Is Russia's new submarine any good?

Comments · 839

• SH

  @ShubhayooBanerjee · 2 years ago · pinned

  The opening scene felt like a movie

  518

• UN

  @uncaringbear · 2 years ago

  If it doesn't have an onboard swimming pool, I'm not interested.

  876

• SS

  @ssh9342 · 2 years ago

  Спасибо автору за интересный рассказ о предмете без геополитики и негатива. Пусть эти прекрасные машины никогда не будут использованы по своему целевому назначению. Всем мира!

  55

• CO

  @Cougar4ik · 2 years ago

  Boreas is the Greek god of the cold north wind, storms, and winter. IDK why, but I just love this name and can't remember anything cooler.

  367

• DT

  @DtWolfwood · 2 years ago

  Retired as it maybe but Ill still love the typhoon class. That baby thicc!

  398

• AZ

  @azeke8 · 2 years ago

  Just the presence of sauna already makes the new Borei upgrade vastly superior.

  166

• GI

  @ginaanddenes9059 · 2 years ago

  &quot;Tale of challenge and corruption &quot;... &nbsp; <br><br>MIC: &nbsp; &nbsp;&quot;hold my beer&quot; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; 😂

  28

• HU

  @Hunter-rr5ue · 2 years ago

  I thought this was about the Belgorod submarine

  222

• CA

  @CatDad01 · 2 years ago

  the lack of a sauna is a deal breaker.

  29

• DA

  @dansantos1659 · 2 years ago

  Let me give a few addtional history.<br><br>The Borei&apos;s, which are the product of Project &quot;Zapad&quot; a Soviet era submarine building program, were originallt slated to be armed with 12 R-39UTTH SLBMs. Now R-39UTTH is an improved version of the R-39 SLBM, the major difference between the two missiles is that the R-39UTTH SLBM has a greater throw weight which is 3.05 tons compared to the R-39 which is 2.55 tons, plus with newer, compact and light weight nuclear warheads which were adapted from the R-29 SLBM the R-39UTTH can carry 10 or more low yield nuclear warheads. Another difference is the accuracy, NPO Avtomatika developed the guidance system of the two missiles, the R-39 was reported to have a CEP of 500 meters, while the R-39UTTH was reported to have a CEP of 120 meters.<br><br>After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the Russians decided to move the development of the R-39UTTH was moved to Russia, the development of the first stage of missile was transfered from Yuzhmash (Ukraine) to NPO Iskra and NPO Altai, so was the second stage. The third stage was already being developed by NPO Iskra during Soviet times, the MIRV bus segment was already being developed by Kbkhm which is Russian. All three stages of the R-39UTTH were produced in the PZKHO plant in Perm in fact specialize production equipment from Pavlograd (Ukraine) were transfered to the PZKHO plant to produce the 1st stage of the missile. The first test of the R-39UTTH in Russia was on November 1993, but it was declared a failure, there was a total of 4 tests all were unsuccessful, Makeyev attributed the failure of the lack of funding in the localization of production of the 1st stage of the missile, plus the Ministry of Defence was complaining of the cost of the production of the engines. Makeyev still defended the R-39UTTH as the missile program was 70 percent complete and that they needed additional funding, the problem is that during the 90s the defense budget was so small that design bureaus were fighting over the small defense budget that available at that time.<br><br>Now here comes Yuri Solomonov head of the Moscow Institute of Thermal Technologies, he advertised the Bulava SLBM, he lobbied the MOD to fund the Bulava SLBM, he told them that the Bulava will have commonality with the Topol-M in terms of components and spare parts, the Ministry of Defense bought as they see the commonality as being able to save on maintenance of the missile. Unfortunately, important testing stages were skipped so as to fast track and to save money on the Bulava SLBM, normaly when a new SLBM is tested it is from a land based launch platform, after that a fixed submerge platform and after that from a submarine, after the Bulava was tested from the land base platform it was immediately tested on the Dmitry Donskoi, they skipped the fixed submerge platform. According to rumors MITT did not account for the submarine to be constantly moving and exposed to the sea. Plus Votkinsk Zavod was not prepared for the production of Bulava, it was only in 2011 that Votkinsk was seriously funded and major modernizations of the production lines. The repeated failures of the Bulava made Makeyev using its own funds to continue development of the R-39UTTH and was given the designated Bulava-45, and Makeyev presented this to the MOD for consideration, but MOD did not adopt as this would mean the Borea submarines would have to be redesigned and rebuild which would make even more expensive, plus the MOD spent a large amount of money on the Bulava that they were already too committed on the Bulava.<br><br>Fortunately, the Russian Ministry of Defense today decided to come to their senses. In 2016, the MOD awarded the Makeyev a R&amp;D contract to develop the next generation SLBMs, if I am not wrong last year the MOD finalized the technical specifiactions of the next SLBM.

  19

• MA

  @Maltesestromdana · 2 years ago

  their crisp white sheets is still no match for the DIRTY BOOTS!

  83

• LI

  @LifeOfExo · 2 years ago

  I was expecting the belgorod class submarine but borei class it is..

  54