Comments on: Russian Nuclear Missile Submarine Patrols Decrease Again http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/04/russian-nuclear-missile-submarine-patrols-decrease-again.php Comments and analyses of important national and international security issues Fri, 25 May 2012 17:31:54 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Bob http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/04/russian-nuclear-missile-submarine-patrols-decrease-again.php/comment-page-1#comment-8160 Bob Fri, 18 Sep 2009 11:27:17 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=237#comment-8160 As a followup to my comments of August 19, 2009 it appears that the United States in addition to planned construction of about 18 Virginia Class SSN's in the next decade is conducting preliminary planning on a SSBN-X replacement for the Trident fleet which will start to be retired in the late 2020's. The US will probably build 12 to 14 new SSBN's of a new design by 2029. They may use the Virginia Class design and power plant, or a new design possibly based on the existing Ohio Class SSBN's. With this in mind, it looks like everybody will have new SSBN's in the next decade or so. As a followup to my comments of August 19, 2009 it appears that the United States in addition to planned construction of about 18 Virginia Class SSN’s in the next decade is conducting preliminary planning on a SSBN-X replacement for the Trident fleet which will
start to be retired in the late 2020′s. The US will probably build 12 to 14 new SSBN’s
of a new design by 2029. They may use the Virginia Class design and power plant, or a new
design possibly based on the existing Ohio Class SSBN’s. With this in mind, it looks like
everybody will have new SSBN’s in the next decade or so.

]]> By: Bob http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/04/russian-nuclear-missile-submarine-patrols-decrease-again.php/comment-page-1#comment-8083 Bob Thu, 20 Aug 2009 02:41:17 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=237#comment-8083 During the Cold War and the Vietnam Era I served on one of the "41 For Freedom", SSBN630. The United States was probably 220 million population, and the Soviet Union about 270 million. The technology at the time was such that we patrolled up north of Russia, and they patrolled a few hundred miles off our coasts. As the range and accuracy of the weapons increased we swapped patrol areas years afterwards and Russia patrolled in it's "strategic bastion" near it's northern ports. It became easier and cheaper for them to defend their boomers there and they didn't have to worry about Sosus tracking them down here. For the future of SSBN's I see Russia building eight new SSBN's by 2018, and China coming on line with some of their own. However, our aging Trident fleet will be ready for deactivation during the 2020's and we are, as far as I know, only planning construction of about 18 Virginia Class SSN's before the Tridents reach the end of their service. China and Russia are spending billions of dollars on future SSBN construction for a reason. They know everything that we see here! During the Cold War and the Vietnam Era I served on one of the “41 For Freedom”, SSBN630.
The United States was probably 220 million population, and the Soviet Union about 270 million. The technology at the time was such that we patrolled up north of Russia, and they patrolled a few hundred miles off our coasts. As the range and accuracy of the weapons increased we swapped patrol areas years afterwards and Russia patrolled in it’s “strategic
bastion” near it’s northern ports. It became easier and cheaper for them to defend their boomers there and they didn’t have to worry about Sosus tracking them down here.
For the future of SSBN’s I see Russia building eight new SSBN’s by 2018, and China coming on line with some of their own. However, our aging Trident fleet will be ready for
deactivation during the 2020′s and we are, as far as I know, only planning construction of about 18 Virginia Class SSN’s before the Tridents reach the end of their service.
China and Russia are spending billions of dollars on future SSBN construction for a reason. They know everything that we see here!

]]> By: Andi Pfisterer http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/04/russian-nuclear-missile-submarine-patrols-decrease-again.php/comment-page-1#comment-3742 Andi Pfisterer Fri, 05 Sep 2008 12:39:05 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=237#comment-3742 Thanks a lot for your reply ! With best regards A.P. Thanks a lot for your reply !

With best regards

A.P.

]]> By: Andi Pfisterer http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/04/russian-nuclear-missile-submarine-patrols-decrease-again.php/comment-page-1#comment-3691 Andi Pfisterer Sat, 23 Aug 2008 16:20:26 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=237#comment-3691 [edited] I have a question in terms of the TYPHHON Class submarines....I have watched on Google Earth the base in Zapatnaja litsa on March 2008. There were three of them on the docks. Some weeks later there was only one of them on the dock. Two disappeared and the third had changed the position. Since that , I am looking at the same place , and nothing has changed. I thought, that there is only one of them in process. But i believe that there are minimum four of them on patrol. We know that TK 208 "Dimitri Donskoij"is on duty. But what happened to TK 20 "Severstal , TK 17 "Archangelsk" and finaly TK 12 "Simbirsk"? Does someone know about this? <b>Reply: </b>None of the Typhoons are thought to be operational and deploying with missiles on patrol. Their SS-N-20 missiles were withdrawn from service in 2004. All patrols - of which where are not that many - are done with Delta IV and Delta III. The Dimitri Donskoij has been converted to a test platform for the Bulava missile. A statement by the Russian navy last week appears to show that the boat will be further modified to deploy with the Bulava on operational patrol, possibly due to the slow production rate of the new Borei-class SSBNs. HK [edited] I have a question in terms of the TYPHHON Class submarines….I have watched on Google Earth the base in Zapatnaja litsa on March 2008. There were three of them on the docks. Some weeks later there was only one of them on the dock. Two disappeared and the third had changed the position. Since that , I am looking at the same place , and nothing has changed. I thought, that there is only one of them in process. But i believe that there are minimum four of them on patrol. We know that TK 208 “Dimitri Donskoij”is on duty. But what happened to TK 20 “Severstal , TK 17 “Archangelsk” and finaly
TK 12 “Simbirsk”? Does someone know about this?

Reply: None of the Typhoons are thought to be operational and deploying with missiles on patrol. Their SS-N-20 missiles were withdrawn from service in 2004. All patrols – of which where are not that many – are done with Delta IV and Delta III. The Dimitri Donskoij has been converted to a test platform for the Bulava missile. A statement by the Russian navy last week appears to show that the boat will be further modified to deploy with the Bulava on operational patrol, possibly due to the slow production rate of the new Borei-class SSBNs. HK

]]> By: Marcello http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/04/russian-nuclear-missile-submarine-patrols-decrease-again.php/comment-page-1#comment-2869 Marcello Fri, 09 May 2008 12:04:53 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=237#comment-2869 Thanks for the answer and for the pointer! (feel free to delete this comment after reading, i looked for a direct contact form but couldn't find it) Marcello Thanks for the answer and for the pointer!
(feel free to delete this comment after reading, i looked for a direct contact form but couldn’t find it)

Marcello

]]> By: OB http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/04/russian-nuclear-missile-submarine-patrols-decrease-again.php/comment-page-1#comment-2815 OB Fri, 02 May 2008 20:56:01 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=237#comment-2815 Also, lets be frank: the Bulava hasn't exactly had a stellar test-record. The Topol system is pretty well proven at this point. Also, lets be frank: the Bulava hasn’t exactly had a stellar test-record. The Topol system is pretty well proven at this point.

]]> By: OB http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/04/russian-nuclear-missile-submarine-patrols-decrease-again.php/comment-page-1#comment-2814 OB Fri, 02 May 2008 20:54:09 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=237#comment-2814 Check, however I would be interested to see what level these submarines are at right now. While they're not in active service, I honestly wouldn't be surprised that they were keeping them at a minimal level of service, so in the event of a crisis they could spool them back up to a semi-ready status. In all honesty, however, the Russian ground fleet is already pretty robust to begin with. The road mobile force provides a very effective assurance of at least a limited counter-value response. Check, however I would be interested to see what level these submarines are at right now. While they’re not in active service, I honestly wouldn’t be surprised that they were keeping them at a minimal level of service, so in the event of a crisis they could spool them back up to a semi-ready status.

In all honesty, however, the Russian ground fleet is already pretty robust to begin with. The road mobile force provides a very effective assurance of at least a limited counter-value response.

]]> By: Carl Osgood http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/04/russian-nuclear-missile-submarine-patrols-decrease-again.php/comment-page-1#comment-2813 Carl Osgood Fri, 02 May 2008 20:22:47 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=237#comment-2813 I'd like to know more about the 54 US patrols. Who are we aiming all those missiles at? Only at countries that also have nuclear capabilities or perhaps some non-nuclear countriews as well? <b>Reply: </b>It is US nuclear policy that its "nuclear forces must be capable of, and be seen to be capable of, destroying those critical war-making and war-supporting assets and capabilities that a potential enemy leadership values most and that it would rely on to achieve its own objectives in a post-war world." The targets are in any country that has Weapons of Mass Destruction and is considered a potential adversary. However, during normal operations, the aimpoints (targets) are not loaded in the missiles' guidance computer, but they can be loaded in a few minutes by pressing a button. The target assigned to a missile is determined by the particular attack plan the submarine is ordered to execute in a given scenario. By loading different strike packages, the missiles can be "shifted" to different targets and can also quickly be retargeted after an initial strike or if the target moves. Some of the potential targets are in countries that do not have nuclear weapons. HK I’d like to know more about the 54 US patrols. Who are we aiming all those missiles at? Only at countries that also have nuclear capabilities or perhaps some non-nuclear countriews as well?

Reply: It is US nuclear policy that its “nuclear forces must be capable of, and be seen to be capable of, destroying those critical war-making and war-supporting assets and capabilities that a potential enemy leadership values most and that it would rely on to achieve its own objectives in a post-war world.” The targets are in any country that has Weapons of Mass Destruction and is considered a potential adversary. However, during normal operations, the aimpoints (targets) are not loaded in the missiles’ guidance computer, but they can be loaded in a few minutes by pressing a button. The target assigned to a missile is determined by the particular attack plan the submarine is ordered to execute in a given scenario. By loading different strike packages, the missiles can be “shifted” to different targets and can also quickly be retargeted after an initial strike or if the target moves. Some of the potential targets are in countries that do not have nuclear weapons. HK

]]> By: MarkoB http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/04/russian-nuclear-missile-submarine-patrols-decrease-again.php/comment-page-1#comment-2808 MarkoB Fri, 02 May 2008 07:42:29 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=237#comment-2808 What role does extended deterrence play in the perceived requirement for SSBN patrols in the United States? What role do SSBN patrols play in first strike counterforce nuclear targeting policy i.e. do SSBN blue water patrols lower the warning time and hence add to the prompt hard target kill capability of Trident II D5 SLBMs? I notice that under prompt global strike options that the D5 will have more accurate RVs. So, could the whole issue of patrols demonstrate subtle, but key, differences in strategic nuclear war planning postures? <b>Reply: </b>Absolutely. That is one of the reasons operational details about SSBN patrols are so secret. Little is known about the role of SSBNs in extended deterrence today. During the Cold War the United States assigned a few SSBNs for NATO scenarios. And SSBNs have targeted China for decades, most likely in Taiwan/Japan scenarios, and North Korea is a potential targets for SSBNs today. Modern SLBMs probably play a central role in the opening salvos of strike plans due to their ability to be launched from patrol areas much closer to the targets than fixed ICBMs. The US Navy has test flown the Trident II D5 at compressed trajectories down to only 1,200 nautical miles (2,200 km), considerably less than its maximum range of 7,400+ km. With the compressed trajectory the impact occurs approximately 12 minutes after launch. HK What role does extended deterrence play in the perceived requirement for SSBN patrols in the United States? What role do SSBN patrols play in first strike counterforce nuclear targeting policy i.e. do SSBN blue water patrols lower the warning time and hence add to the prompt hard target kill capability of Trident II D5 SLBMs? I notice that under prompt global strike options that the D5 will have more accurate RVs. So, could the whole issue of patrols demonstrate subtle, but key, differences in strategic nuclear war planning postures?

Reply: Absolutely. That is one of the reasons operational details about SSBN patrols are so secret. Little is known about the role of SSBNs in extended deterrence today. During the Cold War the United States assigned a few SSBNs for NATO scenarios. And SSBNs have targeted China for decades, most likely in Taiwan/Japan scenarios, and North Korea is a potential targets for SSBNs today. Modern SLBMs probably play a central role in the opening salvos of strike plans due to their ability to be launched from patrol areas much closer to the targets than fixed ICBMs. The US Navy has test flown the Trident II D5 at compressed trajectories down to only 1,200 nautical miles (2,200 km), considerably less than its maximum range of 7,400+ km. With the compressed trajectory the impact occurs approximately 12 minutes after launch. HK

]]> By: VJ http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2008/04/russian-nuclear-missile-submarine-patrols-decrease-again.php/comment-page-1#comment-2795 VJ Tue, 29 Apr 2008 13:14:47 +0000 http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/?p=237#comment-2795 Jian Feng, OB: Russia does not have operational Typhoon subs now. Last active sub - Dmitry Donskoy - was converted to Bulava testbad. Jian Feng, OB: Russia does not have operational Typhoon subs now. Last active sub – Dmitry Donskoy – was converted to Bulava testbad.

]]>