www.ditl.org

Blackstar the Chakat wrote:Dang, seafort got to it before I did, but he's got it right.

I always am. 8)

Captain Seafort wrote:

Blackstar the Chakat wrote:Dang, seafort got to it before I did, but he's got it right.

I always am. 8)

Ya, but I wanted to show off my knowledge on military subs. Those were my favorites at one point. I even wanted to serve on one once but they have that stupid gender rule. That, and I'm mildly claustraphobic.

Here's a random fact on submarines, the Russian sub classified by NATO as the Typhoon-class, designated Akula-Class by the russians, is the largest submarine ever built, and it's one of the stealthiest as a result.

Sorry Blackstar but thats not true. The Akula is an attack sub where the Typhoon is a boomer.

Deepcrush wrote:Sorry Blackstar but thats not true. The Akula is an attack sub where the Typhoon is a boomer.

Read what he wrote. The Akula (Shark) class SSBN has the Nato reporting name "Typhoon". The one you're thinking of is the Bars class SSN, which has the Nato reporting name "Akula".

Oh, the Akula is only about half the size of a Typhoon as well.

Sorry forgot about that. I'll look up the specs later if anyone wants.

Captain Seafort wrote:

Deepcrush wrote:Sorry Blackstar but thats not true. The Akula is an attack sub where the Typhoon is a boomer.

Read what he wrote. The Akula (Shark) class SSBN has the Nato reporting name "Typhoon". The one you're think of is the Bars class SSN, which has the Nato reporting name "Akula".

Why would NATO use Typhoon twice?

That just doesn't make sense to me. The ships aren't even close in matching.

Deepcrush wrote:Why would NATO use Typhoon twice?

It didn't - it used it once, for the Akula class SSBN.

Deepcrush wrote:

Captain Seafort wrote:

Deepcrush wrote:Sorry Blackstar but thats not true. The Akula is an attack sub where the Typhoon is a boomer.

Read what he wrote. The Akula (Shark) class SSBN has the Nato reporting name "Typhoon". The one you're think of is the Bars class SSN, which has the Nato reporting name "Akula".

Why would NATO use Typhoon twice?

That just doesn't make sense to me. The ships aren't even close in matching.

No no no. They use it once. The SSBN is called Typhoon by NATO and called Akula by the Russians. The SSN is called Akula by NATO and Bars by the Russians.

Alright, I pulled out my Uncles' req book though it is USN not NATO doc. But, I think it says it counts for NATO as well.

Akula Class (BARS) (Type 971) (SSN)
Active 11 known, 3 possible unknown. *Says building or built but not confirmed*
Known names are BARS, LEOPARD, PANTERA, PUMA, VOLK, TIGR

Displacement surfaced tons 7500
Displacement dived tons 9100
Length, 360.1 feet or 110 meters
Beam 45.9 feet or 14 meters
Draught 34.1 feet or 10.4 meters.

Typhoon Class (Type 941) (SSBN)
Active 6, no names listed.

Displacement surfaced tons 21500
Displacement dived tons 26500
Length 562.7 feet or 171.5 meters
Beam 80.7 feet or 24.6 meters
Draught 42.7 feet or 13 meters

The Akula is listed as BARS as Seafort said but that is the same listing as the SSN. Is there something missing here?

Captain Seafort wrote:

Deepcrush wrote:Why would NATO use Typhoon twice?

It didn't - it used it once, for the Akula class SSBN.

So did NATO not know the right class name?

Deepcrush wrote:So did NATO not know the right class name?

The Soviet Navy wasn't about to issue a list of names and commissioning dates to its enemies. In any event, we used codewords even for those systems we knew the Russian names of, for security reasons.

Oh, ok... that makes a little (very little) sense.

Deepcrush wrote:Oh, ok... that makes a little (very little) sense.

It confused you didn't it? Confusing the enemy is always helpful.

That wouldn't confuse them. They know where their subs are. Now how funny is it to give a ship a code name to have your enemy build a class that uses that name.

Actualy that makes sense. Think about it, let's say the Russians intercept a US inteligence communication saying "we have our subs shadowing 5 Akulas in the North Pacific", then the Russians would be more likely to think that they mean the actual Akulas, rather than a different type of ship with that name. Misdirection.