February 19, 2018

Russian Submarine Building Statistics 2017 - Yasen-Ms

The following is a translation from French, drawing from a long excellent article by "Khan" of January 12, 2018, titled "Russian Shipbuilding [Statistics] 2017". That article is contained in the French language, but mainly Russian website, The portal of the naval forces of the Russian Federation. 

The end of 2017 reveals information on the financial and industrial priorities of [shipbuilding in Russia]. This provides context to some long delays in delivery of some surface vessels and submarines...The nature of the platforms is changing, with a trend toward combat units of lower tonnage [eg. more corvettes] but still with a high weapons load (eg. Kalibr missiles). So, what do we have to remember about shipbuilding for the Russian fleet in 2017?

... Submarines

No submarines were commissioned in 2017. However 3 subs were launched in 2017 (see TABLE below):
-  the second Project 0885.1 Yasen SSGN (K-561 Kazan) was launched by Sevmash shipbuilding at
   Severodvinsk (which is by the White Sea, north of St. Petersburg). 
-  the seventh Yasen (Ulyanovsk) was put "on hold".
-  6 Project 636.3 Kilo class SSKs for the Pacific Fleet were commenced at the Admiralty shipyard
   St. Petersburg. This was starting with 2 Kilos (B-603 Volkhov and B-274 

TABLE of Submarines Commissioned or Launched 2013 to 2017.







See the WHOLE ORIGINAL ARTICLE in French HERE (right-click mouse to translate into your own language).

Separately soumarsov advises regarding the Project 885 Yasen SSGN class:
-  one (the first, named Severodvinsk K-560 ) is active in the Northern Fleet. She has been in
   experimental service for years and only in March 2016 was she fully combat ready.
-  the follow-on Yasens are designated 885M or “Yasen-M”. 
   :  the first one, Kazan, was launched in March 2017 and is expected to be commissioned at the end
      of 2018. 
   :  the last one, Ulyanovsk, is due to be commissioned 2023 at the earliest.

More on Russian SSKs, SSGNs, SSNs and SSBNs from soumarsov next week.



Anonymous said...

That is what the US should be doing, smaller , faster craft with some lean mean fire power, instead of these huge slow setting ducks , making easy targets. A ship that has one intended target, boom, racing onto the next . Speed kills

Josh said...


In the USN, surface ships are primarily global escort assets, not regional striking assets. As such they tend to be much larger and lack the same punch, ton for ton. This extends to Soviet era platforms as well; they were generally dripping with weapons tubes compared to things like Knox, Perry, or Spruance. This reflects the fact that the Soviet and Russian fleets emphasized striking power of their surface ships since they had no carrier element for long range strike. More recently the smaller Russian ships are employed in the Baltic, Black, Med, and Caspian Seas specifically because the sea states in those enclosed bodies of water are much more conducive to heavily loaded, top heavy small ships. Those vessels would have a hard time handling rough water in open ocean the way USN ship is routinely required to do. You generally won't see those ships deploy to open water; in fact I can't think of any open water deployments: that is usually handled by larger legacy Soviet escorts like Udaloy, Slava, and Sorvemeny.


twitter: @squid_jigger

Peter Coates said...

Very true Josh

Also the calm water Russian corvettes (like in the Caspian flotilla: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caspian_Flotilla#Ships_in_service ) can be lighter and smaller as they carry very limited diesel fuel.

These corvettes only need limited range unlike much longer range US destroyers (mainly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arleigh_Burke-class_destroyer ).



Anonymous said...

Since WW2. US naval fleet strike power is handled by flat tops while USN surface ships' roles are to defend the flat top. Al other countries do not have CVNs so their surface ships need to handle strikes as well.
In my view the smaller Russian corvettes seakeeping abilities are mainly limited by their hull shapes and the loads they carry, not necessarily because they are top heavy. A modified hull shape will allow them to handle open oceans and the latest Russian corvette designs are clearly moving in that direction.
It is not clear going forward, in a peer to peer major war, flat tops will have the advantages they used to enjoy during WW2. Any weapon systems conceived by man will sooner or later encounter their sunsets.

Peter Coates said...


Not true - there is so much more in the US Navy.

The USN has more Destroyers [1] than any other country to independently handle land attack

strikes using 90 cell (increased to 96 cell) VLS for Tomahawk missiles.

This was evident against targets in the Middle East.

US SSNs and SSGN also independently carry out strikes, without CVNs coming into it.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arleigh_Burke-class_destroyer