Soviet subs tactics

[FPSchazly]

Originally Posted by caine007

Awesome post Kapitan, thanks.

I've always been curious if the super-cavitating Shkval torpedo was a tactical game changer or not. Any thoughts?

At first I was like, "This thing is instant death" but after thinking about it a bit it seems like it's almost a step backwards having no real control or guidance?

300km/h is pretty nuts though and I guess it's not that hard guessing where a Supercarrier will be in the next few minutes but hitting a sub seems harder.

I definitely get the impression it's meant as a hard kill counter-measure (with or without nuclear weapons) or you strap a nuke to it, which makes it easier to hit a submarine. I've also seen someone mention that, with a nuclear warhead, it's meant to take out a boomer that is about to launch its missiles.

[609_Avatar]

Wow, Kapitan, that was quite the informative post! Thank you very much for sharing all that, great reading and very helpful. S! sir!

[Kapitan]

Originally Posted by caine007

Awesome post Kapitan, thanks.

I've always been curious if the super-cavitating Shkval torpedo was a tactical game changer or not. Any thoughts?

At first I was like, "This thing is instant death" but after thinking about it a bit it seems like it's almost a step backwards having no real control or guidance?

300km/h is pretty nuts though and I guess it's not that hard guessing where a Supercarrier will be in the next few minutes but hitting a sub seems harder.

The VA-111 is designed for a specific purpose to carry a nuclear warhead to the centre of a carrier group and detonate, it doesnt need to make contact with any hull or even be near by to cause huge effect.

The Skhval (VA-111) is a very impressive weapon and until recently the only one of its type in the world, the Chinese have copied it as have the Iranians and the Germans also tried it out.

While the Torpedo is extremely fast giving a submarine or a ship little to no chance of evasive manoeuvres it does have a drawback a big one, it has limited range and it is a big weapon.



Now bear in mind this is 1970's technology the range of the first generation Skhval which is a straight running torpedo and cannot be direct once launched it has a range of only 5-6nm and a nuclear blast of 20kt would affect the firing submarine yet a conventional warhead if it was to far away from target would do little.

Skhval 2 the more up to date version which came about in the mid 1990's offers up a guidance system with a vectored thrust possibility as yet not confirmed this means it does have some guidance system on board which may explain its wieght increase from 2.6tons to just over 3tons.
Skhval 2 also has a better range but still not anywhere near a conventional torpedo like the MK48 or Stingray although its speed is still there, the range of the Skhval 2 is estimated by the west to be between 12 and 15nm.
less advanced versions are for sale on the open market hence why China and Iran have shown interest.



The nose cone is movable and creates a bubble of gas in which the torpedo flies through thus it has been stated that it does have a guidance system in place, plus its seen to have movable fins too.



The back end also lends to speculation that it is in fact guided, look at the 5 o clock position there is what looks like a multi pin socket for wire guidance which again leads us to review that this could be steerable.

To be honest the technology is not mature enough i dont think to be of real value it is a show weapon the reality is the conventional torpedoes like the MK48's have much longer legs plus they are coupled with a very very good sensor systems for data collection and analysis the chances of getting the Russian boat close enough to fire one of these at a western submarine is slim.

however against an unsuspecting CVBG in some where like the Persian Gulf this would be extremely effective especially if nuclear tipped or sent by a conventional submarine sitting on the bottom in a littoral area (and yes project 636 Kilo can fire these).

[Ansgar Burkhard]

Originally Posted by Kapitan

The VA-111 is designed for a specific purpose to carry a nuclear warhead to the centre of a carrier group and detonate, it doesnt need to make contact with any hull or even be near by to cause huge effect.

The Skhval (VA-111) is a very impressive weapon and until recently the only one of its type in the world, the Chinese have copied it as have the Iranians and the Germans also tried it out.

While the Torpedo is extremely fast giving a submarine or a ship little to no chance of evasive manoeuvres it does have a drawback a big one, it has limited range and it is a big weapon.



Now bear in mind this is 1970's technology the range of the first generation Skhval which is a straight running torpedo and cannot be direct once launched it has a range of only 5-6nm and a nuclear blast of 20kt would affect the firing submarine yet a conventional warhead if it was to far away from target would do little.

Skhval 2 the more up to date version which came about in the mid 1990's offers up a guidance system with a vectored thrust possibility as yet not confirmed this means it does have some guidance system on board which may explain its wieght increase from 2.6tons to just over 3tons.
Skhval 2 also has a better range but still not anywhere near a conventional torpedo like the MK48 or Stingray although its speed is still there, the range of the Skhval 2 is estimated by the west to be between 12 and 15nm.
less advanced versions are for sale on the open market hence why China and Iran have shown interest.



The nose cone is movable and creates a bubble of gas in which the torpedo flies through thus it has been stated that it does have a guidance system in place, plus its seen to have movable fins too.



The back end also lends to speculation that it is in fact guided, look at the 5 o clock position there is what looks like a multi pin socket for wire guidance which again leads us to review that this could be steerable.

To be honest the technology is not mature enough i dont think to be of real value it is a show weapon the reality is the conventional torpedoes like the MK48's have much longer legs plus they are coupled with a very very good sensor systems for data collection and analysis the chances of getting the Russian boat close enough to fire one of these at a western submarine is slim.

however against an unsuspecting CVBG in some where like the Persian Gulf this would be extremely effective especially if nuclear tipped or sent by a conventional submarine sitting on the bottom in a littoral area (and yes project 636 Kilo can fire these).

Or launched by a swarm of fast attack boats in the persian gulf against a carrier battlegroup.

[Kapitan]

Currently the only type of submarine in the Persian gulf that can fire these weapons are the Kilo's its unlikely they would volley fire as not all the torpedo tubes are set up for such a weapon

Currently Iran has only 3 Kilos of the non improved type 877

[Shadriss]

Originally Posted by shipkiller1

Spoken like a true boomer sailor...
I made twelve deployments up north and yes, they really might employ active. Especially during a baffle clear...
Now though, with better sensors afforded to them, no so much.

But as you know, active is not the 'God like' sensor most people think it is...


FTCS(SS/SW)
1980-2004

Oh, I was also qualified Sonar Sup....

Oh, I did a little Fast boat time, Senior. Granted no deployments, but I got to see a little of the other side. Your point about using active for baffle clears is well made, but that certainly isn't what's going on in game terms here, which is the original question I think. And you are certainly right about the limitations of active as well - not remotely the god-like sensor games make it out to be. In another time and place, I would lament about the misinformation at length, but yeah...

As to Kapitan's post, yes, a nice write-up. The OSCAR won't be vanishing anytime soon, but at least initial replacement units are making it's way into the fleet in the form of the SEVERODVINSK SSGN. Not many in service, and they are some... interesting boats, shall we say... but they are capable. The TYPHOONs are all but out of service and have been for some time, so that fleet aspect is basically being covered by the DELTA IIIs and IVs, though they've got help coming in the form of the DOLGORUKY SSBN that's hit the fleet in the last few years as well. AKULA II isn't going anywhere anytime soon either... it's still the best attack boat they have, and they have been concentrating more on the strategic mission than ever before, so it's not likely to change soon.

They're still behind, but the gap gets closer all the time.

[Kapitan]

Originally Posted by Shadriss

Oh, I did a little Fast boat time, Senior. Granted no deployments, but I got to see a little of the other side. Your point about using active for baffle clears is well made, but that certainly isn't what's going on in game terms here, which is the original question I think. And you are certainly right about the limitations of active as well - not remotely the god-like sensor games make it out to be. In another time and place, I would lament about the misinformation at length, but yeah...

As to Kapitan's post, yes, a nice write-up. The OSCAR won't be vanishing anytime soon, but at least initial replacement units are making it's way into the fleet in the form of the SEVERODVINSK SSGN. Not many in service, and they are some... interesting boats, shall we say... but they are capable. The TYPHOONs are all but out of service and have been for some time, so that fleet aspect is basically being covered by the DELTA IIIs and IVs, though they've got help coming in the form of the DOLGORUKY SSBN that's hit the fleet in the last few years as well. AKULA II isn't going anywhere anytime soon either... it's still the best attack boat they have, and they have been concentrating more on the strategic mission than ever before, so it's not likely to change soon.

They're still behind, but the gap gets closer all the time.

The last Oscar was launched in 1996 K-150 Tomsk she is due for mid life refit and slated for upgrade to Project 949AM which is deleting the SS-N-19 missiles for Land attack missiles, We should see these submarines still about into the late 2020's atleast.
On another foot note to the Oscar the Belogorad which is a heavily modified and Lengthened submarine (now the longest in the world) launched this year she too was originally an Oscar II and will be around probably beyond 2035.

Typhoons only one is active TK208 but that should be going into layup this year or early next year they may keep it on but it all depends on the funds TK17 & TK20 have been in layup sine 2004 and wont return to service TK210 TK13 TK202 have already been cut up.
The Delta III and IV are being replaced by the Borei's and its likely the last Delta III will be gone by 2020 with the delta IV not far behind by 2025, so far only 12 Bories are slated for completion (replacing 14 boats)

The 4 modified Victor III (Victor IV) and early Akula's (Project 971) are slated to be replaced with the 12 Yasens that are on order, while the Akula Improved versions and Sierra's are slated to continue on into the 2020's, so far no replacement is announced and no commitment to further 6 Yasens options are on the drawing board

[The Bandit]

Originally Posted by Kapitan

The last Oscar was launched in 1996 K-150 Tomsk she is due for mid life refit and slated for upgrade to Project 949AM which is deleting the SS-N-19 missiles for Land attack missiles, We should see these submarines still about into the late 2020's atleast.
On another foot note to the Oscar the Belogorad which is a heavily modified and Lengthened submarine (now the longest in the world) launched this year she too was originally an Oscar II and will be around probably beyond 2035.

Typhoons only one is active TK208 but that should be going into layup this year or early next year they may keep it on but it all depends on the funds TK17 & TK20 have been in layup sine 2004 and wont return to service TK210 TK13 TK202 have already been cut up.
The Delta III and IV are being replaced by the Borei's and its likely the last Delta III will be gone by 2020 with the delta IV not far behind by 2025, so far only 12 Bories are slated for completion (replacing 14 boats)

The 4 modified Victor III (Victor IV) and early Akula's (Project 971) are slated to be replaced with the 12 Yasens that are on order, while the Akula Improved versions and Sierra's are slated to continue on into the 2020's, so far no replacement is announced and no commitment to further 6 Yasens options are on the drawing board

If I'm not mistaken the only Typhoon left was just for Bulava missile testing and no longer has any strategic role. They made some noise a few years earlier about dragging the other two out of moth-balls but that was before all of these sanctions and the like, can only imagine what a nightmare getting something like that which has been sitting around for 10+ years sea-worthy and operational again, just as well off to build something new.

[Kapitan]

Originally Posted by The Bandit

If I'm not mistaken the only Typhoon left was just for Bulava missile testing and no longer has any strategic role. They made some noise a few years earlier about dragging the other two out of moth-balls but that was before all of these sanctions and the like, can only imagine what a nightmare getting something like that which has been sitting around for 10+ years sea-worthy and operational again, just as well off to build something new.

TK17 and TK20 have been de-fueled and in layup since 2004 they are slated for scrap and will not return to service TK17 is on the list to go in .

TK208 is not only a test platform she is fully capable of conducting a deterrent patrol and does as buluva missile are now fully operational and installed in the Borei class

They are building new rather than recommissioning old units in fact TK208 is the oldest of all typhoons dating from 1977 while TK20 Severstal is the youngest coming into service 1989.

It is unlikely the typhoons that are laid up will ever return to sea they would cost too much the same goes for the 4th and likely the 3rd Kirov cruisers too.

As for the current sanctions it hasn't affected Russia as massively as the west hoped the IMF is still forecasting growth.

[Shadriss]

Just for reference, the Borei talked about above is the same as the DOLGORUKIY class I mentioned - one is the "local" name, and the other is the NATO designation. For example, the TYPHOON is the NATO designation... the Russian designation is Akula (Russian for 'shark').

So yeah - 1 TYPHOON has been used as a test bed platform as mentioned, two others are scrapped, and the remaining one has been powering local towns for a decade or so. She's essentially welded to the pier, and won't be going anywhere any time soon.

[ollie1983]

Impressive write ups and historical perspectives.

The Sovs knew full well their submarines were not up to par, hence their reliance on ground based strategic weapons which the West largely neglected.

The same was true of aviation. NATO made no real push for SAM/AAA capabilities because they had fleets of fighters and AEW and tankers for these as well.

Much of the vaunted Russian hordes was myth, perpetrated by the need to keep the Cold war going which did wonders for defence spending. In reality the country was half broke.

[Kapitan]

Dont write off the Soviets so quickly, in certain areas they were and in some cases still are more advanced than the west.

They remain the only country ever to serially produce a large military submarine not once but twice with two other experimental boats.




Project 705 Lira (7 built) NATO Code name Alfa initially rated to 900 meters, later on cracks were found in the hull which meant they were restricted to 450 meters, these submarines could sustain 42 knots with a burst speed of 45 knots for a short period, their main draw back was their 5 bladed screw and they made more noise than a Metallica concert.

The next type of titanium submarine was the Project 945 & 945A class (2 Barracuda and 2 Kondor class or NATO code name Sierra I & II) they look similar to the Project 971 Akula's but are much heavier their weapons are the same similar speed profiles and acoustic dampening and here is the difference while the steel hull of the Akula allows for diving to around 550 meters the Titanium hull of the sierra's allow it to go much deeper 850 meters.
How strong is that hull? why not ask the 1992 crew of the K-276 Kastroma, while submerged the Kastroma collided with the Los Angeles class submarine USS Baton Rouge SSN 689 the damage to the Baton rouge was deemed so severe the vessel was deemed uneconomical to repair and scrapped, the Kastroma suffered Minor damage to her sail and now wears a kill star.





Other titanium boats include the lone Project 661 Anchar whc=ich holds the worlds fastest sustained under water speed record at 44.7 knots this is her back end just prior to her scrapping.



And probably the most famous yet ill fated the Lone Project 685 Plavnik or NATO Code named Mike class, which still holds the world record for deepest diving military submarine at 1020 meters, in 1989 she would catch fire in the Norwegian sea and sink with the loss of 42 of her crew.



Before you say it the USN has the seawolf class SSN yes i know it can dive to over 600 meters, however she isn't made of titanium she is made of HY130 steel unlike the 688's, Virginia' Trafalgar Swifsures and Astutes which are made of HY80 steel

What about weapons then? well as above the Russians have the only working and usable rocket powered torpedo proving the technology is Workable, the initial launch in 1977 shows that they were somewhat ahead for their time whats more the torpedo was updated in the mid 90's


Want to know another thing that is used to this day by of all people NASA ?

The NK33 rocket engines and variants of it used a closed system saving alot of fuel plus giving more power in a smaller motor, created in the 1960's ! it was deemed by NASA after a very large expenditure that the system was un workable and unsafe.
Variants of that NK33 engine now power the Atlas and Antares rockets they have also powered a lot of other ones too, it is also likely that a variant will be used in the Ariane 6 rocket for the ESA.
This particular engine group is also fitted to nearly every single type of ballistic missile in the Russian arsenal, whats more variants power the vintage 1957 designed R7 Semyorka rocket which even to this day is used not only by the Russian's but also but crews heading to the ISS Since 2011 when the shuttle programme ended in the USA this old girl plus her vostok capsule also of 50's vintage is currently the only way to the ISS from Baikanor Kazakhstan


Also it is worth while to note this last piece il give you, in 1999 over Sarajevo the F117A Night hawk stealth jet was shot down by a ground based SAM system called S-125 Neva / Prechora which was a derivative of the SA-2 Guidline that in 1962 took down Garry Powers U2 in Russia and Rudolf Andersons U2 in Cuba, a vintage missile system.

Brace yourself for the following picture.......

Chernobyl 2017 by Blair shaw, on Flickr

This is myself standing in front of one of the largest over the horizon radar arrays, this array is located near the Chernobyl nuclear power plant the array dubbed Chernobyl 2 was able to send a signal around the earth, much to the annoyance of every ham radio operator in western Europe, this array code named steel yard proved that radio waves could bounce around the ionosphere and stratosphere which led the way to the Phased array radars we see today at places like RAF Flying Dales in Yorkshire, again the Russians proved it could work it was improved upon massively by the west specifically the USA and developed greatly and today you have systems such as Aegis and Sampson because of this development.

[JhonSilver]

Originally Posted by ollie1983

myth, perpetrated by the need to keep the Cold war going

The maritime strategy of the USSR, developed by the mid-sixties, was actually formulated as follows:
the flot of the USSR should, in any variants of conflict development, to destroy terrestrial objects on the territory of the enemy and inflict a paralleling impact on the marine nuclear power component for prevention of a nuclear strike across the USSR.
the main form of combat operations was the application of missile and nuclear missile strikes.


The first day of the 1968 campaign should look like this - the melted wreckage of the submarine against the background of a megaton nuclear explosion over the Holy-Loch base

There were no interceptions of NATO convoys. Because the war should be over in 2 weeks. And the first convoy would not come until three weeks later.


-------------
So that Tom Clancy was, to put it mildly, fantasizing

[denis_469]

Originally Posted by Kapitan

Project 705 Lira (7 built) NATO Code name Alfa initially rated to 900 meters, later on cracks were found in the hull which meant they were restricted to 450 meters, these submarines could sustain 42 knots with a burst speed of 45 knots for a short period, their main draw back was their 5 bladed screw and they made more noise than a Metallica concert.

You not right. Depth limit was 700 meters or 2297 feet. Maximal speed was 41 knots. And subs was silence like Kilo submarine. What you write about noisy was special. In few orders submarine must very nisy so covert other submarines go. After receive order submarine 705 project go in depth few then 100 meters an start flank speed. Start very noisy and US SOSUS system can not detect other submarines with less noisy. But in normal Alfa subs was silence like Kilo class so use electric motors.

Originally Posted by Kapitan

The next type of titanium submarine was the Project 945 & 945A class (2 Barracuda and 2 Kondor class or NATO code name Sierra I & II) they look similar to the Project 971 Akula's but are much heavier their weapons are the same similar speed profiles and acoustic dampening and here is the difference while the steel hull of the Akula allows for diving to around 550 meters the Titanium hull of the sierra's allow it to go much deeper 850 meters.
How strong is that hull? why not ask the 1992 crew of the K-276 Kastroma, while submerged the Kastroma collided with the Los Angeles class submarine USS Baton Rouge SSN 689 the damage to the Baton rouge was deemed so severe the vessel was deemed uneconomical to repair and scrapped, the Kastroma suffered Minor damage to her sail and now wears a kill star.

So it is submarines now so depth diving is secret.

Originally Posted by Kapitan

Other titanium boats include the lone Project 661 Anchar whc=ich holds the worlds fastest sustained under water speed record at 44.7 knots this is her back end just prior to her scrapping.

Papa depth was 400 meters or 1312 feet.

[The Bandit]

From what I've read the Baton Rogue incident is often overblown in terms of the damage that the boat actually suffered. She wasn't immediately decommissioned and if any repairs were deferred it was just as likely due to the peace dividend as much as anything else. Two other early 688s were decommed at the same time as Baton Rogue (Omaha and Cinncinati), they hadn't been involved in collisions, its just that they were considered surplus and the Navy had decided not to spend the $$ to refuel them.

From what I recall, the collision between USS ?Grayling or Greenling? and an Echo II was quite a bit worse (the US captain feared that the Soviets sunk) but both boats survived and were put back in service.

For all the flak they get about being second rate, even without taking titanium into account, as far as metallurgy goes the Soviets were ahead pretty much from the time the Foxtrot hit the water, with the Victor class being built out of steel that exceeds HY100 (Seawolf was HY100 by the way, not HY130 which is what the CONFORM design from the 70s was supposed to be made from) and this was in the late 60s! Their double-hull designs were typically stronger, with more reserve buoyancy and greater resistance to damage (most designs could survive the loss of one full compartment and associated ballast tanks) so they did have a lot going for them.

While the argument has been made that the Soviet boats are quieter than given credit for (so maybe they weren't as far behind in this area as often said) I don't think any argument can be made for how much they lagged behind in the electronics department and I do agree with the notion that for probably the entire Cold War the Americans had the upper hand (better electronics / sonar and superior silencing techniques) but the "inferior" Soviet foe was not to be taken lightly.

The other thing that I will say, which is kind of ironic when you compare the backgrounds of the respective countries, looking at what they had to work with, I think the Russians were more creative with their submarine designs, mainly because they had to be. They were aware of their weaknesses / disadvantages and tried to work around them as best they could, coming up with many innovative designs in the process.