Is Russia the global leader of submarine technology?

They have so many submarine types with special features.

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous
      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        What? Didn't India build a submarine recently that immediately sank?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yes but that was because they forgot to close all the hatches

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Submarines are supposed to d that.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Romeo class?

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They are good at making things that sink. Like their economy among others.

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      what's the point of a "Nuclear torpedo" ?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It's one of the newest russian Wunderwaffen. It was said to be armed with a very large warhead, travel autonomous at high speed and would explode near the coast to create some radioactive tsunami

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          you can't make a Tsunami, so they're either completely retarded or bluffing.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            why can't you make a tsunami?

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              A nuke has different power :
              -the explosion produce a ball of fire that can blind people who look at it and vaporize most living being inside
              -a heatwave, which can cause third degree burns
              -a shockwave, that can be more or less powerful depending on the bomb power, distance, many things.

              now explode your nuke underwater :
              -nobody can see the light, so no damage here
              -it's far colder than in surface, so no damage from the heatwave
              -the shockwave will be less powerful because : the water pressure will act as counterbalance, and water is heavier than air, so it will be more difficult to travel.
              -radioactivity from a nuke is narrow, so the radioactivity will be diluted in the open water.

              it will very much cause enough abnormality to be detected by most navies, expert, and military instruments : congratulation you did fuck all with a costly nuke, and now your enemy now you're using atomic weapons.
              just look at historical nuclear test in the pacific, the French and American did plenty of underwater detonation : no Tsunami.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                you're enemy knows*

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You need to displace a metric assload of water to make a tsunami, the largest nukes don't even get one thousandth of the way there.
                Flipping a tank with your bare hands would be significantly easier.

                wow thanks for the explanation I never realized how much power there is behind a tsunami
                It's almost pathetic and kind of humbling if you think of it. Even our most destructive weapons are capable of only a tiny part of the destruction that nature is capable of.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah, nature can get scary.

                The Russians believe their missiles will get shot down before reaching anywhere near the carrier group.
                Torpedoes, particularly very fast ones, are much more difficult to intercept compared to missiles.

                >torpedoes
                >hard to intercept
                Maneuverability at high speed goes to shit in water faster than in air, due to higher density and drag of the medium.
                Let's not even get into how going really fast underwater requires supercavitation, and supercavitation forces even more draconian constraints on maneuvering.

                A Granit might (at least theoretically) pull some pretty hard turns and maybe evade an interceptor, a Poseidon has literally no hope of dodging a standard torpedo looking for a collision course.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                It's hard to intercept because you can only find it by acoustics. A missile can be found by any radar on a large distance too, while you need to be very close to a sound source like this to hear it. That torpedo is said to move slowly to it's target in silent running mode and do an attack sprint at the last few km because it will be detected by that time.
                Another advantage would be that it can be place on the seabed as a second strike weapon. I think all these challenges can be overcome but at the moment most navies probably don't have a good way to defend themselves to this weapon

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Missiles can hide under the radar horizon by flying low, sea skimming ASMs aren't new tech, but torpedoes cannot evade sonar detection so easily (seabed skimming is usually not an option).
                Also, sonar works better than radar for volumetric scans, so even at low closing speed and with sound absorbing materials the enemy can pick up a torpedo-shaped hole and figure out what hides there.
                Assuming Russia managed to overcome those issues through high tech (lol), the result would be a carrier-killer weapon that takes several hours to reach its target: something only usable in a first strike, and Russia can't afford that.
                >rest on the seabed as a second strike weapon
                Hiding your nukes deep behind enemy lines, I wonder what could possibly go wrong with that?

                The Poseidon does the opposite of a plunge during its attack run. It first dives very deeply (remember that it has a 1 km diving depth, which is really deep), then shoots up almost vertically at max speed.
                Also, what anon here [...] said.

                Going deep doesn't make you less visible on sonar, same way going high doesn't make you less visible on radar: attenuation might help a bit if you were 10 km deep, but 1 km deep is nothing with modern sonar.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Going deep doesn't make you less visible on sonar
                You can have a bunch of thermoclines in 1 km of water. Remember that water isn't actually homogenous.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                No amount of naturally occurring thermal gradients is going to hide your closing velocity and resulting doppler shift, digital processing has simply improved too much.
                There's a reason the US spent so much time and effort on sonar tech: once you get it good enough, there's no hiding.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You're talking about active sonar right? Or a netwerk of hydrophones? Because I don't know how else you'll find the doppler shift.
                I'm actually going to develop a sonar system for a research agency here as my thesis for my masters degree in mechanical engineering. I'll start in a few weeks, still waiting for my clearance. Any advice on what to read as preparation?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Integrated Undersea Surveillance System(IUSS), which is Sound Surveillance System(SOSUS), and Surveillance Towed Array Sensor System(SURTASS) combined. All those integrated with Advanced Deployable System (ADS)

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yeah so a network. I'll be doing something similar as SOSUS but on a different scale. What would be good technical sources to expand my background in advance?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Find your own intel, Chang.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I'm Dutch, but thanks

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous
              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Of course you go active (ships are easy to spot anyways), and of course you go for a network of sensors for better resolutions (towed arrays aren't new).
                >advice on what to read
                The tech is so old and well understood that even just looking at the wikipedia sources will get you a good starting point.
                Hobbysts are also worth looking at, especially as you're planning on actually building something.

                >a Poseidon has literally no hope of dodging a standard torpedo looking for a collision course.

                Poseidon has stealth technology. Americunts will be dead before they know it.

                >screaming through water at 100mph+
                >stealth
                Top zozzle

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The Poseidon does the opposite of a plunge during its attack run. It first dives very deeply (remember that it has a 1 km diving depth, which is really deep), then shoots up almost vertically at max speed.
                Also, what anon here

                It's hard to intercept because you can only find it by acoustics. A missile can be found by any radar on a large distance too, while you need to be very close to a sound source like this to hear it. That torpedo is said to move slowly to it's target in silent running mode and do an attack sprint at the last few km because it will be detected by that time.
                Another advantage would be that it can be place on the seabed as a second strike weapon. I think all these challenges can be overcome but at the moment most navies probably don't have a good way to defend themselves to this weapon

                said.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                > what could possibly go wrong?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The continued survival of a carrier group, natochud.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Everything, but you have to remember: it's Russians we're talking about.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >a Poseidon has literally no hope of dodging a standard torpedo looking for a collision course.

                Poseidon has stealth technology. Americunts will be dead before they know it.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                thermal torps have a depth limit as they can't expell exhaust gasses past a certain depth

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Even our most destructive weapons are capable of only a tiny part of the destruction that nature is capable of.
                Keep in mind though that this is in part a deliberate choice. America (and specifically a team under that whacky guy Edward Teller) actually looked seriously at a 10 gigaton nuke. Thermonuclear technology can scale very well. That's a lot of energy, even by nature standards. Something like the dinosaur asteroid impact level of energy.

                As a weapon though it was dumb, the goal of war at least for decent countries isn't "fuck the entire world forever for lulz" it's to gain some measure of actual victory.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                yeah I went a bit over the top with my comment but it's still fascinating how much energy there is behind natural disasters

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >congratulation you did fuck all with a costly
                You can wipe the entire aircraft carrier battlegroup or multiple submarines easily with nuclear torpedos easily.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                if you say easily several more times i'm sure someone will finally believe you

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Cope, mutt.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                keep coping, slavmutt

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                i can't because i don't know how easily it is to easily do it easily

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              You need to displace a metric assload of water to make a tsunami, the largest nukes don't even get one thousandth of the way there.
              Flipping a tank with your bare hands would be significantly easier.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              The Sumatra-Andaman earthquake, which caused the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, is estimated to have released energy equivalent to 23,000 Hiroshima-type atomic bombs.
              That's 6x the power of the largest nuke we have, but the water displacement will be fucked up by evaporation as well, so it may create a wave 1-2ft high but that's it.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The Poseidon torpedoes are intended to instakill carrier groups. Like, actually delete them, rather than just cause severe shock damage. They're last-ditch defensive weapons, rather than whatever bullshit nuclear tsunami fanfic peddled by either the Russians or Western idiots is doing the rounds.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              A swarm of ASMs with nuclear warheads does it faster, more reliably, while being harder to intercept, and still takes up less space on the launch platform.
              Poseidon is such a meme it's unreal.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The Russians believe their missiles will get shot down before reaching anywhere near the carrier group.
                Torpedoes, particularly very fast ones, are much more difficult to intercept compared to missiles.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        To keep your nuclear scientists employed so they don't move to France.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Shredding whales

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They aren't confident that the ballistic missiles would get through.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >They aren't confident that the ballistic missiles would get through.
          Same thing with Tridents. Russia will shot them down and then wipe the USA with things like Poseidon and Avangard.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous
    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Oh. It’s only two megatons.
      I thought for sure that since Russia was bragging about how it would cause super duper mega tsunamis that it would be at least fifty megatons. I guess it’s even more useless than I thought

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Its more powerful than any other nuke like Trident.
        Take your meds.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          But the Trident is actually real, and in production. How's that nuclear-powered cruise missile going? Still blowing up, and radiating Russian's?

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          With the amount of shit the Russians are having to scrap for parts to avoid humiliating defeat against Ukraine, you have to assume their nuke subs are being pretty badly neglected when bluffing works just as well right up to armageddon.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It’s also not being used like other nukes.
          Two megatons on an ICBM is a pretty good size.
          Two megatons when compared to the energy of an underwater earthquake is fucking nothing

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Because, like I said in a previous post, it's an anticarrier weapon. The Russians don't trust their antiship missiles, and current torpedoes aren't that good at intercepting other torpedoes (especially when said torpedo is travelling at almost twice the speed of the would-be interceptor). It's why Northrop-Grumman are developing a dedicated interceptor torpedo (the VLT).

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    j b

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous
      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous
      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/Iu9XLKt.jpg

        What was the Losharik up to when the fire happened, I wonder

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    bjhb

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Russia is the global leader of-BLUBLUBBBLBLB...

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      russia surely learned a lot since then and won't have similar incidents

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        True, they'll have brand new ones.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        They learned less than nothing. They have continously rotted away and lost expertise and skill ever since the USSR imploded.

        Theo only thing Russia is good at today is producing vapourware for propaganda purposes.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >They have continously rotted away and lost expertise and skill ever since the USSR imploded
          This is true, any competent USSR military man either defected to the West for money during the fall or got rich from criminal activity and left the military. The few that remained and the few competent ideologues that joined later have been whittled away by the glorified gopniks in uniform that outnumber them.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The original smooker

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      why did the front fall off?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        a wave hit it

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Made from cardboard derivatives.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous
  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    > 'many special features'
    most of which can and probably will fail in spectacular fashion killing the entire crew, but on the bright side will give the kremlin more opportunities to blame accidents on the 'evil capitalist running dogs'.

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    They're the leader in submarines at the bottom of the ocean during peacetime

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >They have so many submarine types with special features.
    Yeah, too bad that they still need to work out "being able to resurface" feature

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's truly impressive, they even managed to convert their flagship into a submarine.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      > 'many special features'
      most of which can and probably will fail in spectacular fashion killing the entire crew, but on the bright side will give the kremlin more opportunities to blame accidents on the 'evil capitalist running dogs'.

      They're the leader in submarines at the bottom of the ocean during peacetime

      Cope amerishits

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        All of your ballistic missile submarines are being followed by American attack submarines at this very moment, russoid.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >All of your ballistic missile submarines are being followed by American attack submarines at this very moment, russoid.
          Sure, amerimutt.

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    How many?

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Their SSBNs are reportedly very quiet... for the first year or two of service. Then they start making a lot of banging noises and are easily identified.
    Attack subs seem fine.
    For diesels you'll want to go European.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      How would this affect their detectability ?
      > It turns out that in addition to hull sections, the Dolgorukiy SSBN is borrowing used steam turbines from scrapped nuclear-powered submarines that were built nearly 30 years ago.
      https://7fbtk.blogspot.com/2014/09/dolgorukiy-ssbn-dirty-secret-under-hood.html

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Turbine is fine, cumrad.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Armatard suck donkey sick :^)

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            *dick

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Russian technology
    That's a hard no, but we will only find out how shit their subs really are if they pick a fight with a nation that has a navy.

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >special features
    more like special needs features

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Status 6 is a badass name for that nuclear torpedo.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Indeed.

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Russia
    >Global leader of anything except aids and alcoholism
    Lmao no

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Fucking stupid Russian military cheerleaders. Fucking fanbois. Why don't you Russian morons find something better to jerk off too.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Ever since that accident with the photo of your naked mom going viral worldwide people have been developing the weirdest fetishes from trauma.

  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >lada class
    heh

  20. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    1. Russian subs are loud.
    2. The russian navy has no money to keep them running without everything be broken.
    3. Massively overstated capability
    4. Russians can’t stop damaging subs beyond repair
    5. Russia sank five nuclear submarines (one sank twice)

  21. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What is Ukraine going to do with the Belgorod when it's seized as a war reparations?

  22. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  23. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No. Leader in nuclear sub accidents? Yes, by far.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous
    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/2hIG4xs.png

      Source for picrel: https://inis.iaea.org/collection/NCLCollectionStore/_Public/28/026/28026137.pdf

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      where does USS Narwhal (SSN 671) fit in this graph? It was a neat one off and it's fun to play with in Cold Waters

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Our competitors will improve over time, which is why we need to stay on top of the technology edge and work with our allies (our real allies not "allies") to pool research and maintain our position.

  24. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Cope

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >literal paper model

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The Russian military is extremely powerful if you factor in stuff they don't have but want to have

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Neat model, I made them when I was a kid.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >an autistic kid has more powerful navy than world's second strongest military

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Correct, that model is cope

  25. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The Moskva is probably one of the largest submarines in the world so that's one thing they lead in.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It pales in comparison to the USS America (CV-66).

  26. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Nah, it's Sweden and Britian as far as silence and kill likelihood goes.

Your email address will not be published.