I have always admired the idea of sailing under water than on it. Submarine's were introduced to me in 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea with James Mason and Kirk Douglas. What impressed my imagination even more from that picture is the idea of owning a boat. It would set you a part from others if you could own your own submarine. This is probably why I gravitate to dive watches because they are like a micro submarine.

However, my question was about naval submarine's. Personally, I prefer the Soviet subs because of their exterior design and construction. For example, my favorite sub's are the Akula class(better known by the NATO designation: Typhoon), Lira class(NATO designation: Alfa), Shchuka class(NATO designation: Victor-III), Barrakuda and Kondor class(NATO designation: Sierra I and Sierra II), Borey class(NATO designation: Dolgorukiy), and finally Yasen class(NATO designation: Severodvinsk).

Many of these subs feature a towed sonar array; this is a pod on the tailplane. Funny story was when this design debuted on the Shchuka class in 1979, America thought is could be part of a magnetohydrodynamic drive or caterpillar.


Soviet submarines were further advanced than American submarine's. One example is in the use of titanium for the hull in the Lira class. Titanium was expensive and revolutionary at the time. Like all Soviet submarines this boat had a double-hull. The inner hull withstood the pressure while the outer hull formed the shape for better hydrodynamics. The Lira, or Alfa class, was rumored to have a crush depth over 1,300 meters. Apparently, this has been refuted by a Russian authority. The Shchuka class(pictured above) had a maximum operating depth of 600 meters, making it one of the deepest diving naval subs.


My favorite sub of all-time is the Typhoon class. Not solely because it was featured in The Hunt For Red October but mostly because of its size. At 574 feet and having a submerged displacement of 48,000 tonnes, it remains the largest class of submarine ever built. Only six were made and all but one have been retired. The one still in operation serves as a training vessel, although, it is still armed and capable of launching nuclear missiles. Unlike many ballistic missile submariner's the silos were forward of the sail, rather than behind it. I should point out that has twin screws(propellers). This was not and is not commonly seen on sub's, especially today. The last American sub to feature twin screws was the USS Triton in mid-1950's. It even has a swimming pool. You can see pictures of one that a blogger published when he got a tour of the boat here.




Of American submarines, I like the Ohio class submarine and Virginia class attack submarine. The Ohio class submarines are ballistic missile boats. These are equal to the Typhoon class and serve as a nuclear deterrent. Ohio's are 560 feet and have a submerged displacement of 18,750 tonnes. The shape is more similar to the traditional submarine design.


For a while I have been toying with the idea of buying a radio control submarine replica of one of these naval sub's. But the costs range from $400 to over $1,000. My wife would have something to say if I bought one just like that. Fortunately, I found one for under $30. It is intended for children but I have to remember to share with my son, rather than the other way around. We take it to the pond and play with it there. It is 10 inches long and has a range of 15 meters. The operational depth of 2.5 feet(I did exceed that depth and it continued to work at 4 feet). The sun fish seem to like it.


My son has the "conn".

I have owned a few radio control toys in my younger years, but a radio control submarine has been the most fun. Mine can turn left and right, dive and stay submerged while moving along or just sail along the surface. It can even perform a mini emergency breach!

Perhaps one of these will be acquired in the future...

 

Interesting post, I know next to nothing about military submarines, the closest thing I have, is a Lemania chronograph issued to Royal Navy personnel serving on nuclear powered subs, note the absence of luminous material on dial so as not to interfere with radiation detectors on board.

 

The story of the Russian sub KURSK would be enough to keep me off a submarine, period! If man was meant to swim or submarine, God would have given him gills! Interesting to read about, nonetheless.

 

The Kursk sank because of two reasons. (1) One of its dummy torpedoes exploded due to a leak of fluid, and (2) Pride. The Russian authorities declined the offer from several countries to assist in the rescue. If the Russian's had accepted, the crew of the Kursk might still be alive today.

The same can be said about flying. We were not given wings, but it is still, technically, the safest way to travel. Ask Mad Dog.

 

I bet your watch was used to time torpedoes range to targets.

 

I don't know how you could state that Soviet submarines were of a superior design compared to American subs. The Russians/Soviets have lost too many over the years along with all hands. Soviet subs were noisy and easier to track then their American counterparts. They had inferior weapons systems. In fact, all the systems, including the conscripted crew, were inferior. They have suffered many more accidents as well. The US hasn't lost a submarine since the 1960's (Thersher 1963, Scorpion 1968). Of course the Soviets did not even have much of a submarine force until after World War II. They spent the cold war years attempting to catch up and led the US and it's allies in volume of subs but certainly not in quality.

I've walk thru a couple of museum subs including Nautilus, the first nuclear power sub which went under the polar ice cap in the 1950's. Very tight, cramped amazing pieces of technology.

 

Interesting post. My previous job was in airborne Maritime Patrol so I spent quite a lot of time getting to know a lot about many submarines, so we could better find them, and track them! Seeing a periscope blip on the radar then homing in to try and track it was great fun!

 

I never used the word superior. Their submarine's were further advanced that ours, such as in the use of titanium for some of the hulls and acoustic suppressing plates on the Typhoon class. Soviet/Russian sub's were/are quiet, only not to the degree of American boats. I am not the only one that appreciates Russian subs.

I am not knocking our submarine's. And I am aware of our track record with sub accidents and the tech inside our boats. Soviet/Russian sub's just have differences that I like.

 

This "impressive" Russian sub you cite began construction in 1993 and took 20 years to enter the Russian fleet. It maximizes Soviet technology from the 1970's and 1980's. Do the gauges look like this at 6 o'clock?

T USSR MADE T

I think the US Rear Admiral quoted is being politically correct in his praise. Of course any sub is to be feared. I'm confident that this Russian vessel is obsolete compaired to it's Western counterparts.

 

Did you have something to do with naval submarines in the past? You seem highly agitated.

 

No. And I am not agitated at all.

 

Confident? Well, if you read the article you would note that, as everyone knows, Russia had money problems when construction of the boat began. The tech was influenced by Soviet era tech; it did not indicate that it has Soviet era tech. Since more are being built modern tech will be included in the design. Our government is not exactly utilizing pure modern tech either, I am sad to say.

 

There's a reason for that.

Naval ship building is a lot different to commercial production. The design, selection, development, testing, integration, certification and acceptance takes many years from project start to launch and commissioning.

Because the lead time is so long, many of the selected equipment/systems will be technically obsolete by the time the vessel enters service.
The more complex the the systems become, the longer it takes to implement them.

That's why warships are in a continuous rolling upgrade program so that they can keep up with change, but always slightly behind the latest cutting edge technology.

 

^ Thanks for explaining that. It makes perfect sense. But something like a floppy seems a little sloppy.

 

I think calling the Russian subs more advanced is a little wrong. You have to look at the needs, tactics, which influenced the design goals of the US vs the USSR. Russia could field more cheaper boats that required less training. Most Russian sailors just did the required 2-3 years and left, with a small Officer core. US subs had much higher trained enlisted with a larger officer core. This made the Russian subs much simpler to work on.

Citing Titanium hulls as higher tech is kind of looking at the problem sideways. Russia has lots of titanium to build with while the US not as much. It was a means to an end. The stronger hull could in theory take more hits then the US hulls. The higher speeds on Russian subs was their way of dealing with the tech gap between the 2 fleets. US subs tend to work alone and preserve stealth, while Russia hunter killers worked in packs. Russia could not build subs as quiet as the US subs so they fielded more, and traded stealth for raw speed.

Russia could field more subs, with less tech which they leveraged against the higher tech and much quieter US subs with better sonar that where fewer in number.

Also you need to look at the mission of the non SSBN's. American to protect Atlantic shipping, and Russia to stop Atlantic shipping, this also highly influenced design and tactics of the fleets.

 

I recently watched the Huell Howser show (California focused public TV) where he visits the Hornet and Midway. I made a note that I need to drive down to SD soon. And there are ΩF folks down there too! A GTG may be in order.

 

Been on a few vessels and subs over the years
Just a few ships coins of many, some might notice a few US ones

 

I spent seven years on Los Angeles class submarines... I can assure you, even the 688s are more modern, in every way, than a Russian boat.

It is rumored that the Akula class boats use minimal radiation shielding to save weight (and increase max speed).. and that the crews would have to be swapped periodically to avoid radiation sickness.

Pick up the book "Blind Man's Bluff" - an outstanding account of submarine service.

 

I am glad you shared this. My information was from internet research, but having someone with experience serving aboard a submarine is quite different. Did you ever get to meet Russian submariners?