The Only Ukranian Submarine

[Jimbuna]

We'll swap her with you for the Astute

[Kapitan]

nice boat, but the foxtrots are too dated now, they would have been better off buying a single type 209 from germany of a forign country and probably saved money while imporved the tech and capability level.

personally i dont think this is more than a PR stunt the foxtrot design is 50+ years old triple screw is noisey, they are slow unable to match the depths of the russian submarine alrosa in the black sea (kilo class).

out of this all they will achieve is an antiquated piece of scrap with some modern gumpf put in it, with the current plans of the russian navy black sea fleet to move a new submarine of the lada class to the area i dont think even with updated tech this boat could match what the ukrainians are hoping for.

plus your forgetting another black sea power and also probably the one who controls the entrance and exits to the med and other oceans beyond turkey with thier submarines, numbers dont match up.

romanian navy currently doesnt operate a submarine in the black sea, but as the capable ASW force, georgia and a few ex soviet satalite states dont operate these vessels (yet) turkey is the only other major power in the black sea with upto 14 type 209 submarines in various states of readyness i might also add they have plans to add type 214's to the list by 2015 which probably will see A a reduction in numbers and B the type 209's being phased out.

the foxtrots are legends a beautiful looking boat but they were obsolete even while being built, they are also the most numerous class of submarine built post WW2 beating the 688's at the hieght 64 foxtrots were in the soviet navy alone with more in other navies around the world and india was a big purchaser of these vessels.

verdict on this:

buy a kilo or something not so dated

[CCIP]

Originally Posted by Kapitan

nice boat, but the foxtrots are too dated now, they would have been better off buying a single type 209 from germany of a forign country and probably saved money while imporved the tech and capability level.

personally i dont think this is more than a PR stunt the foxtrot design is 50+ years old triple screw is noisey, they are slow unable to match the depths of the russian submarine alrosa in the black sea (kilo class).

out of this all they will achieve is an antiquated piece of scrap with some modern gumpf put in it, with the current plans of the russian navy black sea fleet to move a new submarine of the lada class to the area i dont think even with updated tech this boat could match what the ukrainians are hoping for.

plus your forgetting another black sea power and also probably the one who controls the entrance and exits to the med and other oceans beyond turkey with thier submarines, numbers dont match up.

romanian navy currently doesnt operate a submarine in the black sea, but as the capable ASW force, georgia and a few ex soviet satalite states dont operate these vessels (yet) turkey is the only other major power in the black sea with upto 14 type 209 submarines in various states of readyness i might also add they have plans to add type 214's to the list by 2015 which probably will see A a reduction in numbers and B the type 209's being phased out.

the foxtrots are legends a beautiful looking boat but they were obsolete even while being built, they are also the most numerous class of submarine built post WW2 beating the 688's at the hieght 64 foxtrots were in the soviet navy alone with more in other navies around the world and india was a big purchaser of these vessels.

verdict on this:

buy a kilo or something not so dated

Well, considering that the article says the rebuild only cost a couple of million, that's certainly saving them a bit of money. To be honest given Ukraine's economic situation as of late, I don't think they can afford a new sub (which would cost them a couple of hundred million to acquire). Although by all means something a little more modern would be preferable.

[Kapitan]

in a way yes i could agree however they may have benifited more in putting thier lone slava cruiser back together, giving them thee powerfullest warship in the area, the current state shows azov an elderly kara class cruiser is the only one to combat.

If the refit has cost 2.5 million i doubt much more than a scrub repait and the old bits put back in job has been done, given that a sonar system can cost 1.5 million on its own.

perhapse they could have sorted a lease purchase agreement with germany like the greeks have done and done the deal over 10 years thus keeping the budget sort of down while still haveing the advanced platform.

in the long run service maintinance and parts are going to end up costing more than what the submarine is worth, because theres only a handful of the type left and a few of them are museam pieces.
which would mean not only the cost to purchase to parts but now also the cost to manafacture the parts which could run into alot of cash.

submarines are a big threat to the area given the topography and geography of the area however a sizeable ASW force could defeat any worthy submarine force given that its such a confined space and theres only one entrance and exit.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Kapitan

in a way yes i could agree however they may have benifited more in putting thier lone slava cruiser back together, giving them thee powerfullest warship in the area, the current state shows azov an elderly kara class cruiser is the only one to combat.

The Slava would most likely just be a white elephant. She is designed for long range open ocean cruising and has quite a big crew (around 500) for a small coastal navy. They would be better off buying some corvettes and maritime strike aircraft. A couple 1000 ton costal submarines could be handy but a Foxtrot or German 209 is a little too big for the black sea.

BTW I think the Azov has been scraped.

[Kapitan]

yes she was sorry i was thinking of the ochakov which was the last one active out of the batch decommed in 2010, the moskva is active slava class.
i get where your coming from, perhapse a few DDG's and FFG's such as a compact version of the british type 23 seeing as romania operates type 22's which are the size of DDG's.

two or three submarines in the fleet would give an almost all year round capability and possibly a small landing craft.

but this submarine i still think should have been sent to scrap.