[dhanushmenon]

Fantastic thread sir. And methought your prowess was only on aviation related subjects!!

Incredible in depth research and a gripping read. This article in itself can be a Bible to the knowledge of submarines. I'm sure Indian Navy would be proud to have a voluntary good will ambassador in you.

I've been inside a submarine. Not the museum one at Vizag, but an actual submarine. 15 minutes into the visit, I'd made up my mind:
"This is the last place on earth I would want to be "
Such a cramped and claustrophobic place!!

I've anyways looked up to the submariners with awe since then.

[AlphaLamb]

Fantastic thread, Mr. Narayan. You sir have the gift of narrating a long story with a very good mix of information and pictures.

I have also been fortunate enough to have been inside a submarine and it was the INS Sindhurakshak, none the less. The first feeling that hits you is how cramped it was and even a skinny person would have to be careful moving down from the conning tower to the inner living space of the submarine.

I can still remember the WC from the sub, it had so many handles and on querying I was told these handles were there to ensure that the person can stay in the right posture when using the WC

Overall that visit was one of things I would cherish for my lifetime and also brought about immense respect for the personnel who operate such a magnificent machine in such confined spaces.

[R2D2]

Salute to you for teaching me more about the IN's submarines than my Dad ever did.

PS - those officer's names take me straight back to my childhood days when some of them would visit us for cocktails and dinner.

[handsofsteel]

A small correction sir, if i may. the typhoons are highly romanticised, rightly so in many aspects - only submarine to have 5 pressure hulls, widest sub, longest sub (not any more though), tallest sub,heaviest sub etc. however, it is nowhere near 48000 tons, at best 28-32000 tons. its no longer a combatant, indeed only 3 specimens exist as on date. the cost of refurbishment is so high that the russians went ahead and designed a totally new class of subs, the yurii dolgoroky class. in fact there is a proposal with the russian govt to convert the typhoon into an iron ore carrier to utilise the polar circle route between east and west russia going below the ice caps. neither is it the second largest combatant, the charles de gaulle, kuznetsov, indeed many cruisers of wwII were larger than this behemoth. nonetheless it is truly magnificent.
PS - i am probably one of the few indians/ foreigners to have seen this at close quarters, hence speak with first hand knowledge.

[ShellZee]

What an extensive study you must have carried out to come out with such a detailed and interesting write up on our most important, yet 'still in the works' arm of The Nuclear Triad. Great work.
The Arihant shall make us proud, soon but through most of our maritime history it is our most dependable military suppliers The Mighty Russians who balanced out the perpetual odds stacked against us, most notably the technology denial. Where we stand today, especially the Navy with a hugely successful in house design bureau is courtesy the Russians. I wish the Army had a similar setup which would have resulted in more forex being used for top end tech.

[aditya101]

Very nice - thank you Narayan.

On Foxtrots: In the 1990s remember reading whatever little morsels of info one could get in the likes of India Today and other colour magazines ... Foxtrots were often described as outdated and generally Pak Navy fleet was described to be modern etc ... I think our media overdid the skepticism. We were operating Kilos as well and while Foxtrots were not the quietest they were a potent threat. I believe Russia or Ukraine still operates one!

[Locomotive]

Wow what a superb article. Thank you sir for putting it together. Thoroughly enjoyed reading it. Thanks

[DragonHawk]

Excellent thread and good narration too. Threads like these help us to gain more indepth knowledge on subjects which are not easily accessible to everyone. Kudos to Narayan sir for bringing out one more such informative thread.

Originally Posted by handsofsteel

A small correction sir, if i may. the typhoons are highly romanticised, rightly so in many aspects - only submarine to have 5 pressure hulls, widest sub, longest sub (not any more though), tallest sub,heaviest sub etc. however, it is nowhere near 48000 tons, at best 28-32000 tons. its no longer a combatant, indeed only 3 specimens exist as on date. the cost of refurbishment is so high that the russians went ahead and designed a totally new class of subs, the yurii dolgoroky class.

Displacement is the key term we use when we say weight of the ship and this is nothing but the tonnage of water that vessel displaces when it is floating.
When we talk about displacement of a submarine we generally consider surfaced displacement and submerged displacement. Surfaced displacement will be less than the submerged displacement. So in that way data shared in the thread is correct. Indeed typhoon class has surfaced displacement of 24,000 t and submerged displacement of 48,000t. Talking about the Typhoon class as such, it is largest type of submarine ever built, involving multiple pressure hulls within the one casing. That does also give it extra 'survivability' if one of these was to be flooded and no doubt it is one of the technologically advanced ship ever built in its age. Of 6 built only 1 is in active service as of now. Primary reason for Russia to cancel the modernization plan is the cost factor as the cost of new Borei class of SSBN will be half the cost of modernizing the Typhoon class.

[anshuman_v]

Narayan saab, please take a bow. I have shared your article with some high-ranking officer friends I know of in the Indian Navy now. They have thanked me for this, and I have to pass on the thanks to you! Apart from the knowledge, the effort you have put in to pull this together, is just awesome.

Kudos, and thank you again!

[handsofsteel]

Originally Posted by DragonHawk

Displacement is the key term we use when we say weight of the ship and this is nothing but the tonnage of water that vessel displaces when it is floating.
When we talk about displacement of a submarine we generally consider surfaced displacement and submerged displacement. Surfaced displacement will be less than the submerged displacement. So in that way data shared in the thread is correct. Indeed typhoon class has surfaced displacement of 24,000 t and submerged displacement of 48,000t. Talking about the Typhoon class as such, it is largest type of submarine ever built, involving multiple pressure hulls within the one casing. That does also give it extra 'survivability' if one of these was to be flooded and no doubt it is one of the technologically advanced ship ever built in its age. Of 6 built only 1 is in active service as of now. Primary reason for Russia to cancel the modernization plan is the cost factor as the cost of new Borei class of SSBN will be half the cost of modernizing the Typhoon class.

i repeat sir, the submerged displacement figure of 48000 T is inaccurate. again 3 of them are in active service not one (let me see if i can post the photographs of the 3 together..will have to search). further, the borei cost as much as the cost of upgradation (and not half). these myths are part and parcel of the 'romanticisation' of the typhoon. ah! one more detail, the typhoon was never the 'most modern' it was, and probably still is, the most indestructible against flood and battle damage courtesy the many pressure hulls, 5 to be precise. it was a revolutionary design alright but not without its limitations. part of the awe is the shroud of secrecy around this class (helped to no small extent by 'the hunt for red october') .

[Jeroen]

Remarkable Wikipedia mentions submerged displacement as ranging from 33000 to 48000 tonnes. Which unless the main dimension vary a lot I dont see how that can be.

If we just consider the typhoon as a big rectangular box it would displace about 170 (lenght) x 23 (beam) x 12 (draught) = 47000 Cubic meter which is roughly,give or take, 47.000 tonnes as well. That would be surfaced!

It rides pretty deep in the water. The hull shape is not exactly rectangular although a pretty large part of its hull can be considered as such. When it submerges the tower will add displacement. But if you add this all up I don't think the 48.000 submerged tonnes seems unrealistic. If anything the 24.000 tonnes surfaced seems a little on the low side, just looking at the overall dimensions. If anybody has a diagram with better hull dimension its fairly easy to make a more accurate calculation.

Jeroen

[extreme_torque]

Excellent info! I have always been fascinated by submarines and find them deeply disturbing machined behemoths but it is exactly the reason why I like them as well. Imagine a car which you have to refuel only once or twice in its lifetime and you get the idea of how big an achievement a nuclear powered submarine is. Thanks for taking the time off to explain everything.

[peterjim13]

As expected. Felt like a detailed class on Submarine tech and the story behind the Indian Submarine Arm.

I though the submarine just randomly dived whenever it felt to do so, never know that it had a hell lot of science technique and skill involved.

Do keep writing, and I am sure with articles like these, we should soon get a forum for defense related articles.

[lovetorque]

Originally Posted by V.Narayan

And finally lest we forget...
Attachment 1486894

A submariner's dream of what awaits inside the torpedo tube...
Attachment 1487650

Wonderful write up Sir. Really informative.

[WindRide]

Excellent Thread. Thanks for putting in the effort and bringing it to us.

Originally Posted by barcalad

...
Also, if anyone would like to know more about submarines (without any nonsense), please watch these movies - The Hunt For the Red October, K-19 : The Widowmaker, U-571 and Crimson Tide. Watching these movies fascinated me more and more about submarines.

None of them come anywhere close to 'Das Boot' for sheer claustrophobia. Watch the original German version.