The greatest submarine design ever.

Any plans to put an AIP in the Collins class?

Thanks Blackcat , Yes Roel posted it .

Yes The Fuel Cell AIP is also offered to the IN 209 subs as part of its upgradation plan, Since the IN has not made up its mind on the AIP and the German Fuel Cell is preffered over others , Its possible the IN might standardise on its AIP based on German Fuel Cell on its Scorpene , T-209 and may be Amur in the future.

Perhaps Neptune can again post the Lada Launch Image once again which clearly showed the sub 7 blade skew prop.

c’mon man, the Amur launching picture was posted a bit back by Role in the fora … here are 2 of them ….

btw, which was the image at PR, shall i see it?

How many 209’s have been sold. French had their daphne and agosta . Russian kilo class may give competition in numbers. The type-209s are very limited subs due to their inability to fire missiles.

The type 209 not only can fire missiles (after upgrade) ,but also take AIP (the hull is cut after the conning tower and the AIP section is inserted and then reassembled all together).Greece has upgraded in the 90s 4 209/1100 with sub-Harpoon capability (among other things) and is currently putting AIP to 3 209/1200.It has proven to be one of the most versatile submarines ever made.

If anybody is intersted in reading “Rising Tide: The Untold Story of the Soviet Submarines that fought the Cold War”, please tell me (via PM) I have the book on e-book format, but don’t want to post the link right here due to copyright thingies

P.S: If you’re talking about of anecoic or rubber coat (like on the external hull), let me say that most of the third generation Russian boats have them too…RSM55 talked at lenght about them, advantages ar cons, and this is not a british invention 😀

Hey Guys

Some “food for thought” here, isn’t that “so-balanced” article, but it raises some very good points in the “Diesel vs Nuclear boats” in the USN environment…

Sometimes the article (very large article!) could be very off of mark, but it is good in the overall…

http://www.g2mil.com/thompson.htm

Have fun

P.S: I want to see the propellors of the two last Indian Kilo subs…they came from the last ex-soviet stocks of 877M…very different Paltus than the 877/877EKM iteration…with 7 bladed skewed propellor and lot of noise reduction mechanism

P.S2: Austin and Pesho will send promised info in the afternoon

Hi GF , Yes I saw that Image in PR at that time , It was the image when the sub was being taken to the yard for upgradation , she came from India for the same purpose , IIRC it had a 5 blade prop (merchie) , Now that was prior to the upgrade.

I do agree that Kilo’s are not that quite , But the upgradation was also a major one , It took a year or two to be done , Have a look at one of the upgraded Indian Kilo , Unfortunately you cant make out clearly the propellor from the pic ,But looks like a skewed one.

http://www.star.ru/fotocor2.JPG

Neptune has also suggested that they might be changing their prop after the media photoshoot.

Perhaps Neptune can again post the Lada Launch Image once again which clearly showed the sub 7 blade skew prop.

Welcome GF , Nice To see you .

I have not seen pic of any Indian Kilo ( the upgraded ones ) with their propellors shown , If you have any pics of the same , Please post it.

But I dont know what does the term modern propellor from Russia means , The 636 has a 7 blade skewed propellor , some time back Neptune had posted the pic of the Lada clearly showing the 7 blade skewed propellor.

But it would not be wrong to say that the Upgraded Kilo would have received a 7 Blade prop , The original ones had a 5 Blade prop.

Kilo 636 prop

Gidday Austin. I’m pretty sure that one of the Russian navy guys posted it on Proton River about 8-9 months ago. He had access to the construction area and so was able to post the image. He no longer posts on PR though as he disagreed with the new forum rules on using names etc…

It was definitely Indias latest sub – and it definitely had a “merchie” non skewed screw. I remember speaking offline at one stage to Francois about it as he works with subs as well. I remember we sent a few emails back and forth to each other as it seemed a stupid thing to do just to save money.

Kilo’s are not that quiet – and putting on the “merchie” style screw was just stupid in both of our opinions.

Welcome GF , Nice To see you .

f you’re talking about the latest Indian Kilo then it does not have the latest propellor on it

I have not seen pic of any Indian Kilo ( the upgraded ones ) with their propellors shown , If you have any pics of the same , Please post it.

But I dont know what does the term modern propellor from Russia means , The 636 has a 7 blade skewed propellor , some time back Neptune had posted the pic of the Lada clearly showing the 7 blade skewed propellor.

But it would not be wrong to say that the Upgraded Kilo would have received a 7 Blade prop , The original ones had a 5 Blade prop.

Kilo 636 prop

Sorry if it sounds offensive, but it’s a bit naïve to believe those results are genuine

In the case of the RIMPAC 2004 (Ex Silent Fury) results the exercise was indeed serious. The post exercise results make it quite clear.

Rankin was up against all of DF-31, 2 x P3C Squadrons out of Hawa’i/Guam plus an extra 3 skimmers out of the 7th Fleet core assests. DF-31 is the pre-eminent ASW Squadron in the USN – it is tasked to teach other fleet assets the “art”.

At the last UDT I attended in Hawai’i it was made patently clear that the USN was committed to attacking and sinking Sheehan and Rankin. The boats actually made noise in the end so as to prove presence. Bear in mind that Rankin was also attacking from the shore side and within territorials and thus in a vulnerable position.

I would have spoken to any number of 7th Fleet pers who indicated a desire to have a Collins short squadron in place as a permanent aggressor squadron.

As a side note – the Gotland is referred to as “mini-me Collins” as they are a smaller scale version. it (Gotland) lacks the same onboard power (and hence processing strengths) and they definitely don’t have the same power in their arrays. The advantage for the US is that they get to train against AIP, and they can compare raw data against known Collins data (and there are some peripheral similarities)

Well, I do think that the Kilo and Akula have more modern propellers than the (contemporary!) Västergötland, which surprised me aswell. I can post pictures if you want (need to scan the A17 picture from a book though). If my layman’s assessment is true the Russian props can’t be too bad, given the reputation the Swedes have!

If you’re talking about the latest Indian Kilo then it does not have the latest propellor on it. The image posted on some Russian sites shows a first generation Kilo prop, It’s the heavy 4 bladed hay chopper. The Russians AFAIL have not included their latest props on any of their export models – and the Indian Kilo is the most recent export model photographed to date.

Of course, one thing sounds strange to me? Why exactly would the SSN need “huge turbines” to generate electricity? An SSK makes it from the salt in the water??? They as well use turbines.

The sole SSKs to use turbines are MESMA equipped Agostas and Scorpenes (disregarding the experimental Walter turbines). For a Kilo (and basically any other diesel-electric boat without AIP) that is not running on the surface or snorkeling the only moving parts in the propulsion system are the electric motor, shaft and propeller. Incidentally, this is one of the reasons why a fuel cell such as the German one on the U212 or the Russian Kristall is ideal for submarines, it generates electricity without any moving parts whatsoever.

In a normal nuke sub OTOH you have the steam turbine(s) (which are driven by the steam coming from the reactor), the reduction gear, the shaft and the propeller (I’m not mentioning the coolant-pumps, the are irrelevant when running at patrol speeds). A turbo-electric powerplant substitutes a generator/electric-motor combination for the reduction gear, with the advantage of better silencing (!) and the disadvantage of lower performance.

Silencing measures of differing quality can of course change this picture totally, but all such things equal SSKs ARE inherently more silent.

I do hope you are aware of the fact that the SeaWolf can reach speeds of up to 20kts with natural convection, gives you a slight idea of what the SSN does/can do nowadaysthese things are “rather” silent too.

😮 20 knots is very impressive!

Add to it that they have coatings on the inside which the Kilos don’t have and some extra measures to keep the noise from these reduction lockers and you have a fairly good idea how silent they are.

Do you mean a rubber coating, similar to the one on the outside? If so, the only SSN I know that has these is the Trafalgar class, infact the same book specifically mentions the 688i as not having any on the inside (it is said to use different ‘softer’ tiles on the outside to achieve the same effect). I’d be quite interested to hear your sources though, I’m unsure if my book is to be trusted.

There you have a point, the ART of building propellors, is an art mastered by the West. There’s little art about designing them, but the human touch in building them is the problem, it seems that the Russian props have had some bad human touch. I’ll try to upload some movies or pictures of rudder and propellor tests of time allows.

Well, I do think that the Kilo and Akula have more modern propellers than the (contemporary!) Västergötland, which surprised me aswell. I can post pictures if you want (need to scan the A17 picture from a book though). If my layman’s assessment is true the Russian props can’t be too bad, given the reputation the Swedes have!

Not really the SSK are still the masters of Liotrral waters just as the SSN are the masters of open ocean , SSK are definately quiter than any quite SSN outthere for the simple reason that they dont use Nuclear Reacort and those huge Turbines to generate electricity , The SSK on the other hand relies on Batteries for power , Why on earth do you think that USN is building those special Litoral capable Virginia class SSN.

Of course, one thing sounds strange to me? Why exactly would the SSN need “huge turbines” to generate electricity? An SSK makes it from the salt in the water??? They as well use turbines.
Have you ever heard the sound of a nuclear reactor? I don’t think so… As they’re damn silent, it doesn’t make the sound of a missile blowing near your ears…
I do hope you are aware of the fact that the SeaWolf can reach speeds of up to 20kts with natural convection, gives you a slight idea of what the SSN does/can do nowadaysthese things are “rather” silent too. The Reduction gear, well they really know why they have so many people in the engine room, if you keep those things well kept and use their bearings. Add to it that they have coatings on the inside which the Kilos don’t have and some extra measures to keep the noise from these reduction lockers and you have a fairly good idea how silent they are. Without the possibility of course of telling how silent (in dB) they are, as said, due to age and wearing of these bearings it becomes a bit more noisy, certainly broadening the frequency range.

I haven’t seen anyone from USN acknowledge this fact either, as Vaiar said, they do take it more seriously as North Korea and Iran also posses small submarines, they are just being cautious.

Also you might be aware that just recently the Australian Collins outsmarted the Improved Losangeles Class sub in an exercise .

Yes of course, and did you hear about that Walrus class SSK that outsmarted both Ohio and LA classes and of the U-209s that outsmarted an LA and of the MiG-21 that beat the F-15 and of the US Seals being beaten like a bunch of pussies and amateurs by the Dutch, French and other special forces? Of course… It all happened you know… Sorry if it sounds offensive, but it’s a bit naïve to believe those results are genuine, if those exercises with US were all so real, then why should Iraq have feared US? And why did Sadam’s forces lose of US forces, if the latter are just a bunch of losers?

There you have a point, the ART of building propellors, is an art mastered by the West. There’s little art about designing them, but the human touch in building them is the problem, it seems that the Russian props have had some bad human touch. I’ll try to upload some movies or pictures of rudder and propellor tests of time allows.

Now with modern ultra quite sub like Scorpene,U-212/214 & Amur the SSK still remains the undisputed leaded in Lotoral water , Even the USN acknowledges the fact.

Where do they acknowledge that SSK’s triumph SSN’s anytime in coastal waters? From the Swedish Gotland, USN exercises against Chilean U-209’s and a renewed emphasis on ASW; we can only conclude that the USN regards the SSK as a serious opponent capable of disrupting operations a theater of conflict, but absolutely not that the SSK beats the SSN on average in such circumstances.

Indeed, and how do you actually think they tapped those cables???? Indeed, as far as I know that was with submarines and what does that mean? That Russian ASW sucks?

Well the Soviets actually believed that no would would ever bother to Tap the underwater cable in its own territory , and thats the reason they didnt even bother to encrypt their communication , The Americans did the smartest thing there took a special sub and tapped the cable itself , It was a Billion Dollar operation.

But The Soviets from their sources in the NSA got wind of the opertion and stopped using it and found the tap , Boom goes your Billion dollar.

Had nothing to do with their bad ASW there , Just a sense of complacency that such a thing would never happen.

They are not only built to outlast an SSK or just travel the ocean to reach all of the world, they are made to rule those areas too, to beat their opponents on their own ground (not to run away from them). Much like some fighters (I’m not really knowledgable in that area, I think the F-15?) are made to fly some distance and control that area.

Not really the SSK are still the masters of Liotrral waters just as the SSN are the masters of open ocean , SSK are definately quiter than any quite SSN outthere for the simple reason that they dont use Nuclear Reacort and those huge Turbines to generate electricity , The SSK on the other hand relies on Batteries for power , Why on earth do you think that USN is building those special Litoral capable Virginia class SSN.

Now with modern ultra quite sub like Scorpene,U-212/214 & Amur the SSK still remains the undisputed leaded in Lotoral water , Even the USN acknowledges the fact.

Also you might be aware that just recently the Australian Collins outsmarted the Improved Losangeles Class sub in an exercise .

(you could instead order some crewmembers to start throwing around with stuff too of course).

Thats the funniest thing I have ever heard in my life , Artificial Noise are nothing new , Every one uses it to mask the real noise of the sub, Even the USN in a report to the congress accepted that fact that Soviet subs could be using artificial noise genetrators to mask their real noise.Its kinda Cheap old trick.

As far as blade goes all modern sub like the U boats , Amur ,Scorpene are fitted with the Seven Blade Skewed Propellor , Quite a standard propellor for today sub. But I am sure the Build Quality and the Art remains a secret and thats where they differ with each other.

While natural convection cooling gets rid of the reactor pumps as a noise source at low speeds, won’t the reduction gear still be a problem (more so than an e-motor, anyway)?

The Akula and Kilo have pretty nice propellers from the images I’ve seen, seemingly more advanced than the A17 class, curiously enough (?).

I did tell you that my question was “who are these so-called specialists”? Anyhow, to explain further, “open literature” depends on who you are. There are things open to you, things open to me, things open to president Bush, all are different and how far “open” really is remains the question. Navy propellors are still made by commercial companies, whether these engineers can tell about it or not is really the question. They just do their job in the search for propellors with certain properties. There is a difference between a very inefficient cruiseship, navy and hydrographic ship propellor and a more efficient, but noisier, merchant propellor.
Other things to bear in mind is that propellors need an infinite amount of blades to reduce the load on the individual blades. Reducing the load makes less noise. Yet, infinite is not possible. So you go lower, 7 is the ideal number for now as strength of the blades is the issue there. An uneven number of blades is needed for a submarine as two blades will “attack” each horizontal rudder, giving a serious problem in stability. For Kilo that’s not much of a problem to have a 6 blade as she lacks the upper horizontal rudder, hence no problems with that number of blades.

Another thing here is that “noiselevel” is not really defined, the “difference” of 10dB might be in one frequency, yet in another frequency it might be totally adverse. Electric engines make noise too and stopping is something a nuclear one can do too.

They are not only built to outlast an SSK or just travel the ocean to reach all of the world, they are made to rule those areas too, to beat their opponents on their own ground (not to run away from them). Much like some fighters (I’m not really knowledgable in that area, I think the F-15?) are made to fly some distance and control that area.

And for the noise generators i thought that you mean permament one,not decoy.And yes Korund is noise generator

Not a permanent one, I think you (or I) misunderstood again. It’s just a device inside the submarine that makes some extra noise (you could instead order some crewmembers to start throwing around with stuff too of course). Korund is a decoy, shot away from the sub, in some way of course it indeed hides the submarine’s signature, yet it serves to distract weapons. The generators we mean here are generators that just make a different noiselevel, adding some loudness and probably different frequencies to the submarines sig, with that making it easier to the opponent to find it.

For propellor, US propellors are generally better made than any others, except for German ones and that really makes a difference for propellors.”
And you are one of the mentioned specialists?Is that your statement as propellor designer?

Not entirely a designer of them, but as the above might have shown you, I’m rather close to that, I can answer some questions on this area. Not all of course, been a while since I spent time in those courses.

Neptune you didn’t tell me what is your opinion on this:
“Information on the noise level of nuclear submarines is practically non-existent in the open literature. However, specialists have repeatedly said that the noise level of a nuclear submarine is higher than that of a diesel submarine running on batteries.This fact may be explained by several reasons. First, like a diesel submarine, a nuclear submarine may work at a minimal speed, running off the storage cells (batteries). However, the submarine’s nuclear reactor continues working and this is an additional source of noise. Second, the displacement for nuclear submarines usually exceeds, by several times, the displacement of diesel, and this requires a greater power to weight ratio. In our calculations we made the assumption that within a “quiet” mode the difference in noise level between strategic nuclear submarines and diesel submarines, which were developed at the same time, is 10 dB.”

And for the noise generators i thought that you mean permament one,not decoy.And yes Korund is noise generator.

“For propellor, US propellors are generally better made than any others, except for German ones and that really makes a difference for propellors.”
And you are one of the mentioned specialists?Is that your statement as propellor designer?

“As for the Inside, you think all that space is used for the reactor and the turbines”
Yes i forget the evaporator and electricity generators,as well meny water pumps,batteries and so…..but no living compartments or stored weapons.

Isnt it true that most electric subs are more silent than nuke ones when their diesels are shutdown? Its only the endurance of the nukes that make them so formidable. they can sit out anyone.

What makes you feel subs were tracked only when they were submerged , There were also ….. sub to get the job done.

Mate, i don’t know how to answere that. If you keep asking how, i guess my answere is i don’t know. Tracking in general parlance for sub is underwater.

As for other navies tracking LA’s. I believe we live in a world of exceptions.