U.S.N buys Ruskie sub

Kapitan · 10-25-06, 05:37 AM

Yesterday afternoon the U.S navy announced its intentions to buy and restore a Russian Nuclear submarine.

The submarine in question is known as K123 and currently holds the record for the fastest submarine in the world.

The K123 was built in the 1970’s and is one of seven made, the U.S navy claims this submarine is to be bought at the cost of $4 million U.S Dollars.

The plan is to load the submarine onto a transport ship and then take it back to Norfolk harbour Virginia where specialist personnel can inspect and repair the submarine.

The submarine was removed from Russia’s active duty list permanently in 1995 and has sat waiting for disposal on the Kola Peninsular.

The submarine is to arrive at Norfolk some time next march, it will be the very first time America has stated her intentions to Russia.

Admiral Degalo told interfax “it is a great moment for this submarine, these submarines represented the skill of Russian engineers at the height of the cold war”

The U.S navy claims that the submarine will not be used in front line service but will become a platform for high speed research and later a special target practice submarine, the U.S navy also released the submarines new name “U.S.S Discovery SSRN 2.”

It’s believed that the U.S navy will adapt and modify the submarine for their own use, but the real question is will the submarine be seaworthy when she arrives?

goldorak · 10-25-06, 06:33 AM

I don't like it.
Its like giving for free (4 milion dollars

) a strategic asset.
It makes no sense, from the russian perspective.
If the navy is in so bad a financial situation, I don't think that 4 million dollars would improve significantly the finances.
Silly russians.

Winston · 10-25-06, 06:43 AM

I don't know, it would only cost the Russians to scrap it anyway. Looks like they got an opportunity to not only get rid of one more hull that needed disposing of but made a bit of cash at the same time.

The Avon Lady · 10-25-06, 06:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by goldorak

a strategic asset.

A rusty bucket from the 70's is a strategic asset 30 years later?

diver · 10-25-06, 06:47 AM

Taken out of service in 1995?

I think the Canadians will be able to testidy that submarines do not like being put back into commision after more than a decade on the scrap heap.

And I hope none of the USN blokes they get to man her want to have anymore children.

SkvyWvr · 10-25-06, 06:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

Quote:

Originally Posted by goldorak

a strategic asset.

A rusty bucket from the 70's is a strategic asset 30 years later?

Sure, look at some of the US's Carriers.

UglyMowgli · 10-25-06, 06:53 AM

the Alfa use a liquid cooled reactor and that kind of reactor demand a lot of care and maintenance even if the sub is on dock (wihout heating the coolant solidified) so at this time the K-123 is unable to take sea and even if this new is true, what i doubt a lot, the navy will have to make a lot effort and spend a lot of money to make it operationnal or prepare a barge with heating system before convoy it to USA.

The Avon Lady · 10-25-06, 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkvyWvr

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

Quote:

Originally Posted by goldorak

a strategic asset.

A rusty bucket from the 70's is a strategic asset 30 years later?

Sure, look at some of the US's Carriers.

I assume the Russians ripped out anything of true value just like I assume the carrier USS Intrepid, now serving as a floating museum in New York, no longer contains military sensitive equipment.

goldorak · 10-25-06, 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

Quote:

Originally Posted by goldorak

a strategic asset.

A rusty bucket from the 70's is a strategic asset 30 years later?

Well you might consider that the form of the hull could represent an asset.
Russians were very innovative with hull design, and by giving away the sub to the americans basically for free , the us navy maybe can learn some one or two tricks about designing efficient hydrodynamic hulls that could be used in future us subs.
Its the same thing about propellers, I don't see the us navy selling polaris submarine propellers 25 years give or take after retiring the subs from service.

SkvyWvr · 10-25-06, 07:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

Quote:

Originally Posted by SkvyWvr

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Avon Lady

Quote:

Originally Posted by goldorak

a strategic asset.

A rusty bucket from the 70's is a strategic asset 30 years later?

Sure, look at some of the US's Carriers.

I assume the Russians ripped out anything of true value just like I assume the carrier USS Intrepid, now serving as a floating museum in New York, no longer contains military sensitive equipment.

That all depends on their Mothball system. The US puts ships to be decommissioned through a full overhaul, loads it with supplys and covers the weapon/electronics with spray on covering. The intent is to able to reactivate them within 60 days if necessary. Only after years of being in Mothball are ships either sold or scrapped. Thats when they are stripped.

Oberon · 10-25-06, 07:34 AM

Nice!
K-123? That'll make my mate happy, that's the sub he always used to choose back when we played Sub Command against each other.

Kapitan · 10-25-06, 07:57 AM

Good grief people you lot are so gullable.

goldorak · 10-25-06, 08:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapitan

Good grief people you lot are so gullable.

Well I actually said that it didn't make sense from the russian perspective.

And next time Kapitan wait till 1st april. :rotfl:

Nagy · 10-25-06, 08:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon

Nice!
K-123? That'll make my mate happy, that's the sub he always used to choose back when we played Sub Command against each other.

It has made me happy.There's no greater tactical advantage than being able to outrun your own topedos!

SkvyWvr · 10-25-06, 08:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kapitan

Good grief people you lot are so gullable.

Do you have a fishing License? :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

10-25-06, 05:37 AM	#1
Kapitan Sub Test Pilot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK + Canada Posts: 7,130 Downloads: 77 Uploads: 7	U.S.N buys Ruskie sub Yesterday afternoon the U.S navy announced its intentions to buy and restore a Russian Nuclear submarine. The submarine in question is known as K123 and currently holds the record for the fastest submarine in the world. The K123 was built in the 1970’s and is one of seven made, the U.S navy claims this submarine is to be bought at the cost of $4 million U.S Dollars. The plan is to load the submarine onto a transport ship and then take it back to Norfolk harbour Virginia where specialist personnel can inspect and repair the submarine. The submarine was removed from Russia’s active duty list permanently in 1995 and has sat waiting for disposal on the Kola Peninsular. The submarine is to arrive at Norfolk some time next march, it will be the very first time America has stated her intentions to Russia. Admiral Degalo told interfax “it is a great moment for this submarine, these submarines represented the skill of Russian engineers at the height of the cold war” The U.S navy claims that the submarine will not be used in front line service but will become a platform for high speed research and later a special target practice submarine, the U.S navy also released the submarines new name “U.S.S Discovery SSRN 2.” It’s believed that the U.S navy will adapt and modify the submarine for their own use, but the real question is will the submarine be seaworthy when she arrives? __________________ 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/ Last edited by Gizzmoe; 10-25-06 at 05:44 AM. Reason: Changed text color, no white text, please!

10-25-06, 06:43 AM	#3
Winston Wild Night in Bangkok Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Wales Posts: 179 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	I don't know, it would only cost the Russians to scrap it anyway. Looks like they got an opportunity to not only get rid of one more hull that needed disposing of but made a bit of cash at the same time. __________________ "Don't talk to me about naval tradition. It's nothing but rum, sodomy and the lash"

10-25-06, 06:53 AM	#7
UglyMowgli Grey Wolf Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Canada Posts: 784 Downloads: 10 Uploads: 0	the Alfa use a liquid cooled reactor and that kind of reactor demand a lot of care and maintenance even if the sub is on dock (wihout heating the coolant solidified) so at this time the K-123 is unable to take sea and even if this new is true, what i doubt a lot, the navy will have to make a lot effort and spend a lot of money to make it operationnal or prepare a barge with heating system before convoy it to USA. __________________ Modern Naval Warfare Community Manager

10-25-06, 07:57 AM	#12
Kapitan Sub Test Pilot Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: UK + Canada Posts: 7,130 Downloads: 77 Uploads: 7	Good grief people you lot are so gullable. __________________ 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/

10-25-06, 06:33 AM	#2
goldorak Admiral Join Date: Apr 2005 Posts: 2,320 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	I don't like it. Its like giving for free (4 milion dollars ) a strategic asset. It makes no sense, from the russian perspective. If the navy is in so bad a financial situation, I don't think that 4 million dollars would improve significantly the finances. Silly russians.

10-25-06, 06:47 AM	#5
diver Engineer Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Australia Posts: 213 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	Taken out of service in 1995? I think the Canadians will be able to testidy that submarines do not like being put back into commision after more than a decade on the scrap heap. And I hope none of the USN blokes they get to man her want to have anymore children.

10-25-06, 07:34 AM	#11
Oberon Lucky Jack Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 25,976 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 20	Nice! K-123? That'll make my mate happy, that's the sub he always used to choose back when we played Sub Command against each other.