SSGN thread (Ohio, Oscar and other dedicated SSGNs)

949A Omsk to Vilyuchinsk


6 active SSN/SSGN homeported there, three 949A and three 971 rattached to 10th Subm. Div.

Severodvinsk SSGN: How Many and When?

After reviewing equipment delivery schedules, the actual timelines for only seven units looks something like this:

HULL NAME LAID LAUNCHED DELIVERED
160 Severodvinsk Dec 1993 Jun 2010 Dec 2013
161 Kazan Jul 2009 (2016) 4Q2017
162 Novosibirsk Jul 2013 (2019)
163 Krasnoyarsk Jul 2014 - (2019)
164 ? (2015) - (2020)
165 ? (2015) - (2021)
166 (2015) - (2022)

Unless SevMash production and contractor-supplied equipment deliveries can be sped up, delivering more than five submarines by the end of 2020 appears improbable.

I have a feeling that if world wide oil prices continue to drop that the Russian military schedules for upgrades and new platforms is going to start feeling the pinch.

Time will tell, but crude is now around $48 a barrel.

SSGN K-329 'Severodvinsk'

FORBIN said:

Re: SSN and SSGN nuclear attack submarines

More powerful : about 50 weapons Seawolf, Yasen and Oscar but Seawolf can launch all the different types of weapons with its big TLT, 660 mm, more polyvalent.
Oscar special build as US CV killer with 24 big SS-N-19. Ohio also used for land attack with 154 CM ! with 13 torp but only for self defense.

More quiet : Seawolf a little less Virginia/Astute all get pump jet, Yasen ? but yet don' t get pump jet.

Sonar : US SN always have the best.

Speed : Seawolf about 40 kn max.

Depth : Seawolf operationnal 600 m but all sub can go up to about 20/30 % more than this operationnal limit.

Comparison for length and height for width Oscar II unusual 18+ m ! for use very big SS-N-19

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

FORBIN said:

Re: SSN and SSGN nuclear attack submarines

Thanks for the interesting facts.. And post on this forum. However, the facts on the seawolf class is highly debatable as the facts have always remained classified. One thing is for sure, the us navy used hy100 steel which is more or less the same steel used on the triomphant class subs... As for the sonar... I will tend to believe the ones used by the Royal Navy is better... As for the speed.. I doubt the seawolf will achieve such speeds unless it is a burst speed... One thing is certain.. The reactor is powerful hence the hull diameter has been enlarged compared to the hulls used on the Los Angeles class & Virginia class.
Do not get mt wrong.. The seawolf is no doubt the benchmark set by the us navy and perhaps others as a overall sub.. And I believe is one of the most powerful subs in terms of combat performance.. But the dynamics are changing in the underwater warfare. Hence only 3 were ever constructed.. Set aside the high cost...

Click to expand...

Severodvinsk

Severodvinsk VLS 4 on each side : 8 with 4 missiles : total 32

Scratch said:

Although carrying the same designation, especially Oscar and Ohio subs are really different in missions, however.

I believe the Oscars, to this day, continue their sole role as SAG / CVBG killers with anti sub or heavy anti-ship missiles. Those 24 P-700 are quite a massive punch to be thrown at a target.
The Ohios on the other hand are perhaps the "small scale", but stealthy, version of the arsenal ship idea, capable of (partially) overwhelming land based defenses with swarms of LACMs.
The Yasens seem to be the first subs having true multirole SSGN capability within their hybrid SSN/SSGN role, using the multimission Klub missile.
The Block V Virginias may go there, too should they also field the new LRASM in their VPMs.

Click to expand...

True and was designed from the start for to be polyvalent, successor of Akula and Oscar, in more now use new CM Kalibr/ 3M14E which is a Klub variant her exact range remains unknown minimum 300 km but some data up to 1500 or 2500 km ?
Could also be armed with P-800/SS-N-26 Oniks in her VLS.
I get others data with 3 miss by VLS total 24 and 30 torpedoes, 8/10 x 533 mm TLT.

Announced her reactor have a life of 25/30 years big for a Russian sub in general 6/8.
I see well new 885M with a pump jet as Borey/955 to see...

I believe that the Yasen boats are more SSN than an SSGN. Let's discuss them in the modern SSN thread.

It is true that they, like the Flight V Virginia boats will be hybrinds...but they are principally (IMHO) SSNs.

The Ohio SSGN conversions, the Oscars...those are what I would call true SSGNs. And it seems that they will likely be the last of them because the Russians (who built the OScars) and the US (who made the Ohio SSGNs) ar eboth going to the hybrid SSNs with SSGN capabilities.

Congress Adds Cash to Special Account to Build New Nuclear Submarines


By | Monday, April 20th, 2015 8:36 pm
Posted in
2417
Congress plans to add money into a special fund established this year for the purpose of paying for the Navy’s next-generation, nuclear-armed ballistic missile submarines, the Ohio Replacement Program.

The 2015 National Defense Authorization Act established the National Sea-Based Deterrence Fund as an account created specifically to fund the program; however, it did not receive funding in the initial budget request.

Rep. Randy Forbes, R-Va., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee Seapower and Projection Forces subcommittee, told Military.com that his Congressional subcommittee will add money to the fund as part of its current mark-up of the 2016 defense bill.


“We’re going to put some dollars in that this year. As you know we’ve wanted to get that fund established,” Forbes said. “I think this year you will see us actually putting dollars in there and increasing the opportunity for the Department to put additional dollars in there down the road.”

The exact amount of the mark-up has yet to be revealed. Congressional and leaders wanted to create the fund to separate its spending line from the Navy’s formal shipbuilding budget in order to avoid depleting needed shipbuilding accounts.

If the funding for the Ohio Replacement program would have come from the Navy’s annual shipbuilding budget – it would have devastated the Navy’s overall long-term plans for the fleet, officials have said.

Rear Adm. Joseph Tofalo, Director of Undersea Warfare, said there is historical precedent for the U.S. coming up with innovative funding strategies for undersea nuclear deterrence. He cited the original first built in the 1980s and the first nuclear armed submarines first built in the early 1960s, called “41 for Freedom.”

“The Navy is going to need top line relief in order to accomplish the ship building program. When ’41 for freedom,’ and then the Ohio-Class, were built, the Navy received about $5 to $7 billion per year in additional funding for ship building. When you compare those years to all other post-Korean war years, you see that top line relief is historically consistent with what has happened over time. The issue is the additional resources and that is the conversation that is going on,” Tofalo said.

Slated to serve through 2085, the Ohio Replacement program, the nuclear submarine is scheduled to begin construction by 2021. Requirements work, technical specifications and early prototyping have already been underway at General Dynamics Electric Boat.

Designed to be 560-feet–long and house 16 Trident II D5 missiles fired from 44-foot-long missile tubes, Ohio Replacement submarines will be engineered as a stealthy, high-tech nuclear deterrent.

Production for the lead ship in a planned fleet of 12 Ohio Replacement submarines is expected to cost $12.4 billion — $4.8 billion in non-recurring engineering or development costs and $7.6 billion in ship construction, the plan states.

The Navy hopes to build Ohio Replacement submarine numbers two through 12 for $4.9 billion each.

Detailed design for the first Ohio Replacement Program is slated for 2017. The new submarines are being engineered to quietly patrol the undersea domain and function as a crucial strategic deterrent, assuring a second strike or retaliatory nuclear capability in the event of nuclear attack.

Citing the Ohio Replacement Program’s electric drive technology as a vital part of its ability to stay quieter and on patrol through the 2080s, Tofalo said discussions to fund the program were going well.

“When the new strategy comes into effect we are going to have 70-percent of our nation’s account able nuclear warheads with the submarine force. This is a ship that is going to be on patrol through the 2080s – it is a tremendous return for the American taxpayer when you talk about preventing major power war,” Tofalo added.

The Navy is building 12 Ohio Replacement submarines to replace 14 existing Ohio-class nuclear-armed boats because the new submarines are being built with an improved nuclear core reactor that will better sustain the submarines, officials have said.

As a result, the Ohio Replacement submarines will be able to serve a greater number of deployments than the ships they are replacing and not need a mid-life refueling in order to complete 42 years of service.

Electric Boat and the Navy are already progressing on early prototype work connecting missile tubes to portions of the hull, officials said. Called integrated tube and hull forging, the effort is designed to weld parts of the boat together and assess the ability to manufacture key parts of the submarine before final integration.

In 2012, General Dynamics Electric Boat was awarded a five-year research and development deal for the Ohio Replacement submarines with a value up to $1.85 billion. The contract contains specific incentives for lowering cost and increasing manufacturing efficiency, Navy and Electric Boat officials said.

The successful creation of this fund could raise questions among and leaders seeking for ways to fund some of their top dollar, high-priority programs. For example, the Air Force might seek top line relief for its new bomber program and the Army might wish for funds to pay for its next-generation helicopter program – Future Vertical Lift.