What was the alfa really like? - Page 6

Takeda Shingen · 08-28-05, 08:12 AM

I'm beginning to suspect that these publications do not have authors.

Kapitan · 08-28-05, 08:28 AM

Multi-purpose Submarines and Special-purpose Submarines is written by the same person as the project 705K book is

and i found a linky to it

http://www.aviapress.com/viewonekit.htm?OTH-221

Russian Submarines book this is a good one too i have only read this one i had to give it back after wards as it didnt belong to me but also planning to buy it

heres the link where you can buy it http://www.aviapress.com/viewonekit.htm?OTH-157

Kapitan · 08-28-05, 08:31 AM

found another book i want and i mean i want this one take a look tak this has got to be the best one yet i want it badly

http://www.armybook.com/summary.html?code=0102002i31

it is a must have

Takeda Shingen · 08-28-05, 08:32 AM

Whew. That was needlessly complicated. Nonetheless, I thank you Kapitan.

PS Once again, the 705/K publication is a magazine, not a book. Big difference.

Kapitan · 08-28-05, 08:33 AM

mine is a sort of hard back bit flimsy but a hard back hmmm o well i cant realy tell the diffrence i just read them

Zarlock · 08-28-05, 09:51 AM

Short summary on submarine's diving depths (unless WWII era or shortly afterwards):
Nobody here knows.
And if someone does, he's not allowed to say.

Such information is among the few things still kept closely guarded, and not even revealed to most crew members of these subs.

Regards,

Robert

Kapitan · 08-28-05, 09:58 AM

since the fall of the USSR dimensions and ship specs have been revealed and are publicly avalible the only ones that arnt are the new build subs such as the borey and lada

the americans 688 and 688I are sort of avalible the ones who have kept thje best seacrets are the british

Zarlock · 08-28-05, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapitain

since the fall of the USSR dimensions and ship specs have been revealed and are publicly avalible the only ones that arnt are the new build subs such as the borey and lada

the americans 688 and 688I are sort of avalible the ones who have kept thje best seacrets are the british

Yes, data is available.

Just don't believe it is complete, the truth or even only indicating the truth.

Regards,

Robert

Kapitan · 08-28-05, 10:05 AM

no but we can guess 90% of it when the americans say +25 knots or faster thats normaly mean about 31 knots so we can guess and bring it to a conclusion there

Zarlock · 08-28-05, 11:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapitain

no but we can guess 90% of it when the americans say +25 knots or faster thats normaly mean about 31 knots so we can guess and bring it to a conclusion there

Uh, that conclusion doesn't sound very convincing...

Regards,

Robert

Kapitan · 08-28-05, 11:23 AM

i was talking about the new subs like virginia we can only guess her true preformance stats ie im guessing they are a little bit better than the 688's

but as to al'fa and many other russian submarine there are many resorces where i can draw my conclusion as i posted earlier at least four of the sources claimed 750 meters or 700 meters thus emplying that the al'fa can dive between these depths

the older submarine november echo yankee al'fa whiskey ect ect are not as heavily classified as say the new borey or lada and thus those subs info are much more avalible

Zarlock · 08-28-05, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapitain

i was talking about the new subs like virginia we can only guess her true preformance stats ie im guessing they are a little bit better than the 688's

but as to al'fa and many other russian submarine there are many resorces where i can draw my conclusion as i posted earlier at least four of the sources claimed 750 meters or 700 meters thus emplying that the al'fa can dive between these depths

the older submarine november echo yankee al'fa whiskey ect ect are not as heavily classified as say the new borey or lada and thus those subs info are much more avalible

The problem with these sources is just that: they CLAIM.
Submarines in pretty much every country, and most certainly countries like Russia, China and all NATO states, are kept under pretty close wraps. Usually, only a handful of selected people knows the true statistics, and that does not include everyone on board, or working on these subs.

Also usually, "placeholder" figures are actually released by these countries, or "leaked" to the public, but these don't even have to be correct relative to each other.

If the U.S. Navy says a Seawolf can reach 25 knots+ while a Los Angeles class can only reach 20 knots+, that is merely a political game - if you get congress to pay these increasingly expensive toys, you better say they are better than the old ones in every regard.

To sum it up, all performance figures of almost all submarines past WWII should be taken with a big dose of salt, and are almost exclusively guesswork or placeholder figures.

Regards,

Robert

Kapitan · 08-28-05, 01:23 PM

alot of figures have been releaced but subs built normaly beofre 1975 would be not classified alfa was built in 1969 so it should be unclassified normaly subsmarines stay classified for 30 years unless some are in active service still

30 years on the scorpion disaster was released 30 years on project jennifer was totaly confirmed 30 years on thresher disaster de classified so im guessing after 30 years there is no reason to keep it all clasified

alfa is over 30 years old and is declassified so is the older subs like yankee echo ect ect how do these people guess and get the same numbers over and over again

Zarlock · 08-28-05, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapitain

alot of figures have been releaced but subs built normaly beofre 1975 would be not classified alfa was built in 1969 so it should be unclassified normaly subsmarines stay classified for 30 years unless some are in active service still

Even from subs which are 30 years+ old and out of service you can judge design themes and issues, something countries having used these subs and using their successors wish to avoid.

Quote:

alfa is over 30 years old and is declassified so is the older subs like yankee echo ect ect how do these people guess and get the same numbers over and over again

Copying from each other, or simply coming to the same conclusions from the available data like hull form, or estimated data, like hull material and strength as well as power plants.
The latter is indeed educated guessing, but is not the same as knowing true facts, and occasionally may vastly differ from these.

Regards,

Robert

Amizaur · 08-28-05, 02:24 PM

Or maybe something like that... source that I gave you (that web page in Russian) claims that operational/max depth of Alfa is 350/400m.
From other sources we know that safety factor used by constructors of submarines is 1.5 in US, 1.75 in Russian designs, and as much as 2.0 in German subs.
400m * 1.75 of safety ratio gives 700m. So maybe 700m was the crush depth of Alfa ? Is that possible explanation, Kapitan ? Or you are sure that the 700-750m were for operational or max value, not crush ?

Similar calculation would indicate that 675m diving depth you cited for Akula subs multipled by safety factor of 1.75 would give over 1000m crush depth, don't you think it's too much ? That 675m depth was operational, max diving or maybe crush ? But again I think only insane captain could dive to his boat's crush depth or even to 90% of it...
Do you know what is design safety factor of Russian built submarines ? Maybe you know another value ?
And the last thing, are you still sure that Alfa is the sub that keeps world speed record ? :-) Not the Papa class with 44.7kts ?

08-28-05, 08:28 AM	#77
Kapitan Sub Test Pilot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK + Canada Posts: 7,131 Downloads: 77 Uploads: 7	Multi-purpose Submarines and Special-purpose Submarines is written by the same person as the project 705K book is and i found a linky to it http://www.aviapress.com/viewonekit.htm?OTH-221 Russian Submarines book this is a good one too i have only read this one i had to give it back after wards as it didnt belong to me but also planning to buy it heres the link where you can buy it http://www.aviapress.com/viewonekit.htm?OTH-157 __________________ DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/

08-28-05, 08:31 AM	#78
Kapitan Sub Test Pilot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK + Canada Posts: 7,131 Downloads: 77 Uploads: 7	found another book i want and i mean i want this one take a look tak this has got to be the best one yet i want it badly http://www.armybook.com/summary.html?code=0102002i31 it is a must have __________________ DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/

08-28-05, 08:33 AM	#80
Kapitan Sub Test Pilot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK + Canada Posts: 7,131 Downloads: 77 Uploads: 7	mine is a sort of hard back bit flimsy but a hard back hmmm o well i cant realy tell the diffrence i just read them __________________ DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/

08-28-05, 09:58 AM	#82
Kapitan Sub Test Pilot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK + Canada Posts: 7,131 Downloads: 77 Uploads: 7	since the fall of the USSR dimensions and ship specs have been revealed and are publicly avalible the only ones that arnt are the new build subs such as the borey and lada the americans 688 and 688I are sort of avalible the ones who have kept thje best seacrets are the british __________________ DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/

08-28-05, 10:05 AM	#84
Kapitan Sub Test Pilot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK + Canada Posts: 7,131 Downloads: 77 Uploads: 7	no but we can guess 90% of it when the americans say +25 knots or faster thats normaly mean about 31 knots so we can guess and bring it to a conclusion there __________________ DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/

08-28-05, 08:12 AM	#76
Takeda Shingen Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2000 Posts: 8,643 Downloads: 19 Uploads: 0	I'm beginning to suspect that these publications do not have authors.

08-28-05, 08:32 AM	#79
Takeda Shingen Navy Seal Join Date: Mar 2000 Posts: 8,643 Downloads: 19 Uploads: 0	Whew. That was needlessly complicated. Nonetheless, I thank you Kapitan. PS Once again, the 705/K publication is a magazine, not a book. Big difference.

08-28-05, 09:51 AM	#81
Zarlock Swabbie Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 9 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Short summary on submarine's diving depths (unless WWII era or shortly afterwards): Nobody here knows. And if someone does, he's not allowed to say. Such information is among the few things still kept closely guarded, and not even revealed to most crew members of these subs. Regards, Robert

08-28-05, 11:23 AM	#86
Kapitan Sub Test Pilot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK + Canada Posts: 7,131 Downloads: 77 Uploads: 7	i was talking about the new subs like virginia we can only guess her true preformance stats ie im guessing they are a little bit better than the 688's but as to al'fa and many other russian submarine there are many resorces where i can draw my conclusion as i posted earlier at least four of the sources claimed 750 meters or 700 meters thus emplying that the al'fa can dive between these depths the older submarine november echo yankee al'fa whiskey ect ect are not as heavily classified as say the new borey or lada and thus those subs info are much more avalible __________________ DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/

08-28-05, 01:23 PM	#88
Kapitan Sub Test Pilot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK + Canada Posts: 7,131 Downloads: 77 Uploads: 7	alot of figures have been releaced but subs built normaly beofre 1975 would be not classified alfa was built in 1969 so it should be unclassified normaly subsmarines stay classified for 30 years unless some are in active service still 30 years on the scorpion disaster was released 30 years on project jennifer was totaly confirmed 30 years on thresher disaster de classified so im guessing after 30 years there is no reason to keep it all clasified alfa is over 30 years old and is declassified so is the older subs like yankee echo ect ect how do these people guess and get the same numbers over and over again __________________ DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/ Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/ Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/

08-28-05, 02:24 PM	#90
Amizaur Sonar Guy Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Poland Posts: 398 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Or maybe something like that... source that I gave you (that web page in Russian) claims that operational/max depth of Alfa is 350/400m. From other sources we know that safety factor used by constructors of submarines is 1.5 in US, 1.75 in Russian designs, and as much as 2.0 in German subs. 400m * 1.75 of safety ratio gives 700m. So maybe 700m was the crush depth of Alfa ? Is that possible explanation, Kapitan ? Or you are sure that the 700-750m were for operational or max value, not crush ? Similar calculation would indicate that 675m diving depth you cited for Akula subs multipled by safety factor of 1.75 would give over 1000m crush depth, don't you think it's too much ? That 675m depth was operational, max diving or maybe crush ? But again I think only insane captain could dive to his boat's crush depth or even to 90% of it... Do you know what is design safety factor of Russian built submarines ? Maybe you know another value ? And the last thing, are you still sure that Alfa is the sub that keeps world speed record ? :-) Not the Papa class with 44.7kts ?