Military Watch explained why Russia changed "Sharks" to "Boreas"

February 9 2023 31

On February 6, the Russian Navy officially said goodbye to its last heavy strategic missile submarine TK-208 "Dmitry Donskoy" of project 941 "Shark" (SSBN Typhoon - "Typhoon" - according to NATO codification). 6 TARPKSNs were built in the USSR: 3 were disposed of, and another 3 - TK-17 Arkhangelsk, TK-20 Severstal and TK-208 Dmitry Donskoy - were withdrawn from the fleet and are located in Severodvinsk. This was reported by the publication Military Watch, studying the problems of operating giant submarines.

The publication notes that the Russian Navy withdrew from service the TK-208 with a displacement of 48 thousand tons against the background of talks about the future fate of this submarine that have been going on for more than a year. Therefore, there is a possibility that the TK-208 may remain in a "semi-operational state" for research purposes.

To date, Project 941 Shark submarines remain the largest ever built on the planet. They are larger than the British Invincible-class aircraft carriers (series of the 1970s) and only slightly smaller than modern Japanese Izumo-class helicopter carriers. Project 941 Akula submarines were the most combat-ready units of the Soviet fleet, which carried intercontinental ballistic missiles with multiple warheads. But the collapse of the USSR and subsequent problems in the economy Russia led to the reduction, and now to the final decommissioning of them. They were replaced by fourth-generation strategic nuclear submarines of project 955 "Borey" (955A "Borey-A").

The Borey is preferred over the Typhoon due to its much lower operating costs. They are much more secretive and smaller in size. 7 Boreevs have been built (6 are in service and 1 is being tested), 3 more are under construction and 2 are planned for laying down. In total, Russia will have 12 such submarines.

- says the publication.

On December 29, 2022, the Imperator Alexander III nuclear submarine of the Borey-A project was launched, perhaps this accelerated the withdrawal of the Dmitry Donskoy from the fleet, which was the only submarine of its type that underwent significant modernization. The TK-208 even carried out the integration of the R-30 Bulava-30 ballistic missiles (RSM-56 according to START-III), which were developed as the main armament of the Boreev, but the submarine itself was used mainly for training.

The integration of the RSM-56 was the right investment and was intended for missile testing. But it remains unclear how many of the 20 launchers have undergone such upgrades.

- added the media.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

lord-palladore-11045

0

9 February 2023 15: 18

It's a pity that the Shark-class nuclear submarine was a serious support for Russia in the dashing nineties and the absurd two thousandths. It's a pity...
Sergey3939

+4

9 February 2023 15: 22

What amateurishness!
The boat, the Shark, was created under the R39 ICBM.
And the Borey boat was created under the Mace ICBM. And the first boat was still waiting for the missile to be brought to mind and the SSBN to be armed.
And accordingly, the size and displacement of boats depend on the size and number of missiles.
1. Vladimir1155
  
  0
  
  15 February 2023 13: 52
  
  it’s true, and Ukraine is the reason for this, large ICBMs were made in Dnepropetrovsk, which turned out to be captured by the Nazis, this also applied to mine SS20 and sea-based, Russia got a factory in Votkinsk, where they made small poplars, and had to develop this line, creating the Liner and Bulava, I hope the creation Sarmat will help revive large sea-based missiles, and even a faint hope of reviving titanium eternal sharks, the money from the sale of unnecessary kuzi will be enough to increase the number of so vital SSBNs
Constantine N

-7

9 February 2023 15: 38

submarines are beneficial if they strike first with a nuclear strike, otherwise they will simply disappear right after the strategic missile silos.
1. Renat Peter
  
  +1
  
  9 February 2023 22: 33
  
  Is it like they just disappear?
2. zenion
  
  0
  
  10 February 2023 16: 59
  
  Shame on you to say that they will perish. The people were outraged beyond measure. Apologize immediately and tell them that you managed to hide the rowless boat behind a pebble and she poured sand on herself, like that fish, and remained alive. And if this boat is a Shark, then it swam into an underwater pyramid, or wherever it is supposed to be in fairy tales.
3. Vladimir1155
  
  0
  
  15 February 2023 13: 58
  
  part of the boats should be on combat duty in the ocean, I think that it is necessary to build hangars for nuclear submarines, not only underground, but also simply light metal trusses covered with cellular polycarbonate, 30-50 times more than there are nuclear submarines and at different bases so that the enemy did not see where exactly the nuclear submarine is located at the moment, in the sea? which parking lot? Where?
  1. Vladimir1155
    
    0
    
    15 February 2023 14: 05
    
    this is unacceptable when google shows everyone, and spies know even more, hangars are needed at least at the level of hay sheds, for the country's most expensive and most powerful strategic weapons
zenion

-8

9 February 2023 16: 16

They did the right thing, that they were scrapped. Everything that could be taken from her and sent over the cordon has already been taken. It's time to take on everything new and master them in the same way as the previous low-breathers mastered. All that was left of that was called a shield, it's time to switch to something that is not heavy, quickly collapsible and goes further where the shield went.
1. Sergey_12
  
  +1
  
  9 February 2023 19: 03
  
  What, the toad strangles and impotence? And it remains only to spoil the air in the place of meaningful comments on the topic? And how is it, “they do it right that they are sent for recycling”, yeah, you said very accurately, you should have done with such a long time ago
Afinogen

+6

9 February 2023 16: 23

I understand the boat is very expensive in terms of operating costs, where their resource has come to an end (nothing lasts forever under the moon) Moreover, there are no destructive weapons for them, and converting them to a modern one is much easier to make a modern nuclear submarine for new missiles .. BUT you can make a museum out of one. Imagine the largest nuclear submarine in the world. Those wishing to visit the museum will be like pink salmon that goes to spawn. Yes, I will personally visit this museum (if there is one). They made a museum from the first domestic nuclear submarine K-3.
1. Renat Peter
  
  +1
  
  9 February 2023 22: 51
  
  It's all right, it's all right. But I can’t imagine how such a fool can deliver to eternal rest (on land). Do not make a second Aurora out of her, she will simply rot in the water. A Komsomol member was recently brought to Kronstadt, and then they sawed it into two parts. But I don’t know the Shark, probably it will be necessary to cut it into four parts. In short, it will cost a lot of money.
  1. Afinogen
    
    +2
    
    9 February 2023 23: 09
    
    No one even dreams about land, and it’s not real. Put where on the waterfront (like Aurora) How to understand rot. It was generally worth it for water.
2. Vladimir1155
  
  0
  
  15 February 2023 14: 17
  
  repairs are usually cheaper than new construction, it’s just that sawmills and thieves prefer large sums, and they spread a false tale about the imaginary high cost of repairs, now Russia cannot afford those newer titanium cases in principle
Vasya 225

+4

9 February 2023 16: 31

Everything was a little worse. In the 90s, the life of the R-39 solid propellant rocket engine - the weapon of the Sharks - ended. The shift - the missile "Bark" Miass was cut down by Minister Sergeev in the company of Dvorkin and Solomonov. They pushed through the Solomon's Mace, but it was not suitable for the Sharks. The boats were left without weapons and, with the active participation of the United States, they were decommissioned ahead of time, and Mace, cat. did Moscow non-specialists for a long time learned to fly.
And Donskoy remained as a stand for working out the Mace. 2 mines.
1. Vladimir Tuzakov
  
  +4
  
  9 February 2023 17: 09
  
  At the D. Donskoy nuclear submarine, re-equip all the mines under the Bulava and lay up the nuclear submarine in Kamchatka in a submerged position, as a stationary base for strategic nuclear weapons. It will serve in this form for several decades. The proposal is of course superficial, but the prospect is not bad for the further use of nuclear submarines. And it is possible to do this with all three Sharks, because the time is alarming and such an application as the ability to quickly and inexpensively strengthen strategic nuclear weapons, which is the first thing on the agenda today.
2. Sergey3939
  
  +3
  
  9 February 2023 18: 33
  
  Don't tell tales about Bark! The idea is good, but they could not pretend in practice. All rockets exploded at the start.
  1. Vasya 225
    
    +1
    
    9 February 2023 23: 07
    
    2 failed trials, third banned. It's better to count how many failures the Bulava had, and even now ... Miass is a pro in this direction, it's just that Pavlograd let them down, refusing to order. No wonder the Sarmat was given to Miass.
Peavis

+3

9 February 2023 21: 15

What is it that is a pity? The youngest "Typhoon" service life without restrictions ended in 2014. It is actually more expensive to maintain them in good condition than to build a new boat, and primarily because of the unrealistic weight and dimensions. And again, what's the point of them without ammunition? Plus, they are noisy, compared to modern strategists, and nothing can be done about it: for a boat, detection is tantamount to death, unfortunately, as effective warships, they are hopelessly outdated.
Smirnov Sergey

0

9 February 2023 21: 46

Sharks were written off primarily because they ran out of missiles. And then we thought about how to apply. I don’t know how cost-effective it will be, but if the boats were, say, not 30, but 10 years old, it would be interesting to replace their mines with launchers for Zircons. And now, for such old boats, such modernization will no longer be effective, because their service life in the reactor will not be long.
1. Peavis
  
  +3
  
  9 February 2023 22: 45
  
  Yes, not the reactor is the main problem, and not the ammunition. The fatigue wear of the mechanisms and the hull at this age of the ship turns the latter into a time bomb. The boat is simply dangerous to operate.
  1. Vladimir1155
    
    0
    
    15 February 2023 14: 25
    
    metal fatigue is a difficult issue, but accessible for research, I don’t think that the cases are so tired that titanium will fall apart, and the mechanisms will have to be changed for the most part, to modern and most importantly quiet
    1. Peavis
      
      0
      
      20 February 2023 22: 21
      
      Quote: vladimir1155
      metal fatigue is a difficult issue, but accessible for research, I don’t think that the cases are so tired that titanium will fall apart, and the mechanisms will have to be changed for the most part, to modern and most importantly quiet
      
      Damn, Vova, I am a former mechanical engineer of submarines pr.636 and 641B. What you are talking about has long been studied, but what I said is the regulatory requirements for the operation of ALL warships of our Navy, belongs to the category of chipboard and is not subject to discussion at the current stage of technology development and the geopolitical situation. These are the basics of ship repair, taught in the 4th year of the corresponding naval university, in the amount of 70 academic hours (20 years have passed, but I remember). Take it as an axiom.
      1. Vladimir1155
        
        0
        
        22 February 2023 18: 45
        
        Quote: Peavis
        former mechanical engineer submarine project 636 and 641B
        
        titanium is somewhat different in its properties from steel ... not even iron at all
        
        Titanium (Ti) from the Latin Titanium is a light silvery-white metal. Melting point 1668 °C, boiling point 3287 °C. Thermal conductivity 21,9 W/(m K) at 20 °C. The temperature coefficient of linear expansion is 9,2·10−6 K−1 in the range from −120 to +860 °C. The strength of the metal does not depend much on temperature, but it directly depends on the pretreatment. For commercial titanium, the Vickers hardness is 790-800 MPa, the modulus of normal elasticity is 103 GPa, and the shear modulus is 39,2 GPa. High-purity titanium pre-annealed in vacuum has a yield strength of 140-170 MPa, relative elongation of 55-70%, Brinell hardness of 716 MPa. Titanium is characterized by high viscosity, during machining it is prone to sticking to the cutting tool, which requires the application of a lubricant. Coated with a protective film of TiO2 oxide, resistant to corrosion except for alkaline environments. The increased resistance of titanium to evaporation in a vacuum, plus its lightness, make the metal in demand in the design of spacecraft. The transition temperature to the superconducting state is 0,387 K. At temperatures above 73 kelvin, titanium is paramagnetic.
        
        Main categories of titanium alloys
        
        Structural and high-strength titanium alloys. They have a very hard composition, thanks to which an ideal balance of ductility and strength is achieved.
        Heat-resistant titanium alloys. They have a solid composition, which includes a certain amount of a chemical compound, which somewhat reduces ductility, but gives high heat resistance.
        Titanium alloys based on a chemical compound. This high-temperature composition has a low density and can compete with nickel compounds in terms of heat resistance at a certain temperature.
        Now titanium is very widely used in structural activities. Even 200 years ago, it was considered unsuitable for construction, but time has passed, and at the moment it is one of the most durable and reliable materials with a wide range of other useful properties.
        
        https://metallrc.ru
        
        Peavis
        
        0
        
        24 March 2023 21: 43
        
        First of all, it is not the hulls that are subjected to fatigue wear, but the valves and pipelines of the outboard fittings. Have you seen how submarines are built? Everything that is outside the rugged housing is mounted before the lung is welded. Only in order to fix everything you need to disassemble half of the boat. Otherwise, it will remain a floating Pandora's box.
2. Vladimir1155
  
  0
  
  15 February 2023 14: 22
  
  just for zircons, they are too big, you need to either equip them with maces or analogues of Sarmatians, I don’t know if the cases physically exist, if they exist, I consider it appropriate to restore serial, capital, with improved noise and other characteristics, as successfully done with 1155
Storm_2022

+3

10 February 2023 04: 49

Probably the best option would be to remake the Sharks in the early 00s under Sineva / Liner, this would give these nuclear submarines a second life and extend their service life to 25-30 years.
6 units Sharks pr. 941 in the Northern Fleet could have stood guard over Russia all these years, and not hang out "on a leash" at the piers awaiting disposal.
The operation of a single missile (Sineva / Liner) on all boats of the Navy would have avoided the huge expenses that were spent on bringing the Mace to a combat-ready state.
1. Vladimir1155
  
  0
  
  15 February 2023 14: 23
  
  support
Dmitry Volkov

+1

10 February 2023 09: 36

Well, in vain, they would have made an attack submarine cruiser out of the Sharks, with calibers, anti-ship missiles, air defense and hypersound, and for all this to work from a submerged position, target designation from solar-powered UAVs, several pieces hung over the coverage area ...
1. legal
  
  0
  
  10 February 2023 10: 42
  
  “semi-working condition”: it follows that the cart will be stuffed with Zircon Caliber “to the very worst”
vlad127490

0

11 February 2023 13: 01

Decisions of this level are made by Putin; an ordinary citizen cannot assess the correctness of the decision. Consider here "Why", "Why" does not make sense. Decision is made.