input , Plus she is leasing 2 Akula from Russia for 10 years.

12 SSBN is a good number to have atleast 3 ~ 4 can be on constant patrol

The Russian Navy today has twelve strategic submarines and struggles to have one under the ice on patrol. Learn from the French. Have four submarines, two crews, three sets of missiles and associated warheads and maintain a "deterrence patrol" of one boat at all times. Honestly, one boat on patrol is just as good as ten in today's world.

Russia doesn't need India's help designing submarines. Russia needs India's help paying for its own purchases, financed by foreign sales.

Frank Shuler
USA

russian needs more submarine to protec its territory

Protect it from whom? Interesting question in 2006, isn't it?

Frank Shuler
USA

TEN years is an awfully long time to build a submarine.
IFthe original plan way for twelve large missles, why could'nt the First borey just have a tubelinner that would allow at least twelve beluva's instaled in the first sub.
At least this would have allowed it to go to sea earlier , leaving modifications for future submarines of the class.

Tubelinner question is interesting. I think the design change for this class of submarine has really gone through the gambit. I suspect the original plans were to install liquid-fueled missiles; now the payload will be much smaller, solid-fueled rockets. Remember, this is the first nuclear submarine Russia has ever built. The military industrial complex necessary to support such a weapon system is still being built itself. Given all the obstacles to overcome, the RS Yuri Dolgorukiy is quite an accomplishment.

Frank Shuler
USA

The original plan was to deploy Yuri Dolgorukiy with a "Bark" missile, which was a modernization of the the solid-propellant R-39/SS-N-20.

I seem to remember the “Bark” missile being Typhoon-submarine tested and being discarded as unworkable. Was this missile significantly larger that its replacement, the Bulava, necessitating the design and construction changes?

Frank Shuler
USA

Bark was essentially an R-39/SS-N-20, which is significantly larger than Bulava.

A curiosity you may be able to answer. There has always been a healthy debate in the Soviet/Russian military over solid fueled vs. liquid SLBMs. Some of this is political, the difference of opinion between the Makeyev Bureau, that designed most of the Soviet Navy’s ballistic liquid fueled missiles and the Moscow Institute of Thermotechnology that advocated solid fueled technology. The liquid-fuelled R-29RM (SS-N-23) that arms the Delta IV class has always been thought of as a “successful” missile system. Its all-Russian remanufactured successor, the Sineva, now installed on the Delta IVs, also a successful missile. However, the solid fueled R-39 (SS-N-20) missile on the Typhoon class, a disappointment. In fact, issues surrounding the reliability, performance, and versatility of the R-39 were essentially the reason the Typhoon class was paid off early. Instead of trying to adapt a less successful missile, the R-39 rebuilt as the Bark, for the new Borey class, why not engineer a version of the successful R-29 Sineva?

Frank Shuler
USA

A short answer is, the Navy liked solid-propellant missiles much better. They are safer and easier to handle. So, I would imagine, the Navy was not very enthusiastic about Sineva.

If so, why not invest in a “Sineva remanufacturing” of the R-39 (SS-N-20) capable of supporting 10 warheads each, refurbishing the Typhoon class and discarding the Delta IVs? Then you would have the technology and infrastructure to build the modified Bark for the new Borey class. With all the money the Russian Navy is investing in the overhauls of the various Delta IVs, the liquid fueled R-29RM (SS-N-23) will be in the inventory for a long time. Just curious... always curious...

Frank Shuler
USA

I guess this would have been too difficult. I'm not sure one can refurbish Typhoons without significant modifications. It's easier to build a new submarine.

First Official Pictures of Borei at a Conference on Sevmash

Borei

Borei-Note The Pump Jet Propulsion and Integrated Hull Casing

Borei: Close Up Of the Sail, Note the square box Missile Launch Tubes just
aft of the Sail

The Subs Design definately represents a drastic enhancement compared
to previous submarine like the Delta & Typhoon, a compact and
Integrated hydrodynamically efficient hull for reduced broad band
noise, and the first ever use of Pump Jet Propulsion on a Russian
Nuclear Submarine.