@@MouffakAbdelhak Whats pump jet have to do with it when the ICBMs are released? This video should be titled "Which sub has the best ICBMs" The "Trident II" will wins that and the Ohio carries more of them and there are more Ohio subs. I'm sure the Ohio's propellers will get the sub within it's 7000 mile (11,000km) range of the enemy country.
Both of them are able to fulfill their main task - to carry missiles. I don't think it matters which one is better. They don't have to fight each other, that's what other ships and submarines are for. Smaller crew. This means that either the Russian submarine has more modern equipment, or rather - the equipment is simply less than that of the US submarine.
Wondering if missiles on Ohio submarine would work? 🤔 Seeing all the Western weapons in Ukraine how failed to be as effective as presented in the statistics, this is a serious question.
@@gloryx6316 - UK use the same missiles, and they got their own sub almost destroyed weeks ago, when the missile failed to launch and crashed near sub... rusty old crap is dangerous...
You're kidding right? US subs are way better than Russian subs (and previous Soviet subs) Ohio class is the top dog nuclear missile sub ever made. 3 billion(Ohio) vs 1 billion(Borei) cost to build, that says a lot. One advantage the Ohio Class has... they Work as intented. Russia had numerous issues with their subs. Also the greatest of them.. the Typhoon. Only 1 currently left on duty of these.
@@mangonicusmaximus369 how about starting with you first.. and your family. May that what you wish upon others come to your own doorstep your own household
You forgot to tell that in modern strategic missiles warfare weight and power of warheads are not the main thing. Trident-2 is old missile and it and its warheads fly by simple high ballistic trajectory and that means that they can be easily detected and destroyed by anti-missile projectiles. While Bulava have different means to penetrate anti-missile shields. Unlike Trident-2 Bulava maneuvers during the flight,. and detached warheads also maneuver so, it makes to shoot them down impossible. It's active (accelerating) part of trajectory is short, it's trajectory is low and gently sloping, it also carries warheads decoys, and electronic warfare means.
@@Crashed131963 from a statistical standpoint yes, but the difference can be covered in less than a day. Subs take hours or days to position themselves properly before firing so I don't think it matters. Plus, when you consider the range of the missiles and possible patrolling routes, both have enough range to strike all across a continent. It's to be expected that the borei is better though, it's newer. That and we rarely modernise
@@deven6518 Positioning? A Trident II has a range of 12,000km at a speed of 29,000 km/h . Where is it not in range of a target? It can be off the shore of Iceland and hit Moscow in 10 minutes.
@@Crashed131963 half the earth is longer than the maximum range and depending on which ocean/sea it's in, it doesn't won't have the reach of an entire continent. Yes, positioning still matters. It matters both for that reason and survivability. Even when launching, a submarine must position itself in a location where it is easy to regain it's stealth because just dipping under the ocean isn't always enough.
Borei has max speed of at least 35 knots... probably around 40... And it can dive to more than 1000 meters... its nominal max depth is 1000m, but given the Russian rule of extra 15%, that makes it possible to dive to around 1100-1200 meters... Lets not forget that Ohio is from 1980, with upgrades after the fact... Borei is really a modern beast...post 2000... so in my mind its not really a competition... Borei is a clear winner...
@@phantomhd7889 Borei is superior to Ohio... Its impossible to destroy Russia... too great of a country, too massive the land controlled and too advanced the anti-missile defense...
@@vNYCblade Bored is NOT superior to Ohio, Russia will be destroyed if it will launch nuke in Ukraine. Ohio, seawolf, Astute: they are all better than Borei. We already have B 52 nuclear bombers and Destroyers at black sea which will destroy Kremlin. Russia is in great danger to be destroyed
@@phantomhd7889 B52 bomber is older than Biden... LOL... Russia will not use Nukes in Ukraine since Ukraine territory and its people are part of Russia... The fighting that is happening in Ukraine today is a great tragedy for the Russian people and people of Ukraine, most of whom are Russian. This war was manufactured and provoked by US... Russia can not be destroyed. Soviet Union built many massive underground cities in many different location around Russia and former Soviet Republics... Many of these underground cities were built in Ural mountains which can house millions of people and have entire factories which are standing by to produce basic life necessities in case of nuclear war. Ural mountains strech for more than 2500 kilometers and there are dozens of these underground cities.. some are not used and have been built in case Nuclear War happens... some are activelly used for different kinds of purposes like nuclear fuel production and processing. Besides that, you can not destroy a country as massive as Russia... Look, more than 80% of Russian territory is wilderness...with virgin forests, plenty of natural resources, rich and fertile soils, abundant freshwater resources, huge hydropower potential on hundreds and thousands of small and medium sized rivers. Its ideal conditions for restarting civilization after a nuclear strike. People in Russia do not fear Nuclear War, they do not want it, BUT if it happens, they have plans and they know how to live off their land and survive without having to rely on food from either a delivery service like GrubHub or from frozen TV Dinners which are heated up in a microwave oven... Russian people are NATURAL survivors; you have to be to live and prosper in a place like Russia... No other country has that kind of natural reserve... US for example will not be able to survive for long and with a large enough population if coastal areas are annihilated... Middle of US, the so called flyover states are not great at sustaining large populations... pretty much everything WEST of Mississippi river is considered a desert... with no access to freshwater resources... It doesnt matter how many nukes you have or how AMAZING your fake economy is that is based on speculative financial operations and trading make-believe BS paper...you need hard natural resources to survive and fresh water is among the most important... and US has a lack of freshwater resources in the middle of the country... Those fresh water reserves which are located underground, like in the aquafers are not always safe as they are polluted with chemicals and radioactive waste from decades of environmental carelessness... You can google cancer towns and cancer states and you will see how polluted the middle of US is... So restarting civilization in US is going to be akin to the movie MAD MAX... If we are talking about UK, well that is just a bunch of small islands in the north sea with shitty weather... restarting civilization there will be impossible... France will NEVER use its Nukes against Russia, because French are pussies and they are NOT suicidal... Brits are pussies too... but they are American puppets so if America really wants to go to war with Russia, most likely UK will follow US. Now, there is another reason why destroying Russia is impossible... You can do some basic math and figure out how much land will become uninhabitted if all 6000 nuclear warheads (combined nuclear arsenal of US + UK) are launched at Russia... Its simple to calculate... so each warhead is about 300 killotons equivalent of TNT, we can estimate that a radius of 8km is rendered uninhabited... so given Circle area = πr² = π * 8^2 ≈ 201.06 km² Lets round things off... so 6000 warheads x 200 km² = 1,200,000 km² of uninhabitted area The largest country in the world is Russia with a total area of 17,098,242 Km² (6,601,665 mi²) and a land area of 16,376,870 Km² (6,323,142 mi²), equivalent to 11% of the total world's landmass of 148,940,000 Km² (57,510,000 square miles). So assuming that EVERY SINGLE warhead launched by US and UK hit the Russian territory, it means that only 7.2% (1,200,000 / 17,098,242) of total area would be rendered uninhabitted. Even if 10% of Russian territory is rendered unihabitable, you need to understand that Russia will be able to survive, BUT the West, specifically UK and US will be obliterated... Russian nukes are more powerful per warhead than US or UK warheads, which is a result of Soviet ICBMs being less accurate than American ICBM and had greated Probable Circular Error (CEP). Most Russian nuke warheads are 750 killoton and above... im not even going to mention things like Poseidon Nuclear Torpeido, which has 100 Megaton warhead designed to create a radioactive tsunami over 700 meters tall and completely annihilate coastal areas using 2 mechanisms, first by demolishing everything in the way of the Tsunami wave and because the water in the wave is radioactive, all the areas where the water touched and then recedes is going to be radioactive to several hundred years or maybe a thousand years... There are other doomsday/appocalyptic weapons in Russian arsenal which hopefully noone will ever witness being used. You can act like America is the greated and most powerful nation on Earth, but is only "true" in American movies that Holywood produces, but in real life, America is weak country with FAKE Economy and low reserves of natural resources that MUST invade other small countries and steal their resources and feed off of others like a PARASITE... Russia simply got sick and tired of America telling everyone what to do and they called American bluff... China is slowly getting stronger and stronger and TODAY, China's economy is more powerful than American economy in ABSOLUTE TERMS, not in terms of GDP dollars... America will huff and puff and bluff its way to try and drive the world to the edge of nuclear armageddon, but America is shit scared to use its nukes against Russia because then America will cease to exist... You gotta understand that the conflict in Ukraine has been created by US. Most of Ukrainian soldiers who are dying on the front lines have been forcefully abducted by their government and sent to the front lines against their will... The Zelensky regime is treating its own people 100 times worse than Hitler treated Germany... The entire Neo Nazi Ukrainian regime is fueled 100% by US and NATO... all supplies from fuel, soldier uniforms, soldier boots, personal protection equipment, personal weapons like rifles and pistols, infantry assault vehicles, rocket artilerry systems like HIMARS, long range artillery like M777 and Caesar Howitzers and everything else is supplied by US and NATO... Russia is not fighting Ukraine in Ukraine, Russia is fighting NATO in Ukraine...
Not really a "fair" comparison since Ohio boats are getting old. They are scheduled to be replaced by the Columbia Class. Since this is a class who's first boat is still under construction, there's very little information publicly available
The Borei should be compared to the upcoming Columbia class. The Borei is the Typhoon successor and so will be the Columbia for the Ohio. Anyway the Ohio is still more than capable of doing the job.
Don't forget you can put a 150 kt warhead on the Tomahawk cruise missile, and an Ohio SSGN can carry 154 of those Tomahawks. The US is also building the next generation of SSBN the Columbia class.
Although Ohio class got more nukes the more stealthy higher speed, deeper dive and anti ballistic missile missiles of the Borei class make it my first choice.
Trident 2 is powerful than bulava missile Russia cant face u.s So you think russia have nuclear turpedo or ss sarmat They doesnt use it becouse of shameless
SSBN - Ballistic Missile Submarine Borei with nuclear thermonuclear firepower of 10 500kt. There a 4 of this class. Russia has also Delta class 9 and Typhoon class 1 + 2 reserves. A total of 16 SSBN submarines. The US has 14 Ohio SSBN submarines. SSGN Guided Missile Submarine Russia has 9 Oscar classes. The US 4 Ohio class submarines have been converted into SSGN conventional cruise missile platforms to replace their Tridents.
@@REPOMAN24722 America has the largest number of nuclear submarines and they are generally considered the best. In air America is the clear winner. Idk what pilots you are talking about. In SAM systems Russia seems really strong. Like Patriot is more of a comparison to S-300 than S-400 let alone S-500 but from what we see in Ukraine and what reports there were from the middle east it seems like it might be just a paper thing Soyuz is a rocket so do you really mean rockets or missiles? Electronics ofc the US is ahead of the world.
@@REPOMAN24722 US have more production power and money to conquer the sky. Even if su-57 beats f-22, there are more than 10 raptors for each felon... And usaf pilots have more flight hours in training
Is about time the USN come out with a new SSBN....How long can it keep over-stretching the perceived superiority of its naval assets which are really ageing? In term of speed, depth and even stealth the Borei class perform better not to mention the cost. The Borei class use pump jet technology while the Ohio propeller so I can only surmise it is much quieter? If I am not mistaken, the former sonar is also more superior with a longer range... I would think the Chinese latest SSBN the Type 96 is also more superior than the Ohio Class submarine...Makes me wonder how is it the US military budget is 900 billion, more than the next 10 countries combined and yet it is falling behind in modern weapon systems development?
Who is the "king" ?? One is 43 years old, other is new, from 2013... comparing 40 yo+ tech and designs to modern one, so you really need to argue who is outclassed ?? ...
I am sure Borei Class is actually faster, 4-5 knots faster submerged. And it is much better than all US balistic submarines. And the Yasin Class is the best attack submarine, no doubt , even the first also, that was started laid down as early as 1993, It was far ahead of its time, maybe 40 years when it was Laid down! Kilo Class about the same as the German Type 212 submarine (Non newclear submarine)
Задача обеих подлодок - пуск ракет. Они могут достать противника не выходя из своих территориальных вод. Дежурство в заданном районе их главное времяпрепровождение. Всё равно что сравнивать: чей ядерный взрыв и последующий за ним ад лучше.
Trident 2 is a simpler rocket. It cannot maneuver along the course, which means it is easier to intercept. The accuracy is slightly higher, although it does not really matter when using nuclear charges. A hundred or two meters is not essential for a nuclear explosion of 150 kilotons :) In addition, as they say, there are problems with the simultaneous launch of several missiles from American submarines. Some technical problems. At the same time, Russian submarines were already firing several missiles at once and everything was fine.
@@stevecherk1022 I looked it up. ICBMs travel to orbit at 7000 mph and once in orbit hit 18,000 before released multiple H-Bomb warheads. Very not easy to intercept. You cannot even test intercepting ICBMs in orbit without starting a war. No way the other side can tell if it is a test.
Clearly the Borei is a better platform, much newer. It will swing when the US brings out a new SSBN. The Borei would most likely not be used in any role other than Nuclear trident...it does however have the potential with the tube launched Kalibers ,it can attack ships or other subs at long distances. Or Strike land targets with conventional LACM carrying 40 weapons for the tunes is an a lot of fire power. With the ability to fire those LACM/ASCM from 700km distance dive to her max depth and speed away I think it would be considered in the right circumstances....
To make one thing clear. I know, one side won't like this, but this is the truth. Russia is a military oriented country, while the USA is economical. You can't expect the USA to have quality. Russia has quality, while the USA always has quantity. The leopard tank shocked the world, but not the ones who understand military stuff. Those who were understand used to say that the leopard even though all the glorification, will be destroyed in no time by Russian tanks and anti tank missiles. And while T72 needed a few javelin hits to be disabled, we saw how one $30k drone pierced the leopard tank. Not to forget, before they were deployed to the battlefield, used to be unstoppable, their armour superior and 1 leopard tank was equivalent to 10 T72. This is what means being a paper tiger. Best in the statistics, everyone glorifies it, but not so good on the battlefield.
These subs are basicly meant to carry nukes, there are other classes of subs that are meant for anti-submarine warfare, if you wanna nuke someone i think either of these subs can do the job.
el Ohio es el cascarón único que por décadas usa EEUU para sus sub atómicos no renueva esa vieja fisonomía en cambio Rusia hasta la fecha ha sacado ene modelos para sus sub atómicos como para AIP...!!!
i have this ideas of SHARP program mix with nuclear submarine. basicly you have 70m cannon replacing the silos, the cannon will be erected underwater only the tip is out of the water and it will fire SADM 10kt warhead into orbit in 70 second, evading any detection becuase of the speed. when its ready to attack it will de-orbit into target.
It's funny to me that people think they know about stuff but they really don't because most of that stuff is kept Secret but you can bet your butt on one thing! I'd rather be in the American boat
@@esawparkerjr637 well yes, specifics are kept secret but the general principles of most of the technologies are well known as is the physics behind making a submarine withstand pressure, go fast, be silent etc. It's sorta like everyone knows how a phone screen is made but the individual techniques are trade secrets. At the end of the day you can tell which is likely to perform better from an overview.
The argument that the Borei class is better because it is a decades newer design appears to be somewhat inaccurate for most of the current fleet. The Borei so far about a decade newer in generational ability, if the abilities are equal/proportional to the Western Tech. This partly takes into account that the Borei work started in the mid 80’s as the first couple Ohio class subs were completed. They started making the first 3 Borei class submarines in the mid 1990’s but then stopped and left them sitting and waiting. The first wasn’t actually completed until more than 10 years later and then not operationally ready until after 2013 (following successful tests of a Bulava missile). The only upgraded design is the 955A version (structural changes) of which the 1st has just begun test trials at sea in the last 1-2 years. And even then the Project 955A concept was started in parallel to the original 955 (first 3 Borei) back in the 80’s. So what you have is perhaps 10 years in advancements in comparison to the Ohio class (which had design changes and upgrades during subsequent hulls through the 80’s and 90’s). Now to give you an idea of where the technology gaps may start we should look at the reactors that power these two subs. If the Borei is 10 years or more advanced in design, you need to wonder why it uses a nuclear reactor from the 1970’s. It’s the same reactor that was used in the Akula, Sierra, Mike, Oscar and Typhoon class submarines. It provides upwards of 190 MW of power. The Ohio class submarines are powered by the S8G from the 1980’s with an upgrade to the core system in the 1990’s. It produces 220 MW of power. Supposedly the Ohio class is all older tech and less advanced than the Borei yet the Borei is using power generating tech from before the Ohio started production. What the Borei may have over the Ohio is speed, by perhaps 1-2 mph faster top speed. It also has fewer crew for a similar sized submarine. Having more torpedo tubes isn’t exactly an advancement,t, just that they chose to take up more space with torpedo tubes. The same type of tubes that may have caused a failure and subsequent fire/explosion in the submarine Kursk in August of 2000 that sank it and killed the entire crew. The Kursk was an Oscar class, built around the same time as the Ohio class. If the Russian technology at the time of the Ohio class turned out to be this reliable, then the tech that went into the Borei design during that decade starts off with some concerns. My concern here is reliability with their “advanced” nuclear submarine designs. Both the US and Russia have lost nuclear submarines. The difference is the US lost 2 early designs back in the 60’s when mistakes were made whereas Russia has lost 3 submarines to sinking (1 of them sank twice), 3 to fires/explosions and oddly the first submarine they lost is one they intentionally sank in shallow water to deal with reactor problems and disposing of it. Since the 1970’s that is at least 7 losses. And beyond that the next issue is upkeep. The US built 18 Ohio class submarines and has kept them all active since the first was put out to sea. At roughly the same time that the Ohio’s started construction the USSR started the Delta class submarines (Delta I, II ,III and IV models). In total 43 were constructed. As of now there is one active Delta III and six Delta IV’s. Of the 6 giant Typhoon class submarines that were built in the 70’s and 80’s, only one is active. Half of them were removed from service in the 90’s and scrapped some years later. The 2 “laid up” in harbor have their missile tubes empty and they are collecting rust. In total Russia is currently operating 28 nuclear powered submarines while the US is operating 69. Now back to weaponry. The Borei despite having 2 more torpedo tubes doesn’t stack up well as far as weaponry goes since more tubes doesn’t equate to better weapons. Everything currently fitting into the 533 mm tubes would be from the 60’s and 70’s. The Fizik-2 torpedo went through testing and supposedly will be put into the newer classes of submarines. At its fastest speed it would go 6 mph faster than ADCAP Mod 8 torpedoes (2008) which means not achieving the maximum range (same goes for an ADCAP going its maximum speed). The Fizik-2 “Futlyar” is bigger, heavier but can only dive to 1,600 feet compared to the ADCAP which can go down below 2,000 feet. As for the missiles the Borei’s original missile was scrapped after failures and they turned to the RSM-56 Bulava. It began testing in the early 2000’s with nearly a 50% failure rate in tests. There were a few more successful tests up till 2011 when it was put into the Borei class. Slightly smaller than the UGM-133 Trident II, it can carry 6 MIRV’s out to a maximum of 6,200 miles. The UGM-133 that went into service in the 1990’s carries 8+ MIRV’s out to a range of 7,500 miles. The Borei carries 16 missiles while the Ohio carries 24. Both missiles use INS, Astro-inertial guidance and GPS. Not that the use of nuclear weapons should be used, but the missiles, despite being a decade or so apart from each other, show no real advancement with the Russian design. If the Borei is as quiet as they project it will be, that might be the one advancement that is noticeable in performance. If it adds up to promises. Which might be as credible as the claim that the Su-57 would be stealthier than the F-22. All in all I would say the Borei is a new submarine design as of its original design in the 90’s being about 10 years newer than the first couple Ohio class submarines. Beyond that, consider that it took about 3 years to complete each Ohio class submarine but took about 12 years to complete the first Borei. It then took 6 years for the 2nd, 6 for the 3rd and 5 for the 4th. It is concerning that the Borei, being roughly equal in size took so long to be completed even if you ignore how long the 1st submarine took. It also should be noted that saying it takes a couple years longer for the Borei class to be built because the sub is more advanced doesn’t add up. The newest US submarines, the Virginia class, is more advanced in ways over the Ohio class (though not an SSBN) but only takes about 1-3 years to make. My opinion is that so far there is nothing screaming out to me that the Borei is a leap over the Ohio. Considering the first Ohio was commissioned in the 80’s it really is an 80’s and 90’s submarine for technology with some upgrades here and there. The Borei is a 90’s submarine completed and in service by the 2010’s. The delays and overlaps there make me think that if anything they could be roughly equal with some ongoing concerns about Russia’s abilities with upkeep and reliability
A SSBN would never be transiting at high speed it’s noise at high speed absolutely destroys the one true power, stealth. Most SSBNs operate at a crawl for maximum stealth.
Subs cannot defend territory and are blind when central commands are eliminated. Autonomous nuclear tip Torpedoes that linger are a far more cost effective bang for the buck. Unmanned fully capable subs sounds great until the comms are lost...BTW.,BOREI HANDS DOWN SEA KING!
Russian subs primarily operate in the now opened trans artic shipping route..wich conec6s Asia and Europe. trough out the cold war this was their mission ...to open up that route
Your analysis totally fails in one key item, Rubles for upkeep. If the Ruskie Navy maintenance schedule is as crappy as the Army's seems to be, getting the Boreis on station and keeping them there may be a severe hindrance to the threat.
Both are devastating. Ahh in terms of which is better which in this category can hardly ever be a winner maybe the Borei-class is better because it is newer. The Columbia will be better for sure but again can we name a winner in a category like this
i would go with borei class much newer can outrun ohio enough firepower to wipe out entire usa with one salvo ohio has louzy sonar recently nearly destroyed one by hitting a mountain in south china sea
the Americana HATE when the french eyeball russiain subs and space thing.Consinstantly telling the russians to guard their high-end weapons tech better
The Trident II missile can actually fit about 10 MIRV (But America and the U.K decided to put 6 in each missile). It's basically the same thing. Destroy the Major cities, and then boom, country goes down.
The Bore class looks good on paper. Ho tree refer as history has proved time and time again, Russian weapons systems seldom live up to Russian claims. Their quality control is poor at best.
As a former seamen nuclear engineer on an Ohio class submarine, I can confirm that that information is completely false. The actual max depth is classified information.
@@thehistoryoftheworld Yeah, I know. I played to much Cold Waters that I know the max depth of that in-game is over 1000 feet. So I think the actual max depth might be more than the one in game.
these aretwo great machines, I think this Ohio class wins on the durability aspect , plus the two turbines vs one on the borei should be considered as a redundant propulsion, the range and firepower of the Ohio is superior too, comparing 1980s sub vs 2013 sub, I would vote for the Ohio especially considering engineering reliability and on-board electronics.... Ohio wins it.
Australian Collins class sank a Ohio class in the 90s in war games, Americans didn't even see it coming. Diesel is where it's at for stealth. As for these two the Borei has it.
The 800lb gorilla in the room. The russian sub like all the other equipment is junk. Speed is overrated, half its missles won't work. Torpedoes will circle back and blow it up. And it loud af. Eachone has a Los Angeles class attack sub following it ,
Not in the case of nuclear submarins. If you need quantity and just protect yourself from attack by water - look to the north korea. Russia builds such boats to quarantee the destruction enemy country. And United States too ;)
У России помимо "Бореев" есть и другие АПЛ, и их хватит чтобы пустить весь мир в труху. У современной России оборонительная доктрина и мы не участвуем в гонке вооружений, хотя нам хотят её навязать. В общем, мы не гонимся количеством, на первые роли выходит- качество.
@@Lyanguzov1 Я не буду на английском, пусть помучаются с переводом. У нас в доктрине право на превентивный ядерный удар при угрозе существования государства (чего не было в ссср) , понимать можно широко, Путин недавно на прессухе разьяснял. Я считаю, что если обнаружится подготовка к вторжению (сувалковские переходы им все покоя не дают), а она обнаружится 100% (на ирак вторгаясь полгода логистику настраивали, счас такое не скроешь) и если тем более кто то пукнет в нашу сторону - вынесут всё в потенциально опасных странах, аэродромы, порты, склады гсм и боеприпасов, штабы и центры принятия решений. Европе будет очень больно, учитывая что зрк у них зонированая а не эшелонированная как у нас, да и воевать там особо не с кем. Может и без тактического ядерного справимся
![ไปอยู่ไสมา - ช๊อปเปอร์ โตเกียวมิวสิค [ OFFICIAL MUSIC VIDEO ]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/sWuVNbRTJbc/mqdefault.jpg)
![เบิ้ล ปทุมราช - สาวสอง ( มีมี่ของอ้าย ) ft. ตาต้า,ต้องเต [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/mqlMjnP08XI/mqdefault.jpg)
Displacement: 24,000 t 18,750 t (submerged)
Range: unlimited Unlimited
Speed surfaced: 15 knots (28 km/h; 17 mph) 12 knots (22 km/h; 14 mph)
Speed submerged: 30 knots (56 km/h; 35 mph) 20 knots (37 km/h; 23 mph)
Depth: 450m (1,400 ft) 240 m (800 ft)
Crew: 107 155
I don't believe that the Borei can go 30 Knots (Considering all SSBN goes below that).
Wow, that was a hard decision.
Have to remember that the Borei is a lot newer than the Ohio.
So?
@@Crashed131963
So it's better than the ohio.
The borei equiped with pump jet unlike the ohio
@@MouffakAbdelhak Whats pump jet have to do with it when the ICBMs are released?
This video should be titled
"Which sub has the best ICBMs"
The "Trident II" will wins that and the Ohio carries more of them and there are more Ohio subs.
I'm sure the Ohio's propellers will get the sub within it's 7000 mile (11,000km) range of the enemy country.
This Ohio is still quieter and has better missiles.
But whatever. Once the Columbia enter service it will dominate
@@Crashed131963
When it comes to ICBM
the chinese JL3 is the longest range missile so he wins
Borei is better for sure!
While Astute can kick both subs arses in one sitting.
Grow up
Both of them are able to fulfill their main task - to carry missiles.
I don't think it matters which one is better. They don't have to fight each other, that's what other ships and submarines are for.
Smaller crew. This means that either the Russian submarine has more modern equipment, or rather - the equipment is simply less than that of the US submarine.
They aren't saying they are going to fit each other. It's a comparison
Wondering if missiles on Ohio submarine would work? 🤔 Seeing all the Western weapons in Ukraine how failed to be as effective as presented in the statistics, this is a serious question.
@@gloryx6316 - UK use the same missiles, and they got their own sub almost destroyed weeks ago, when the missile failed to launch and crashed near sub... rusty old crap is dangerous...
In my opinion the Borei class ist better
I think you ist right
Ohio delenda est
You're kidding right? US subs are way better than Russian subs (and previous Soviet subs) Ohio class is the top dog nuclear missile sub ever made. 3 billion(Ohio) vs 1 billion(Borei) cost to build, that says a lot. One advantage the Ohio Class has... they Work as intented.
Russia had numerous issues with their subs. Also the greatest of them.. the Typhoon. Only 1 currently left on duty of these.
@@mangonicusmaximus369 how about starting with you first.. and your family. May that what you wish upon others come to your own doorstep your own household
That is your opinion
You forgot to tell that in modern strategic missiles warfare weight and power of warheads are not the main thing. Trident-2 is old missile and it and its warheads fly by simple high ballistic trajectory and that means that they can be easily detected and destroyed by anti-missile projectiles. While Bulava have different means to penetrate anti-missile shields. Unlike Trident-2 Bulava maneuvers during the flight,. and detached warheads also maneuver so, it makes to shoot them down impossible. It's active (accelerating) part of trajectory is short, it's trajectory is low and gently sloping, it also carries warheads decoys, and electronic warfare means.
From an engineering point of view, the Borei is better
From a Job function and entire purpose of the Sub.
The Ohio takes out more cites from a further distance.
😆😆😆
@@Crashed131963 from a statistical standpoint yes, but the difference can be covered in less than a day. Subs take hours or days to position themselves properly before firing so I don't think it matters. Plus, when you consider the range of the missiles and possible patrolling routes, both have enough range to strike all across a continent.
It's to be expected that the borei is better though, it's newer. That and we rarely modernise
@@deven6518 Positioning?
A Trident II has a range of 12,000km at a speed of 29,000 km/h . Where is it not in range of a target?
It can be off the shore of Iceland and hit Moscow in 10 minutes.
@@Crashed131963 half the earth is longer than the maximum range and depending on which ocean/sea it's in, it doesn't won't have the reach of an entire continent. Yes, positioning still matters. It matters both for that reason and survivability. Even when launching, a submarine must position itself in a location where it is easy to regain it's stealth because just dipping under the ocean isn't always enough.
Did you noticed the ICE SKULL in one of the Russian Submarines... frightening!!!
Let's hope we never have to find out which is better. Peace and love!
Borei has max speed of at least 35 knots... probably around 40... And it can dive to more than 1000 meters... its nominal max depth is 1000m, but given the Russian rule of extra 15%, that makes it possible to dive to around 1100-1200 meters...
Lets not forget that Ohio is from 1980, with upgrades after the fact...
Borei is really a modern beast...post 2000... so in my mind its not really a competition... Borei is a clear winner...
You are in need of urinalysis after 2 black holes destroyed you can't trust anything baba rookie America will always be second to no one
Borei isn't better than Ohio, and more recent submarine does not mean it's better, Ohio will destroy Russia
@@phantomhd7889 Borei is superior to Ohio... Its impossible to destroy Russia... too great of a country, too massive the land controlled and too advanced the anti-missile defense...
@@vNYCblade Bored is NOT superior to Ohio, Russia will be destroyed if it will launch nuke in Ukraine. Ohio, seawolf, Astute: they are all better than Borei. We already have B 52 nuclear bombers and Destroyers at black sea which will destroy Kremlin. Russia is in great danger to be destroyed
@@phantomhd7889 B52 bomber is older than Biden... LOL...
Russia will not use Nukes in Ukraine since Ukraine territory and its people are part of Russia... The fighting that is happening in Ukraine today is a great tragedy for the Russian people and people of Ukraine, most of whom are Russian.
This war was manufactured and provoked by US...
Russia can not be destroyed. Soviet Union built many massive underground cities in many different location around Russia and former Soviet Republics... Many of these underground cities were built in Ural mountains which can house millions of people and have entire factories which are standing by to produce basic life necessities in case of nuclear war. Ural mountains strech for more than 2500 kilometers and there are dozens of these underground cities.. some are not used and have been built in case Nuclear War happens... some are activelly used for different kinds of purposes like nuclear fuel production and processing. Besides that, you can not destroy a country as massive as Russia... Look, more than 80% of Russian territory is wilderness...with virgin forests, plenty of natural resources, rich and fertile soils, abundant freshwater resources, huge hydropower potential on hundreds and thousands of small and medium sized rivers. Its ideal conditions for restarting civilization after a nuclear strike. People in Russia do not fear Nuclear War, they do not want it, BUT if it happens, they have plans and they know how to live off their land and survive without having to rely on food from either a delivery service like GrubHub or from frozen TV Dinners which are heated up in a microwave oven... Russian people are NATURAL survivors; you have to be to live and prosper in a place like Russia...
No other country has that kind of natural reserve... US for example will not be able to survive for long and with a large enough population if coastal areas are annihilated... Middle of US, the so called flyover states are not great at sustaining large populations... pretty much everything WEST of Mississippi river is considered a desert... with no access to freshwater resources... It doesnt matter how many nukes you have or how AMAZING your fake economy is that is based on speculative financial operations and trading make-believe BS paper...you need hard natural resources to survive and fresh water is among the most important... and US has a lack of freshwater resources in the middle of the country... Those fresh water reserves which are located underground, like in the aquafers are not always safe as they are polluted with chemicals and radioactive waste from decades of environmental carelessness... You can google cancer towns and cancer states and you will see how polluted the middle of US is... So restarting civilization in US is going to be akin to the movie MAD MAX...
If we are talking about UK, well that is just a bunch of small islands in the north sea with shitty weather... restarting civilization there will be impossible...
France will NEVER use its Nukes against Russia, because French are pussies and they are NOT suicidal...
Brits are pussies too... but they are American puppets so if America really wants to go to war with Russia, most likely UK will follow US.
Now, there is another reason why destroying Russia is impossible... You can do some basic math and figure out how much land will become uninhabitted if all 6000 nuclear warheads (combined nuclear arsenal of US + UK) are launched at Russia... Its simple to calculate... so each warhead is about 300 killotons equivalent of TNT, we can estimate that a radius of 8km is rendered uninhabited... so given Circle area = πr² = π * 8^2 ≈ 201.06 km²
Lets round things off... so 6000 warheads x 200 km² = 1,200,000 km² of uninhabitted area
The largest country in the world is Russia with a total area of 17,098,242 Km² (6,601,665 mi²) and a land area of 16,376,870 Km² (6,323,142 mi²), equivalent to 11% of the total world's landmass of 148,940,000 Km² (57,510,000 square miles). So assuming that EVERY SINGLE warhead launched by US and UK hit the Russian territory, it means that only 7.2% (1,200,000 / 17,098,242) of total area would be rendered uninhabitted. Even if 10% of Russian territory is rendered unihabitable, you need to understand that Russia will be able to survive, BUT the West, specifically UK and US will be obliterated... Russian nukes are more powerful per warhead than US or UK warheads, which is a result of Soviet ICBMs being less accurate than American ICBM and had greated Probable Circular Error (CEP). Most Russian nuke warheads are 750 killoton and above... im not even going to mention things like Poseidon Nuclear Torpeido, which has 100 Megaton warhead designed to create a radioactive tsunami over 700 meters tall and completely annihilate coastal areas using 2 mechanisms, first by demolishing everything in the way of the Tsunami wave and because the water in the wave is radioactive, all the areas where the water touched and then recedes is going to be radioactive to several hundred years or maybe a thousand years... There are other doomsday/appocalyptic weapons in Russian arsenal which hopefully noone will ever witness being used. You can act like America is the greated and most powerful nation on Earth, but is only "true" in American movies that Holywood produces, but in real life, America is weak country with FAKE Economy and low reserves of natural resources that MUST invade other small countries and steal their resources and feed off of others like a PARASITE... Russia simply got sick and tired of America telling everyone what to do and they called American bluff... China is slowly getting stronger and stronger and TODAY, China's economy is more powerful than American economy in ABSOLUTE TERMS, not in terms of GDP dollars... America will huff and puff and bluff its way to try and drive the world to the edge of nuclear armageddon, but America is shit scared to use its nukes against Russia because then America will cease to exist...
You gotta understand that the conflict in Ukraine has been created by US. Most of Ukrainian soldiers who are dying on the front lines have been forcefully abducted by their government and sent to the front lines against their will... The Zelensky regime is treating its own people 100 times worse than Hitler treated Germany... The entire Neo Nazi Ukrainian regime is fueled 100% by US and NATO... all supplies from fuel, soldier uniforms, soldier boots, personal protection equipment, personal weapons like rifles and pistols, infantry assault vehicles, rocket artilerry systems like HIMARS, long range artillery like M777 and Caesar Howitzers and everything else is supplied by US and NATO... Russia is not fighting Ukraine in Ukraine, Russia is fighting NATO in Ukraine...
Not really a "fair" comparison since Ohio boats are getting old. They are scheduled to be replaced by the Columbia Class. Since this is a class who's first boat is still under construction, there's very little information publicly available
Ill take 3 Borei for the price of 1 Ohio
Ok es que todo producto capitalista es 3 veces mas caro de lo normal...
The Borei should be compared to the upcoming Columbia class. The Borei is the Typhoon successor and so will be the Columbia for the Ohio. Anyway the Ohio is still more than capable of doing the job.
Name: Borei-class Ohio-class
Type: Nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine Ballistic missile submarine(SSBN), guided missile submarines (SSGN)
Origin: Russia USA
Produced: 2002 1976-1997
Unit cost: 890 million $ 2 billion $
Full description: Description, operators Description, operators
Borei sub class wins!🇷🇺👍🙂💯
Ok ok ok…did you see the overview? There’s 14 Ohios and only 5 Boreis. Also, the nuclear missile capacity ratio is insane.
@@sirethanthegreat4069 The Reason there are only 5 is because Russia has the GDP of Brazil .
@@Crashed131963 yea. that is why the us still remains the strongest.
@@sirethanthegreat4069 Do not forget the Delta and Typhoon submarines. Then it is 16 vs 14
Don't forget you can put a 150 kt warhead on the Tomahawk cruise missile, and an Ohio SSGN can carry 154 of those Tomahawks. The US is also building the next generation of SSBN the Columbia class.
Although Ohio class got more nukes the more stealthy higher speed, deeper dive and anti ballistic missile missiles of the Borei class make it my first choice.
On paper
Trident 2 is powerful than bulava missile
Russia cant face u.s
So you think russia have nuclear turpedo or ss sarmat
They doesnt use it becouse of shameless
in the ohio class are weak missiles. There are plenty of them, but they are weak.
@@theodemirweltmann9673 "weak" missiles?????!!!! 😂😂😂😂😂
@@waltherppx6314 Yeah. What do you think they are "strong"? huh? lol
Just to think most of the Ohio class subs are 30+years old
Nicely put tougher vid bro.
Borei #1 ohio are obsolete now
My conclusion... The Borei class is a better sub..
Obviously because it is new out of 2013. Wait for Columbia class to come out.
@@Glock30Eric it will have yasen to deal with
@@Glock30Eric2030 long way off
Let's hope we don't find out!!
Borei class sub
Well done keep going!👏👌👍💯
SSBN - Ballistic Missile Submarine Borei with nuclear thermonuclear firepower of 10 500kt. There a 4 of this class. Russia has also Delta class 9 and Typhoon class 1 + 2 reserves. A total of 16 SSBN submarines. The US has 14 Ohio SSBN submarines. SSGN Guided Missile Submarine Russia has 9 Oscar classes. The US 4 Ohio class submarines have been converted into SSGN conventional cruise missile platforms to replace their Tridents.
Only 150kt. Do you even know what 500kt is? No way 10 of them will fit in one bulava.
In Aircraft carriers race, US wins
In missiles race, Russia wins.
USA probably already is making new misses in places like a51
In submarines: Russia and UK
In Air: Russia, if flown by a trained pilot.
SAM: Russia by far.
Rockets: Russia by a mile.
Electronics: US.
@@REPOMAN24722 America has the largest number of nuclear submarines and they are generally considered the best.
In air America is the clear winner. Idk what pilots you are talking about.
In SAM systems Russia seems really strong. Like Patriot is more of a comparison to S-300 than S-400 let alone S-500 but from what we see in Ukraine and what reports there were from the middle east it seems like it might be just a paper thing
Soyuz is a rocket so do you really mean rockets or missiles?
Electronics ofc the US is ahead of the world.
@@REPOMAN24722
US have more production power and money to conquer the sky. Even if su-57 beats f-22, there are more than 10 raptors for each felon...
And usaf pilots have more flight hours in training
Says who ? I say American missiles are better than russian missiles
Не дай бог им боевые залпы, пусть подводники стреляют только на учениях
American vessels are always expensive
They forgot to say that Ohio cannot launch rockets in salvo mode.
Borey it can - look at the video.
Excellent!
Please In next video comparison compare thing side by side
Borie Class Submarine is much Advance & have Comfartable Living Condition for Submariner's.
The Hyperborea class
Borei class ftw💪🏾
The Borei is obviously better, since it's 30 years newer
Is about time the USN come out with a new SSBN....How long can it keep over-stretching the perceived superiority of its naval assets which are really ageing? In term of speed, depth and even stealth the Borei class perform better not to mention the cost. The Borei class use pump jet technology while the Ohio propeller so I can only surmise it is much quieter? If I am not mistaken, the former sonar is also more superior with a longer range...
I would think the Chinese latest SSBN the Type 96 is also more superior than the Ohio Class submarine...Makes me wonder how is it the US military budget is 900 billion, more than the next 10 countries combined and yet it is falling behind in modern weapon systems development?
Who is the "king" ?? One is 43 years old, other is new, from 2013... comparing 40 yo+ tech and designs to modern one, so you really need to argue who is outclassed ?? ...
Peacekeepers never be used.
Yeah but you forgot the most important quality part of the comparison... Made in the USA
Correction: Assembled in USA. Parts made in China.
I am sure Borei Class is actually faster, 4-5 knots faster submerged.
And it is much better than all US balistic submarines.
And the Yasin Class is the best attack submarine, no doubt , even the first also, that was started laid down as early as 1993, It was far ahead of its time, maybe 40 years when it was Laid down!
Kilo Class about the same as the German Type 212 submarine (Non newclear submarine)
I bet you are russian 🤣
Ok Vladimir Putin if you say so. Again Putin and his bunch of bitches are still at it with their usual over estimating of their accomplishments
@@Grim_Reaper_from_Hell 😂😂
Moskova is best Russian submarine
Seawolf has entered the chat
Borei has hipersonics missils ,that set
Yeah I'd like to be the one on the submarine. After the SHTF
Borei class is better as it can dive to 3000ft which makes it impossible to detect. It is faster and stealthier
Задача обеих подлодок - пуск ракет. Они могут достать противника не выходя из своих территориальных вод. Дежурство в заданном районе их главное времяпрепровождение. Всё равно что сравнивать: чей ядерный взрыв и последующий за ним ад лучше.
One of the missions of attack submarines is to track and destroy these missile submarines before they launch their payloads.
It's more about who fires of the better ICBM.
I vote Trident II over the Bulava.
Trident 2 is a simpler rocket. It cannot maneuver along the course, which means it is easier to intercept. The accuracy is slightly higher, although it does not really matter when using nuclear charges. A hundred or two meters is not essential for a nuclear explosion of 150 kilotons :) In addition, as they say, there are problems with the simultaneous launch of several missiles from American submarines. Some technical problems. At the same time, Russian submarines were already firing several missiles at once and everything was fine.
@@stevecherk1022 I looked it up.
ICBMs travel to orbit at 7000 mph and once in orbit hit 18,000 before released multiple H-Bomb warheads.
Very not easy to intercept.
You cannot even test intercepting ICBMs in orbit without starting a war.
No way the other side can tell if it is a test.
Clearly the Borei is a better platform, much newer. It will swing when the US brings out a new SSBN. The Borei would most likely not be used in any role other than Nuclear trident...it does however have the potential with the tube launched Kalibers ,it can attack ships or other subs at long distances. Or Strike land targets with conventional LACM carrying 40 weapons for the tunes is an a lot of fire power. With the ability to fire those LACM/ASCM from 700km distance dive to her max depth and speed away I think it would be considered in the right circumstances....
To make one thing clear. I know, one side won't like this, but this is the truth.
Russia is a military oriented country, while the USA is economical. You can't expect the USA to have quality. Russia has quality, while the USA always has quantity. The leopard tank shocked the world, but not the ones who understand military stuff. Those who were understand used to say that the leopard even though all the glorification, will be destroyed in no time by Russian tanks and anti tank missiles. And while T72 needed a few javelin hits to be disabled, we saw how one $30k drone pierced the leopard tank.
Not to forget, before they were deployed to the battlefield, used to be unstoppable, their armour superior and 1 leopard tank was equivalent to 10 T72.
This is what means being a paper tiger. Best in the statistics, everyone glorifies it, but not so good on the battlefield.
These subs are basicly meant to carry nukes, there are other classes of subs that are meant for anti-submarine warfare, if you wanna nuke someone i think either of these subs can do the job.
let’s hope we never find out for sure.
el Ohio es el cascarón único que por décadas usa EEUU para sus sub atómicos no renueva esa vieja fisonomía en cambio Rusia hasta la fecha ha sacado ene modelos para sus sub atómicos como para AIP...!!!
Borei is best
hyperborea class
🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺
How about Sprut SPG, vs AMX 10 RC vehicle.
Borey class, Most defenitely.
ВСЕМ - ALL - CAPUT .
Hope we ll newer find out
Russia's Belgorod class is a monster with Poseidon torpedoes...
Bolgorod shows the world that you can't trust a baba rooskie
@@michaelhamill1839 try them then
I think bori class is better.
i have this ideas of SHARP program mix with nuclear submarine.
basicly you have 70m cannon replacing the silos, the cannon will be erected underwater only the tip is out of the water and it will fire SADM 10kt warhead into orbit in 70 second, evading any detection becuase of the speed. when its ready to attack it will de-orbit into target.
WHAT MATTERS ARE THE BRAIN SKILLS IN BOTH SUBS, NOT FEATURES
its newer and we all know that newer counterpart tends to be better-ish XD
Better to destroy all of them at once. Without crew members of course
The question should be which is better 1 Ohio or 3 borei?
ohio is 1980 sub whit some upgrades. nothing more need to say
russians are superb..and unmatched by the world..
They broke tho. Doesn't matter what you know if you can't afford it
It's funny to me that people think they know about stuff but they really don't because most of that stuff is kept Secret but you can bet your butt on one thing! I'd rather be in the American boat
@@esawparkerjr637 well yes, specifics are kept secret but the general principles of most of the technologies are well known as is the physics behind making a submarine withstand pressure, go fast, be silent etc. It's sorta like everyone knows how a phone screen is made but the individual techniques are trade secrets. At the end of the day you can tell which is likely to perform better from an overview.
The argument that the Borei class is better because it is a decades newer design appears to be somewhat inaccurate for most of the current fleet. The Borei so far about a decade newer in generational ability, if the abilities are equal/proportional to the Western Tech. This partly takes into account that the Borei work started in the mid 80’s as the first couple Ohio class subs were completed. They started making the first 3 Borei class submarines in the mid 1990’s but then stopped and left them sitting and waiting. The first wasn’t actually completed until more than 10 years later and then not operationally ready until after 2013 (following successful tests of a Bulava missile). The only upgraded design is the 955A version (structural changes) of which the 1st has just begun test trials at sea in the last 1-2 years. And even then the Project 955A concept was started in parallel to the original 955 (first 3 Borei) back in the 80’s.
So what you have is perhaps 10 years in advancements in comparison to the Ohio class (which had design changes and upgrades during subsequent hulls through the 80’s and 90’s). Now to give you an idea of where the technology gaps may start we should look at the reactors that power these two subs. If the Borei is 10 years or more advanced in design, you need to wonder why it uses a nuclear reactor from the 1970’s. It’s the same reactor that was used in the Akula, Sierra, Mike, Oscar and Typhoon class submarines. It provides upwards of 190 MW of power. The Ohio class submarines are powered by the S8G from the 1980’s with an upgrade to the core system in the 1990’s. It produces 220 MW of power. Supposedly the Ohio class is all older tech and less advanced than the Borei yet the Borei is using power generating tech from before the Ohio started production.
What the Borei may have over the Ohio is speed, by perhaps 1-2 mph faster top speed. It also has fewer crew for a similar sized submarine. Having more torpedo tubes isn’t exactly an advancement,t, just that they chose to take up more space with torpedo tubes. The same type of tubes that may have caused a failure and subsequent fire/explosion in the submarine Kursk in August of 2000 that sank it and killed the entire crew. The Kursk was an Oscar class, built around the same time as the Ohio class. If the Russian technology at the time of the Ohio class turned out to be this reliable, then the tech that went into the Borei design during that decade starts off with some concerns.
My concern here is reliability with their “advanced” nuclear submarine designs. Both the US and Russia have lost nuclear submarines. The difference is the US lost 2 early designs back in the 60’s when mistakes were made whereas Russia has lost 3 submarines to sinking (1 of them sank twice), 3 to fires/explosions and oddly the first submarine they lost is one they intentionally sank in shallow water to deal with reactor problems and disposing of it. Since the 1970’s that is at least 7 losses.
And beyond that the next issue is upkeep. The US built 18 Ohio class submarines and has kept them all active since the first was put out to sea. At roughly the same time that the Ohio’s started construction the USSR started the Delta class submarines (Delta I, II ,III and IV models). In total 43 were constructed. As of now there is one active Delta III and six Delta IV’s. Of the 6 giant Typhoon class submarines that were built in the 70’s and 80’s, only one is active. Half of them were removed from service in the 90’s and scrapped some years later. The 2 “laid up” in harbor have their missile tubes empty and they are collecting rust. In total Russia is currently operating 28 nuclear powered submarines while the US is operating 69.
Now back to weaponry. The Borei despite having 2 more torpedo tubes doesn’t stack up well as far as weaponry goes since more tubes doesn’t equate to better weapons. Everything currently fitting into the 533 mm tubes would be from the 60’s and 70’s. The Fizik-2 torpedo went through testing and supposedly will be put into the newer classes of submarines. At its fastest speed it would go 6 mph faster than ADCAP Mod 8 torpedoes (2008) which means not achieving the maximum range (same goes for an ADCAP going its maximum speed). The Fizik-2 “Futlyar” is bigger, heavier but can only dive to 1,600 feet compared to the ADCAP which can go down below 2,000 feet.
As for the missiles the Borei’s original missile was scrapped after failures and they turned to the RSM-56 Bulava. It began testing in the early 2000’s with nearly a 50% failure rate in tests. There were a few more successful tests up till 2011 when it was put into the Borei class. Slightly smaller than the UGM-133 Trident II, it can carry 6 MIRV’s out to a maximum of 6,200 miles. The UGM-133 that went into service in the 1990’s carries 8+ MIRV’s out to a range of 7,500 miles. The Borei carries 16 missiles while the Ohio carries 24. Both missiles use INS, Astro-inertial guidance and GPS. Not that the use of nuclear weapons should be used, but the missiles, despite being a decade or so apart from each other, show no real advancement with the Russian design.
If the Borei is as quiet as they project it will be, that might be the one advancement that is noticeable in performance. If it adds up to promises. Which might be as credible as the claim that the Su-57 would be stealthier than the F-22. All in all I would say the Borei is a new submarine design as of its original design in the 90’s being about 10 years newer than the first couple Ohio class submarines. Beyond that, consider that it took about 3 years to complete each Ohio class submarine but took about 12 years to complete the first Borei. It then took 6 years for the 2nd, 6 for the 3rd and 5 for the 4th. It is concerning that the Borei, being roughly equal in size took so long to be completed even if you ignore how long the 1st submarine took. It also should be noted that saying it takes a couple years longer for the Borei class to be built because the sub is more advanced doesn’t add up. The newest US submarines, the Virginia class, is more advanced in ways over the Ohio class (though not an SSBN) but only takes about 1-3 years to make. My opinion is that so far there is nothing screaming out to me that the Borei is a leap over the Ohio. Considering the first Ohio was commissioned in the 80’s it really is an 80’s and 90’s submarine for technology with some upgrades here and there. The Borei is a 90’s submarine completed and in service by the 2010’s. The delays and overlaps there make me think that if anything they could be roughly equal with some ongoing concerns about Russia’s abilities with upkeep and reliability
A SSBN would never be transiting at high speed it’s noise at high speed absolutely destroys the one true power, stealth. Most SSBNs operate at a crawl for maximum stealth.
Does anyone consider that you can fire a nuclear torpedo at a costal target i.e. city or naval base.
Subs cannot defend territory and are blind when central commands are eliminated. Autonomous nuclear tip Torpedoes that linger are a far more cost effective bang for the buck. Unmanned fully capable subs sounds great until the comms are lost...BTW.,BOREI HANDS DOWN SEA KING!
Ohio is the Badests too the bone!
And PDRK North Korea.
Only way to win is not to play!
And the winner is the HYPOBOREI CLASS
Russian subs primarily operate in the now opened trans artic shipping route..wich conec6s Asia and Europe. trough out the cold war this was their mission ...to open up that route
Your analysis totally fails in one key item, Rubles for upkeep. If the Ruskie Navy maintenance schedule is as crappy as the Army's seems to be, getting the Boreis on station and keeping them there may be a severe hindrance to the threat.
How on earth is the Russian torpedo traveling at speeds around Mach 0.9??????
Russian Cavitation torpedo exceeds Mach 1 (In ocean water which not 700 MPH).
@@davidsalcido383 false
Гугли, торпеда "Шквал".
Both are devastating. Ahh in terms of which is better which in this category can hardly ever be a winner maybe the Borei-class is better because it is newer. The Columbia will be better for sure but again can we name a winner in a category like this
No one is the winner they not yet fight its other
154 tomahawks tho…
if the button is ever pushed-no winners only losers,everybody loses
2:10
i would go with borei class much newer can outrun ohio enough firepower to wipe out entire usa with one salvo ohio has louzy sonar recently nearly destroyed one by hitting a mountain in south china sea
the Americana HATE when the french eyeball russiain subs and space thing.Consinstantly telling the russians to guard their high-end weapons tech better
Paano mnalo anh burei class ang kargo nuclear nyan 16 lng tapos ang ohio 24 nuclear ang dala...wla sa ayos....
The Ohio can take out more cities from further away.(It's one Job). THE END.
There are also many more of them.
The Trident II missile can actually fit about 10 MIRV (But America and the U.K decided to put 6 in each missile). It's basically the same thing. Destroy the Major cities, and then boom, country goes down.
😆😆😆
Mad because the Russian sun is better 😂😂. Clearly it’s more modernized and sophisticated than the Ohio.
These subs don’t attack each other. Why not pit them against attack subs?
Thank God Submarines don't have tires so that like your Army's logistical forces, you're prevented from moving them.
@@nancystanton3291 submarines are made to move around the ocean without tires
The Bore class looks good on paper. Ho tree refer as history has proved time and time again, Russian weapons systems seldom live up to Russian claims. Their quality control is poor at best.
Borei any day!
thank God for mother Russia🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺
Always, USA NO.1 in the world 🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲🇺🇲💪💪💪💪💪💪💪✊✊✊✊✊✊✊❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
The Russian subs was better in the video. Idk what you talking about?
Both of them is same ballistic missile submarine no win in this 2 sub
borei easily the armament is important but so are other aspects which the borei dominates borei>>>>
Borei is king in my opinion
How did you find out that the max depth of the Ohio is 800 Feet? That ain't even 300 Meters.
Ya gotta say that sounds like some BS
@@guardian6079 Yeah. That's like SSK deep xD
As a former seamen nuclear engineer on an Ohio class submarine, I can confirm that that information is completely false. The actual max depth is classified information.
@@thehistoryoftheworld Yeah, I know. I played to much Cold Waters that I know the max depth of that in-game is over 1000 feet. So I think the actual max depth might be more than the one in game.
@@thehistoryoftheworld thank you for saying this🙌🏻 what boat were you on?
the Yanks all day. no one has a better navy than the Yanks. No one
Why the fleet if there is no one to protect? if these submarines fire
You living in Denial. Clearly the Russian subs was better than the Ohio
@@efamtaylor3580 ok
When they pronounce Borei as Buh-reee you know to be skeptical of the rigour of research.
USA's OHIO class submarines are OUTDATED....compared to RUSSIA's BOREI class submarines ....
Doesn't mean the russian sub is advanced. Ohio is much more advanced than anything russia has
these aretwo great machines, I think this Ohio class wins on the durability aspect , plus the two turbines vs one on the borei should be considered as a redundant propulsion, the range and firepower of the Ohio is superior too, comparing 1980s sub vs 2013 sub, I would vote for the Ohio especially considering engineering reliability and on-board electronics.... Ohio wins it.
Australian Collins class sank a Ohio class in the 90s in war games, Americans didn't even see it coming. Diesel is where it's at for stealth. As for these two the Borei has it.
Prove it Putina....😂😂😂😂😂
Russian sub
I think I'd rather be on the American boat!!!
The 800lb gorilla in the room. The russian sub like all the other equipment is junk. Speed is overrated, half its missles won't work. Torpedoes will circle back and blow it up. And it loud af. Eachone has a Los Angeles class attack sub following it ,
Just ask the families of the Kursk crew how good Russian submarines (and their ability to support them) are.
Khit balonbalonan mo sabog....
We have 14 active nuclear caring Ohio subs to 5 Borei subs. Wasn't it the USSR military that said "Quantity has a quality all its own."?
Not in the case of nuclear submarins. If you need quantity and just protect yourself from attack by water - look to the north korea. Russia builds such boats to quarantee the destruction enemy country. And United States too ;)
Russia as 16 SSBN - Ballistic Missile Submarine. Borei class 4, Delta class 9 and Typhoon class 1 + 2 reserves.
У России помимо "Бореев" есть и другие АПЛ, и их хватит чтобы пустить весь мир в труху. У современной России оборонительная доктрина и мы не участвуем в гонке вооружений, хотя нам хотят её навязать. В общем, мы не гонимся количеством, на первые роли выходит- качество.
@@Lyanguzov1 Я не буду на английском, пусть помучаются с переводом. У нас в доктрине право на превентивный ядерный удар при угрозе существования государства (чего не было в ссср) , понимать можно широко, Путин недавно на прессухе разьяснял. Я считаю, что если обнаружится подготовка к вторжению (сувалковские переходы им все покоя не дают), а она обнаружится 100% (на ирак вторгаясь полгода логистику настраивали, счас такое не скроешь) и если тем более кто то пукнет в нашу сторону - вынесут всё в потенциально опасных странах, аэродромы, порты, склады гсм и боеприпасов, штабы и центры принятия решений. Европе будет очень больно, учитывая что зрк у них зонированая а не эшелонированная как у нас, да и воевать там особо не с кем. Может и без тактического ядерного справимся
now they have 7 after commissioning two new borei subs