America's Virginia-Class Submarine vs. Russia's Lethal Yasen: Who Wins?

[jaop99]

The Russian dont need to get closer, only know where the other foe is ... and shoot this thing!



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3M-54_Klub

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by jaop99

The Russian dont need to get closer, only know where the other foe is ... and shoot this thing!

A potential problem being.....to find out where an enemy is they may first need to get real close, which would put them well within range of an enemies weapons.

[p7p8]

Originally Posted by jaop99

only know where the other foe is

This is the most difficult part for ASW operations!

[Jimbuna]

Originally Posted by p7p8

This is the most difficult part for ASW operations!

True that

[speed150mph]

As everyone has pointed out, Russian subs have district advantages and disadvantages over American subs. The Yasen had a speed, depth, and maneuverability advantage over the Virginia class. She also have nearly the same number of VLS tubes, and twice the number of torpedo tubes, and also has a more versatile array of weapons (shkval, kalibr and klub lam, asm, Asw missiles, uset 80 and UGST torps). The disadvantage of it compared to a Virginia class is the Virginia is slightly quieter, and has a more capable sonar, and there are more of them.

I for one believe that both these subs are extremely capable platforms, crewed by competent men. As one mentioned, the Russians utilize more automation and have smaller crews. On the one side, this increases the workload on each man if the automation isn't effective, and the possibility of ones mistake being missed is increased. However, this is offset by the fact that smaller crews can be more efficient if automation and training is good, and the amount of supplies and space for the crew can be reduced, meaning smaller submarines, or room for more equipment. Also it means that if your training smaller crews, you can devote more time and money to training them then you do with large ones. You take a class of men. Train them, and see how they do. Only the best will be put in a unit.

All in all, I believe that in a one on one engagement, it would boil down to tactics, and the situation, and the environment. I also believe that that chance of a mutual kill situation where both ships sink each other is a very high possibility.

[Kapitan]

Going to throw my 2 pence in here,

Discounting Russia as a third rate navy is very daft to start with (you all knew i would say that) but here is why;

The reality is the mission sets for the two navies are wildly different if you look at defence budgets you will find in America the biggest portion goes to the navy followed closely by air force then the army, in Russia it goes to Strategic forces (nuclear) then to Air force then the army and finally the navy gets whats left.

So whats the figures? (All are quoted in $USD Sources: World Bank and U.N defence database)

The USA defence budget currently stands at 3.3% GDP which is a 0.2% decrease on the same time in 2014 so total expenditure is $597bn a of 2015 data, and ranks number 1 in the world for expenditure.

The Russian Federation on the other hand spends 5.4% GDP which is a 0.9% increase on 2014 data with a total expenditure of $66bn ranking 4th behind China 2nd ($214bn) and Saudi Arabia 3rd ($87.15bn)

The mission:

The USN is committed to its world wide patrols and policing nature and has many on going over seas commitments, from Humanitarian aid to anti piracy and drugs to no fly zones the mission scope for the USN is vast and requires a lot of resources and indeed with ten carrier strike groups available this makes the USN a true blue water navy able to operate any where on earth.
Operating from two coast lines the USN has global reach and its network of allies allows them to have a permanent presence anywhere from Japan to Bahrain South America Northern Europe and Mediterranean with sufficient logistical support not just from the USA but other nations as well.
The USN comprises of around 270 warships most of which are major surface combatants such as the Arleigh Burke destroyers and Nimitz class carriers.

The Russian navy although much smaller from its Soviet days still maintains around 240 active vessels the bulk of which are smaller types such as missile corvettes and small light frigates, the Russian fleet is mainly a submarine fleet and operates 5 fleets (Baltic Black sea Pacific Northern and Caspian Flotilla), the most modern ships tend to go to the Northern fleet however we have seen the trend reverse with the Black sea and Baltic fleets gaining priority.
The Russian navy no longer has the means to support a protracted campaign over extreme distances and former allies of the Soviet Union have now distanced themselves from the Kremlin making the situation harder for the fleets and air force.

The mission difference is that the Russian fleet focuses on submarines more and a lot of investment goes into these submarines but more is going into the newer Borei class Project 995M series than into the Yasen project 885 / M versions.
But we have also seen the re start of the conventionally powered Project 636 Kilo and new ones being produced the earlier 677 Lada Amur design has now been cancelled and no more are expected to be built.
The major surface units of Russian navy are now also starting to come up for retirement the vessels such as Sovremenny (most non active) and Udaloy classes need replacing very quickly i cannot see the design proposal of the 14,000ton DDG being a smart choice but it does appear that the Russians are replacing a lot of the old equipment with smaller cheaper lighter designs such as the Gorshkov Buyan and Steregushchy Frigates (mainly found in Black and Baltic sea fleets).
The navy spends heavily on keeping the old units in service and also now the announcement that another Kirov will be refurbished and put back to service is just another strain and drain on the defence budget.

What does this have to do with Virginia V Yasen?

America has always had a upper hand in technology and systems, while the Russians have caught up thanks to some well placed spies in the 1980's and trial and error today the Russians lack the funds to build significant amounts of heavy units.

The Virginia's production run is expected to end at 48 boats, while the Yasen is expected to run to just 12 giving the USA a 4 to 1 advantage (The first time since WWII that the USN has out numbered a potential enemy), also the Yasen is in slow build the USN has already put 5 virginia's in the water where the Russians have just 1 Yasen in service.

While its suspected the Russian vessels will be able to dive deep (550m+) it wont be like the former sierra (850m) and certainly wont be as fast as the Papa (44.7kts) i would expect the Yasen to operate around the 550m mark with a top speed around 33 knots much like an akula just a tad quieter.

The weapons are vast but they still use the same principle torpedoes they were using back in the 80's the VA-111 Skhval has been modernised but is not really an anti submarine weapon the 65-76 (which likely sank kursk) is now deleted so using older design torpedoes for the modern job needs a re think.

The Yasen has some advantage it has 10 torpedo tubes as opposed to just 4 on the Virginia which means she could potentially put more fire power down range faster than her opponent and flood the area of weapons making it difficult for Virginia's SONAR operators and evasion, however the MK48 ADCAP is a superb torpedo and is extremely capable and given the Yasen would have to get in fairly close i don't think the Yasen could get within a good weapons parameter to fire on the Virginia before the Virginia hears it.

I have little doubt though that in a one for one shoot out the Virginia would come off slightly better due to the better sensors and being quieter the weapons i don't think do much for the Yasen, but i would say against a 688i the Yasen would take it but against a Virginia or Astute the card is marked.

[Jimbuna]

^ Excellent post

[Aktungbby]

Russia is a third-rate trouble-maker these days: it should save it's military shekels and host more Olympics

Discounting Russia as a third rate navy is very daft to start with (you all knew i would say that) but here is why;

U misread my statement: I did not say the navy itself is third rate; I meant the state and it's policies; most notably trying to rebuild the Stalinist politico-geographic buffer-wall by partitioning Ukraine etc. Which cannot work as long as Estonia, Lithuania, and Latvia are NATO....Ukraine is essential to fiil the gap between Moldavia and Belorus, Russia having failed miserbly at "the great game" in Afghanistan(as we R now) is indulging in 'face-saving' More importantly, Ukraine has one of the top three (black-earth) food growing regions on earth to-boot, second only to the U.S.'s Midwest on a calory per acre basis. The basis of any good politics is....FOOD! https://www.boell.de/en/2013/10/30/land-grabs-black-earth-ukrainian-oligarchs-and-international-investors .

[Kapitan]

Originally Posted by Aktungbby

U misread my statement: I did not say the navy itself is third rate; I meant the state and it's policies; most notably trying to rebuild the Stalinist politico-geographic buffer-wall by partitioning Ukraine etc. Which cannot work as long as Estonia, Lithuania, and Latvia are NATO....Ukraine is essential to fiil the gap between Moldavia and Belorus and has one of the top three (black-earth) food growing regions on earth to-boot, second only to the U.S.'s Midwest on a calory per acre basis. The basis of any good politics is....FOOD! https://www.boell.de/en/2013/10/30/land-grabs-black-earth-ukrainian-oligarchs-and-international-investors .

I understand your concern at me "miss reading your post" however i did not, nor was i quoting you on it i was generalising that many nations and people see the Russian navy as third rate and a lot of it is down to their own beliefs lack of knowledge and believing in what the west says all the time because i can assure you the reality of it all is much much different.


As for your statement, i'm not too sure Putin has the re take of the steps as a major concern right now although NATO keep a presence there, if you plot on a map every NATO and US installation you will clearly see just how much Russia and China are surrounded and this does get up the nose of both the Russians and Chinese.

I am not stating and let this be clear and not misunderstood in anyway shape or form do i condone or praise the actions of either side i am just looking at what i see i don agree with either sides actions or their foreign policies unless i state it.

The main claim is that Crimea used to be part of Russia Khrushchev gifted it to the Ukraine why did they snatch it back ? because Ukraine wouldn't extend the black sea fleets lease past 2017.

I don't think we will see much more of Russia's land grab's in the near future they have a more pressing issue in Syria to deal with.

I will be in Estonia and Russia in December and the Ukraine in January so il let you know how i feel around these places if you want.

[cmdr.darksythe]

Its always good to see advances in any navies submarine fleet, let the new era of submarine designs continue.

Also for anyone who hasn't seen this video it provides a detailed view around the Conn of a Virginia class.

[Agiel7]

Note that the Shkval torpedo was a straight runner (as acoustic guidance for a supercavitating torpedo is as useless as, *ahem* mammaries on a bull) and originally designed with a 10kt nuclear warhead in mind, the tactic being to set the detonation after a certain runtime and launch it into the middle of a merchant convoy/surface action group/carrier battle group. Though technically you can use it against an enemy sub if your TMA was spot on, if you were going for the nuclear option the launching sub would probably be better off using an SS-N-15 with a nuclear depth charge instead.

[jadervason]

With only a cursory knowledge of the two vessels, assuming both crews are 110% the advantages are slight either way, with the Virginia as the boat you want to be in before the shooting starts and the Yasen might be the better option once weapons are being traded.

The Yasen has it over the Virginia in a dogfight, speed depth maneuverability and weapons variety and quantity. But the whole design purpose of the Virginia class would seem to be to avoid a dogfight. Sort of like the F-15 vs the Su-27, where the latter is quicker and more maneuverable the former always had better avionics. The Mk48 ADCAP is a truly magnificent torpedo, and Russia's torpedo designs are very far behind it. On paper Russian weapons are wire guided as well as the Mk48 but their fish don't have the speed, endurance or intelligence. For instance a Virginia could guide two Mk48's quietly to bracket a potential target, both from bearings opposite its own position, and then initial the terminal phase.

However! If the Yasen gets wind of the Virginia, that is both detect each other and a fight erupts, with weapons going both ways having a few extra knots and a few extra shots might make a large difference.

As far as sailors, the US has 10x the resources for ASW exercises either within its own fleet or with allies, so I would expect some experience advantage on the Virginia.

[oneuhtheeese]

Originally Posted by jadervason

As far as sailors, the US has 10x the resources for ASW exercises either within its own fleet or with allies, so I would expect some experience advantage on the Virginia.

Agreed. Virginia would win because the training and resources alone. Even assuming tactical parity of the two platforms, the crew proficiency and weapons employment alone would take out a Severodvinsk.

[Sixbreaker]

I was in a Virginia Class; Virginia Class WINS! LOL

damn that video gives me the shudder...

[ikalugin]

I would remind the people here that the sole serving submarine of Yasen class is not representative of the upcomming Yasen class boats for the simple reason of having a different powerplant.

During the 90s we couldn't get the 4th generation powerplant built for the Severodvinsk, hence Severodvinsk has the reactor from the 3rd gen subs.