The Russian Pacific Fleet will commission a new Kilo class submarine next week.
In a statement to TASS Russian News Agency, Russian state media, on the Russian Ministry of Defence said:
“A ceremony will take place at the Admiralty Shipyard in St. Petersburg on November 25 to accept the first Project 636.3 diesel-electric submarine Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky for service in the Pacific Fleet. The St. Andrew’s flag will be raised on the submarine.”
The submarine has completed both factory and state trials in the Baltic Sea, the Russian Ministry of Defence said. The testing confirmed that the submarine is ready for operational duty.
The submarine is part of the Project 636.3 Improved Kilo II class of submarines. The Black Sea Fleet has already received six submarines of this type. Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky will be the first for the Pacific Fleet, out of an order for six signed several years ago.
The addition of the submarines to the Pacific Fleet will bring the Kalibr cruise missile into the fleet’s inventory, say TASS. TASS also noted that the Russian Navy is presently considering adding another order of Project 636.3 submarines for the Baltic Fleet.
Project 636.3 submarines are 74 metres long and displace over 3,900 tons. They submarines can dive to a maximum depth of 300 meters. They have a range of 7,500 nautical miles. The submarines have a maximum speed of 20 knots and an endurance of 45 days, say the Russian Navy.
I’m assuming the tug is just out of the camera view!
I now have a mental image of a Russian submarine, towed by a tugboat, which in turn is towed by Russian sailors in row boats!
It’s a Diesel, if only the Royal Navy could increase our submarine fleet with cheaper Diesels, and a diesel was Britain’s most successful submarine export after all.
I disagree completely re: diesel. Makes no sense to me having submarines that would be so limited in range. With nuclear they can go anywhere, near or far.
My personal opinion is we should order at least an 8th Astute. I’d say 10 total but there is no way MoD will get that kind of cash, not to mention the massive wish list they already have.
Totally agree ?
Make that 3. SSN are the RNs modern day battleships, there should be more of them.
It could be that with the latest nuclear technology (salt matrox) that the uk can build these vessels more cheaply in future.
I suspect it can and even though these vessels are eye wateringly expensive there is no doubt in my mind that they are needed and critical to the uks defence
Yeah there’s some great diesel electric submarines. And if we could get 6 for the price of one then why not, or 100 million each that’s 14! Hell of a bargain. And gets the RN decent numbers again.
Probably because order a decent number of ships and subs so they can rotate them properly, reducing wear and tear on each hull, whereas we buy a handful, less than we really need, then work them to the bone to get 6 ships to do the job of 9 or even 12!
SSN’s and SSK’s are different tools for different jobs.
An 8th Astute would have been nice. Submarines can achieve 3 for 1 availability, but better 4 for 1 (note our trouble with Vanguard). Now Dreadnought is in build we don’t have the capacity for an 8th Astute. What is more likely to happen is we lose Astute as she is ‘different’ to the rest of the class. I think at the moment the only standing task is the Indian Ocean (if somebody could confirm that please). CASD is left to do as was designed hide for its defence. But a hull to patrol the north Norwegian Sea / Barens Sea
/ Greenland Sea would be useful perhaps.
Our main problem is crewing submarines. As it is everything else.
Is the actual problem with recruiting crew though, or is it reduced availability so peoplec applying are almost on a waiting list? I remember reading a few years back that it was taking some people almost 2 years from application to starting training, for some roles in the RN and RAF.
With regards to Submarines, arent we still in the process of building the final 3 out of 7 Astutes? If they are being build alongside Dreadnought then surely an 8th could be built – were the funds to magically appear.
Or if not, could the Trafalgars be retained in addition to the 4th – 7th? Would increase our sub numbers without buying more. Or even the Vanguards? Could pack them full of Tomahawks and make them SSGN like the USS Ohio.
Some answers Steve R
“Is the actual problem with recruiting crew though, or is it reduced availability so people applying are almost on a waiting list? I remember reading a few years back that it was taking some people almost 2 years from application to starting training, for some roles in the RN and RAF.”
The issue isn’t recruitment (albeit it is increasingly difficult to persuade young people used to living in a digital world to enter the Submarine Service), the issue it retention. This is an issue that affects all three services but put simply whilst the recruitment taps can be turned up you also need crew who have years of experience to operate a Submarine and also transfer their knowledge to recruits. The problems we have now with lack of experienced crew is a direct result of decisions made in 1990 with the ‘Options for change’ defence review. By 1993 the recruitment taps were switched off completely for the Royal Navy and kept effectively closed for many years. That young recruit turned away in 1993 if they had been taken and stayed in would be at the tail of their career now with 25+ years of experience. The situation was exacerbated in 2010 when many experienced mid career personnel across all three services were let go. This is why there are desperate attempts by the MOD to persuade people to rejoin now.
“With regards to Submarines, arent we still in the process of building the final 3 out of 7 Astutes? If they are being build alongside Dreadnought then surely an 8th could be built – were the funds to magically appear.”
Astute production is winding down now, adding a new hull would be difficult. Not only would it interfere with the ramp up of Dreadnought production but also cause problems with the supply chain. Long lead items for the Astute class have now all been ordered or delivered. Some long lead items would be difficult to source or even impossible like the PWR2 reactor. You might have to partially redesign Astute to take different parts like PWR3, that would be costly and delay Dreadnought. The decisions have to be made years or even decades ahead of build.
“Or if not, could the Trafalgars be retained in addition to the 4th – 7th? Would increase our sub numbers without buying more. Or even the Vanguards? Could pack them full of Tomahawks and make them SSGN like the USS Ohio.”
The Trafalgars are worn out and sustaining them is becoming increasingly difficult, they were designed and started construction in the 1970’s. They are in desperate need of retirement and their total dive limit is approaching. The Canadians are also probably very keen on parting them out to help sustain their very similar Victoria class SSK. If the RN wants a dedicated SSGN the better path would be to add a customised version of the Dreadnought class to the build schedule with Cruise missile launch tubes and a dedicated dive shelter for special forces not unlike the US Seawolf class stretch. Two Dreadnought derivative SSGN after the four Dreadnought SSBN would be far more useful to the RN, allow time to balance crew availability and bridge production in Barrow to the Astute replacement.
So when you say Astute production is winding down does that mean we won’t even get the full 7 subs?
The current order is still 7 Astutes yes,as the final 3 progress through Manufacture then that leaves a capacity gap behind them.On another point HMS Astute is obviously the lead Boat /Guinea Pig of the class so there may be a few differences.The final 3 were to be built to an ‘improved’ specification but this was bought forward to Boat 4 (HMS Audacious) but problems have been encountered and her entry into service has been seriously delayed.
All ships in a class differ one from another sometimes in a slight way, sometimes in major ways. But Astute is ‘different’ enough for me to wonder whether she will be retained. Astute was launched in 2007, entered service in 2010, but began building in 2001. Agincourt will commission in 2024-ish by which time Astute will be middle aged.
Judging by the amount of pictures on Twitter of subs coming and going crew and sub availability doesn’t seem to be an issue? Maybe someone else can give a more informed opinion?
As for diesel subs it seems a no brainer to have a fleet of say 4-5 purely for patrol around the UK guarding faslane and the North sea, easing pressure on the SSN and surface fleet.
Exactly even for the Mediterranean and base in Gibraltar ok maybe not but thy are a different tool than Astutes and would give the RN much needed options in that area. Far cheaper is just a huge bonus.
That makes more sense shorter range boats and ships for coastal and North Sea duties. Free up some of more expensive assets for fleet duties.
Hi Steve
Please excuse my ignorance of submarine matters but how is Astute different from her sister boats ?
Yes I was wondering that. As for diesels probably more urgent requirements but certainly true that they would seem far more logical for an island nation like us in terms of protecting our coast line than a sprawling one like Russia especially in Terms of its Pacific fleet where it would have a long range attack role ideally from their perspective one might have thought. Maybe Japanese waters is seen as a potential target area.
Re “for an island nation like us in terms of protecting our coastline”
In addition to adding shore-based anti-ship batteries. The inclusion of these would take the pressure off our surface ships and make the country as a whole safer I would have thought?
The Saab RBS15 Gungnir springs to mind!
Or just make sure all our vessels have an anti ship missile fit. Norwegian anti ship missile or LRASM, either or. These should be fitted to all type 45s as a canister fit, already ordered for type 31s I hope and be fitted into the strike length mk41 vl cells of the type 26.
Also return an anti ship missile fit to the RAF, we haven’t had that since sea eagle retired early and without replacement. Yet again Norwegian anti ship missile would fit the bill nicely
Type 45’s as well, It’s not that expensive!
“The cost of these vertical launchers is rumoured to be in the region of $500,000 each so equipping the entire fleet could possibly be done for around $50 million.”
https://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2013/08/type-45-destroyer-time-fit-strike-launchers/
I’d say go for the Norwegian NSM, increase the number of ship kits from 5 to 10, or at least 8. Integrate them with both F35 and Typhoon, plus P8 Poseidon. That way we can kill ships from underwater (Astute), from our surface ships and also from the air, either carrier launched via F35 or protecting our home waters via Typhoon or Poseidon.
Then, when Perseus comes I’d say transfer the NSM to Type 31s.
And more than 9 poisedon maritime patrol planes
I would really struggle to paint that many for my toy army…if they made them smaller, then the cost would go down and the 1:72 would fit better in my shed.
Collins class are knackered. Had very tough service lives, although well painted, also not going to be available until Australias new barracuda clas subs start entering service in late 2020s. So some years away currently.
Well maintained not painted. Sorry autocorrection did not spot. Why cant we have an edit function on this website?
Ok but diesel electrics aren’t that bad, I would love a large fleet of nuclear but with the cost it’s not going to happen where as we could double our hunter killer submarine numbers for 1 billion or less depending on sub. Am I the only guy that likes diesel electric submarine.
Simply untrue: Both diesel & nuclear subs are limited by the amount of food they can carry, so nuclear subs aren’t unlimited, plus are a nighmare to decomission & make safe, & if sunk in action will seriously pollute & damage the enviroment for hundreds of years. Deisel subs are the more economical choice & would allow more units to be deployed than the few Astutes we have.
Agreed, along with 3 more type 45s and lets reintroduce press gangs to crew them.?
Fair enough about the Astute, but we DO need more subs. I’m actually warming up a lot to the idea of diesel-electric SSKs, since they are so much cheaper. You’re right; we could probably build a class of 6 SSK for the price of a single Astute.
We shouldn’t be buying old, second hand, knackered Collins class from Australia though; we should design and build our own, something we could also build for export.
Could easily double our sub fleet for relatively small cost, those SSKs could then patrol home waters, as an extra sub escort to our carrier in North Atlantic, Med, Adriatic or Baltic sea, and we could forward-base on in Bahrain.
The future is not diesel but air independent propulsion with fuel cells probably. I agree though, one way to easily up the RN submarine forces critical mass above the paltry 6 functioning SSNs we currently have would be to purchase some “conventionally powered” SSKs
Or just order an 8th and 9th and 10th astute class as an enlarged batch 2 with more tomahawk cruise missile load out. Our SSN numbers are too low. Although an astute would run rings around one of these improved kilos.
There was an episode in the Med in 2017 when Russia had a kilo try to follow astute. Astute had detected the kilo from 35 miles away and had a targeting solution on her for 2 days as they danced around. The kilo only detected the astute from about 3-5 miles away.
Summary, if things got hot an astute or Trafalgar class would easily defeat these boats.
An SSKs only chance would be to lie at the bottom, in a channel or along a route that it knows an astute/ Trafalgar class is coming along and ambush it from close range.
It would be incredibly difficult to order an 8th, 9th and 10th Astute. The long lead items needed for construction would have to be ordered and in some cases alternatives sought. The PWR2 reactor would probably not be available meaning PWR3 would have to be adapted meaning significant redesign work, this would have serious impact on the Dreadnought program as designers and drafts-man are drawn back to support a further Astute build.
As for your story about an Astute and Kilo in the med considering RN and Russian Federation don’t comment about submarine operations or the performance of their boats I am rather sceptical. Do you have an official source?
AIP is used alongside Diesel and has not supplanted it yet, the success of various AIP systems are also rather questionable. Recent improvements in battery technology means a conventional SSK is still a credible solution. The latest Japanese Sōryū-class SSK Ōryū and Tōryū drop the Stirling AIP system in favour of an enlarged battery bank made up of Li-Ion batteries.
Yes and no, the Hydrogen fuel cell technology used by HDW is certainly compelling vs other AIP systems but I feel it is best suited to confined waters like the Baltic where the patrols are short and you are close to base where the hydrogen can be topped off.
For a SSK that wants to do long range patrols I think you are probably better served with big fuel tanks for the diesels combined with a huge battery bank of li-ion batteries.
Yeah and they would help keep the country safe, only 7 total planned is a joke, we could double that number with diesel electric or what ever new system for the price of 1 Astute.
No Andy that would be mega costly. We could reactivate a couple of the Trafalgars though in a national emergency. Would be expensive but cheaper and quicker than building new boats, until new boats were built
How much use is a diesel sub in the pacific ? Its a huge ocean and my understanding is that submerged diesel boats are still pretty slow, not to mention that it needs to breath air every now and again.
One would assume they would be operating in the Baring Sea rather than gallivanting around the expanse of the Pacific.
Alaska is only a short hop across from eastern Russia.
Brave sailors taking on that role for any sustained period or maybe at all.
Agreed! One thing I don’t think the Russians are short of is brave men. I would fully expect some kind of SOSUS arrangement in the Barents Sea, and likely a hunter-killer or two. Maybe the idea is that the diesel subs are easier to maintain and operate?
If you have the chance, on the subject of submarines, check out the Silent Service, it’s available on iPlayer; really good look at the use of submarines by the US, UK and USSR during the cold war. Very interesting stuff!
Thanks Joe, I will. The intelligence ops of the Silent Service and USN operating in Russia’s backyard interest me greatly.
Ah, then you should enjoy! they had some great interviews with some really senior guys on all sides.
David – an SSK in the Pacific is very potent,look at the Countries operating them around the Pacific Rim,too many to list here but there aren’t many that don’t use them.
Russia’s newest submersible deathtrap…
Not really, the Kilo has a good operational and safety record. The only notable incidents that included fatalities were with INS Sindhurakshak. She suffered a hydrogen explosion in her battery compartment caused by a faulty valve leaking gas. In 2013 the same boat suffered an explosion and fire in her weapons compartment when tied alongside in Mumbai the cause being more than likely poor munitions handling by a tired crew.
My opinion on subs is we have to really wake up to the huge proliferation of decent quality diesel electric subs now operated by many nations including second tier navy’s. 7 Astutes, great they are very good and powerful assets but with only 2-3 deployable at one time, it’s just not enough to defend our shipping lanes or attack others with significant impact. The carrier will require one, CASD requires one, so nothing left for much else.
So for me, diesel electric are a no brainier and we should be building a fleet of them. The latest designs seem very capable and have decent range, and at 400-600 million a pop, we could get a fleet of 6 for £3 billion spread over a 10 year period, so around £350 million a year. They could cover North Sea, CASD and the med, leaving the available Astutes for global deployment.
If war ever broke out with Russia we simply don’t have enough to hold them at bay, and our local allies are not exactly able to provide many either. And then there is China, expect to see a large number of theirs picking around soon.
I think at the moment the upper reaches of the Indian Ocean are of greater concern to the MoD(N) than the Russians. SSBN may be operated to avoid everybody. But surely it would be nice to know who is paddling out there in the Atlantic? But no the Middle East (and Africa) come first…………..not god.
Folks I would not underestimate the Russian Fed Putin has spent vast sums developing new kit to rival the wests and testing its combat capability in Ukraine and Syria , and battle testing commanders and soldiers . I am no expert on subs but agree we should look at a class of diesel electrics new utilising latest battery technology, we have excellent R&D in sub design and could export to allied nation , I don’t think retrofitting the nukes would be successful as they were designed for a specific role .
No, Andy.
In a word, no !