What was the alfa really like?

[SquidB]

Hi,

Im reading Rising Tide by Dr Gary E. Weir and Walter J. Boyne. It details russian sub ops throughout the cold war.

Anyway heres the thing, I always thought that the akula, dispite its titanniam hull didnt have the massive dive depth it was credited for. Also it was a noisy sod.

Now check this out.

"Occasionally Kolyada would discover a Los Angeles class boat on his tail. They usaually made no secret about their approach, falling in behind him to see how Kolyada would evade. After a short joust, which would frequently bring both submarines disturbingly close to each other, Kolyada would accelerate and go deep. His titanium submarine , capable of diving to 3,000 feet, could ultimatly go where only American sonar or SOSUS could follow. If he slowed to a patrol-quiet six knots or less at great depth, finding him could well prove impossible"

Now the authors seem to have done their research and the book is a recent one (2003)

So is it time we re-evaluated the Alfa?

[Amizaur]

From what I know - in the 80s it was known that Alfa is very fast (42kts) and build with titanium, so everybody assumed that titanium hull means very deep diving sub (like the Mike class). And this belief had it's impact on both western weapons design (increased depth for ADCAP and fast deep diving Mk50) and novels written in this time and early 90s.
Now when the secrecy is lower and it's known much more about details of cold-war designed weapons (and about m most new designs too) it was revealed that titanium was used for mass saving, not deep diving, and Alfa was very fast but not especially deep-divin (IIRC 300m operational depth). It was supposed to evade enemy subs and weapons by speed alone.
The ultimate deep diving design was the Mike class (Konsomolec), which was lost in an accident and no more were build. IIRC again, it's (Mike)design had influence on later Sierra boats with not 3000ft but still quite good dive depth. And the more conventional Akula class is quite deep-diving too, again no 1000m but about 600 is better than most western designs. I had info about 520m operational depth for Akula, but Kapitan says he knows for sure that it can go to over 600m.
And one more thing - the Akula is build not with titanium, but with conventional high-strength steel :-). This means MUCH lower cost and was the reason (among with fact that it had very similar capabilites that expensive titanium hull Sierra) that it was chosen to be primary Russian hunter-killer submarine.

[SquidB]

Yeh thats what i thought, however here we have evidence from a primary source, that the alfa could indeed go to 3000 feet.

So is the above book wrong? Is the russian captian who they interviewed for the story telling us porkies? Or is this new info that the could indeed go as deep as originally thought.?

:hmm:

[Bellman]

Should we not naturaly expect some muddying of pools in this area ?

Who really has THE truth ?

[SquidB]

Think your right bellman, Thing is im more inclined to belive a russian source on what the Alfa could do rather than a Nato intelligence prospective. After all, correct me if im wrong but havent the alfas be retired now? (Kapitan?).

[Kapitan]

as it goes alfa can go to 45 knots as stated in the guiness book of records if you care to look

she could dive to 900 meters but only if totaly needed other than that they ussualy didnt go past 500 meters

as reliability goes these subs were some of the worst many sufferd reactor damage called golden fish by the crew

all were laid up by 1980's only one K123 saw service into 1995 and was retired

[SquidB]

So for the record then, 900m = approx 3000ft. If that was their crush depth then the surely could hang around at say 800m without any ill effects?

I understand the reators were awful (liquid metal cooled?) and this plus the massive cost of producing them lead to the early retirement of the class..

As for the speed i never doubted that, just had always read the depth at what these things were supposed to operate at was a myth created on the whole by Clancey and bad intelligence.

Now it seems that they were right all along....or am i missing something?

[Kapitan]

yep sure was right intel doesnt allways stand up

fas.org and other sites dont always give the right info

[PeriscopeDepth]

What's your source Kapitain?

[Takeda Shingen]

The OK-550/BM-40A (types 705/705K) reactor was a liquid metal reactor that suffered from the same problem that all reactors of this type have. That is, the metal cools at the far end of the loop, restricting and eventually eliminating flow of coolant.

Also, the small crew requirements created shortages in repair and maintainance abilities, and required the boats to operate with a level of automation that too far beyond the Soviet technologic capablities of the time.

With a test depth listed at only 400 meters (appox. 1300 ft.), the Alfa could, in fact, not operate at the 600-900 meters that was estimated by the US and British intelligence agencies.

EDIT: Source is Cold War Submarines, The Design and Construction of US and Soviet Submarines by Norman Polmar and K. J. Moore, 2004. Pgs 140-146.

[Kapitan]

collectivity on all sources based on factual information which does include fas.org and other such sites

also included are people who have served on them yes all two of them (i only kno two people who have worked on the al'fa class)

after i collect all the information i asses each individualy under non bias conditions and work out an average

i have sources claiming that the al'fa dives to 500 meters others 800 some even as deep as 3000 meters

its exactly what im doing with my kursk project only the kursk project "big red" is going to take alot longer so far i have spent 4 and a half years on it and im not even half way done

[SquidB]

With a test depth listed at only 400 meters (appox. 1300 ft.), the Alfa could, in fact, not operate at the 600-900 meters that was estimated by the US and British intelligence agencies.

_________________

Lol the plot thickens, So then whats the russian sub commander on about? Or is this just misinformation?

Whats your souce Takeda? Can anyone back up Kapitian or the book?

Edit..ah didnt see your edit you must of done it as i was writing this.

I also have "cold war submarines" and that it mentioned the vastly shallower depth was no surprise. Strange two well researched books both by american authors should get it wrong (well ones worng at least right?)

[Takeda Shingen]

EDIT: Source is Cold War Submarines, The Design and Construction of US and Soviet Submarines by Norman Polmar and K. J. Moore, 2004. Pgs 140-146.

[Kapitan]

british america french even german all said same

in the early 80's a 688 trailed a al'fa only to loose her due to the fact she out dived and out ran the trailing sub

according to the records

now the 688 dives to 1600 feet yet the al'fa out dived it indicating a depth below 1600 feet which is below 400 meters

NATO has also demed the al'fa vertualy indistructable by lightwieght torpedos but can be destroyed by an ADCAP or tigerfish

[Kapitan]

according to a book dedicated to the project 705 and 705k it differs very much it is written in russian so not many will understand but it outlines every part of the al'fa class if i can get to it il post more