Russia bringing back "Typhoon" monster subs

The Man

Former Staff
Jul 2011
50,100
38,122
Toronto
On April 20, 2019, Russia’s TASS Agency reported that Vice Admiral Oleg Burtsev announced Russia’s intention to take two of its decommissioned Typhoon-class ballistic submarines and pack them full of hundreds of cruise missiles.

“The dimensions of these submarines allow arming each of them with at least 200 cruise missiles [each],” he said.

The Typhoon ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs), famously featured in the film Hunt for Red October, are by far the biggest and most expensive submarines ever built. Cruise-missile-armed Typhoons would give Russia direct analogs of the United States’ four Ohio-class cruise missile submarines (SSGNs), which had their launch tubes for nuclear-armed ballistic missiles replaced with vertical launch systems for 154 conventionally-armed Tomahawk cruise missiles.

Burtsev made the missile-envy issue explicit:

“American Ohio-class submarines can carry 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles and Chinese Project 055 destroyer is capable of carrying 112 cruise missiles. But our frigates belonging to the Project 22350 can currently carry only 16 of them. Subsequent frigates will get 24 of them. It is still insufficient,” he added.

But there’s a big problem this plan—revamping the two mothballed subs would likely cost more than simply building newer, better submarines for the job.

The Typhoon and Kalibr

The Typhoon-class submarine, officially designated the Project 941 Akula (“Shark”) in Russia, are Cold War behemoths measuring 175-meters in length and displacing 48,000 ton submerged. That amounts to twice the tonnage of American Ohio-class SSBN it was intended to rival. No less than five internal pressure hulls made of ultra-expensive titanium gave the Typhoon’s extraordinary resilience to battle damage—and extraordinary cost to manufacture.

The Typhoons were designed to lurk under the ice of the Arctic Circle, covered by friendly Soviet naval forces, awaiting a very-low-frequency radio signal indicating that World War III had broken out and had gone nuclear. In that event, they’d rise close to the surface, counting on their reinforced sails to smash through the ice if necessary, and launch their twenty R-39 ballistic missiles. Each missile, in turn, would unleash ten independently targeted 100-kiloton yield nuclear warheads on American and European cities and military bases.

Only one Typhoon remains operational today, TK-208 Dimitriy Donskoi, which has been employed on occasional missile tests. Three others, plus another Typhoon which was laid down and never completed, were scrapped between 2005 and 2009, an operation 80 percent funded with U.S. and Canadian money. Smaller, newer and stealthier Borei-class SSBNs, as well as older Delta-class boats, perform Russian nuclear deterrence patrols instead—at half the operating and maintenance cost of the Typhoons.

The two Typhoons being proposed for refit are the decommissioned TK-17 Arkhangelsk and TK-20 Severstal, which have been rusting in an Arctic ship repair center at Severodvinsk since 2006 and 2004 respectively. For over a decade, the Russian Navy repeatedly announced intentions to either scrap or refit the subs as recently as 2018, only to apparently change its mind.

The idea of arming the Typhoons with cruise missiles and mines, instead of new ballistic missiles, has been kicked around for a while. The Typhoons have even been considered for use as submarine cargo ships for circumventing Arctic ice.

Burtsev stated that Kalibr cruise missiles would be the Typhoon SSGN’s principle armament, but also suggested more advanced Zircon and hypersonic Oniks missile currently under development could also be equipped.

The Kalibr is Russia’s analog of the U.S. Tomahawk cruise missile. It comes in a submarine-launched 3M14K land-attack and 3M54K radar-guided anti-ship variants, with ranges of 1,600 and 400 miles respectively. Unlike the subsonic Tomahawk, the anti-ship 3M54 model can dash nearly three times the speed of sound on its terminal approach to evade missile defenses. On at least nine occasions between 2015-2018, Russian Kilo-class submarines have fired subsonic 3M14K Kalibr missile through their torpedo tubes at land targets in Syria.

The P-800 Oniks is a more advanced supersonic anti-ship missile in service on new Yasen-class submarines, while Zircon is a hypersonic weapon with a reported top speed of Mach 9 that has yet to be integrated onto a submarine platform.

The "Dmitry Donskoy", the lone Typhoon remaining currently in the ranks of Russian Navy


The "Arkhangelsk" and "Severstal"
 

TNVolunteer73

Former Staff
Nov 2014
34,757
9,349
TN
YOU do understand it takes 4 to 5 years to get these seaworthy again, if this is accurate they had to start this refitting during OBAMA'S FLEXIBLE ADMINISTRTION.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Man

The Man

Former Staff
Jul 2011
50,100
38,122
Toronto
YOU do understand it takes 4 to 5 years to get these seaworthy again, if this is accurate they had to start this refitting during OBAMA'S FLEXIBLE ADMINISTRTION.
Probably.

I don't really know about all that.

I will say this though, I like this model, the way the Russian Navy been doing it.

Upgrading and modernizing many great old Soviet vessels, instead of getting rid of them and trying to build new models from scratch, at much more expense and time (not sure why National Interest thinks it would be cheaper for Russia to build new cruise missile subs, that's just dumb...)

For example, the nuclear powered battle-cruiser "Admiral Nakhimov", twin bro of "Peter the Great"
is being essentially rebuilt into a whole new war machine, "Rebirth of a Warship", as the caption says




This is smart IMHO These are tough, strong hulls, even if old. They knew how to build shit to last, in those days, in the 60s and 70s and even the 80s, still... Put new equipment and weapons in there, and they will serve Russia well for decades ahead...

And, after all, recycling is in fashion everywhere today, yeah? Zero waste and all that ;) :D

Greta Thunberg would approve, I'm sure hehe
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hollywood

The Man

Former Staff
Jul 2011
50,100
38,122
Toronto
Russia's current navy is just like the Soviet navy. A suicide force.
They don't need a powerful Navy, honestly. After all, they are never going to project power far away from their shores, nor are they generally looking to do so. They do have more than enough firepower, on the water and on land, to defend those aforementioned shores, however...
 
Nov 2007
2,469
496
They don't need a powerful Navy, honestly. After all, they are never going to project power far away from their shores, nor are they generally looking to do so. They do have more than enough firepower, on the water and on land, to defend those aforementioned shores, however...
I agree. They can defend those shores with literally one shot. Then they die.
 
Nov 2007
2,469
496
You mean like Kamikazi pilots type suicide force? :eek:
Not exactly. The old Soviet navy was designed to be a "one shot and die" force. They were loaded with weapons but had few reloads and virtually no ability to be replenished at sea nor were they expected to make it back to port and rearm. And of course they had few provisions for repairing battle damage at sea.

The Soviet idea was that in a war with NATO forces they would strike first and hit U.S. and allied ships (especially carriers) with everything they had and then most of them would inevitably be destroyed in the ensuing counterattack by surviving NATO forces. In contrast most U.S. and NATO ships had plenty of reloads, lots of damage control capability. They were expected to survive the initial strikes and continue fighting.

The Soviet goal for their naval forces was simply to inflict enough damage in the first hours of the war that it prevented NATO from moving large scale reinforcements to Europe early in the war where they might be able to stop a Soviet invasion.

Even at their strongest, the Soviets had no illusions about their abilities to "win the Battle of the Atlantic III"
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Man