@@thomas.02 when I saw the comment I was gonna reply "yeah wrath of khan academy" then I saw your reply beat me to it. Good job, great minds think alike. lol
The "At one yard" is a reference level and not necessarily the actual distance at which the measurement was taken. Similar to deciBells per millivolt, dBmv. The reference level can be calculated from measurements take even at long distances and adjusted for signal loss in water.
“117 DB at one yard, how we got that measurement is none of your damn business” Darn it Jive, you said you were going to stop ratchet strapping Leroy to the hull.
@@rzu1474 Doubtful since the US apparently managed to sneak up on this Russian sub and get all those readings. Wouldn't surprise me if they somehow recorded that noise level from literally 1 meter away, it's been done before.
How did we get that Measurement? It was after 10:00 pm and someone called Noise Control, Next thing was that there was a Knock at the Conning Tower door, with some Council staffer in a High-Viz holding a ClipBoard and a Noise Meter. "Excuse me sir, but it's now 10:30 pm on a Weekday and you're making more than 70 dB, I'm going to be issuing you an instant $100 fine and a noise abatement notice, if you continue and we get called out again - we will be confiscating your SONAR array and your Engines" The West used it's most potent and devestating asset to get the information: Excessive Local Bureaucracy.
Quick question: is it possible to mask a submarines sound signature by making more noise. Say if you were taking a your brand new nuclear boat for a spin for the first time and you added 1-2 more pumps or generators, just to make some more noise. Prevents the enemy from knowing too much
Not pointless, like the luneberg lenses the F-22 has mounted that make them bigger on radar, I suspect that is done by everybody. On the case of a sub it is even easyer, since you can just turn the 'noisemaker' off on a short notice and be full combat quiet...
Every country that builds subs will perform "quietness" testing to verify the sub meets design standards and fleet requirements. This is the critical phase when other nations want to be in the right place at the right time so they can get that critical data.
@@Komsomolskaya I would imagine ever nation that has submarines is spying on every other nations submarines, and that includes NATO submarines spying on US and other NATO submarines. I suppose it gives the guys something to do to stop them getting bored.
A Victoria class submarine destroyed a Virginia class during an exercise. The American's later came on board and were dumbfounded on how such a vessel could do that. I find it funny how the Americans constantly think their the best, even though they quite often get destroyed during international exercises. ( A little side note, American aircraft carriers are not as invincible as people think they are; A Victoria class sunk one plus over half her strike group in one exercise. True story from a former submariner. Americans hate that one.)
@@chrispitre2052 yeah the virginia and ohios arent as silent as one may think... but those seawolfs are a scary bit of tech. and you wouldnt know it but if theirs a virginia or ohio around you can be damned sure there is a seawolf lurking nearby looking for kilo 2s....
I'm loving this content Jive. As far as I know you are the only person on yt who is delivering this kind of analysis and information for subs. I enjoy your game streams as well but I always look forward to these technical lectures.
@@SubBrief as a Brit I'd be interested in how the US reload trident at Dock, as a visiting US Submariner went white as a bedsheet after seeing the UK used forklifts at some delicate part where you guys obviously had a issue/accident in the past
Awesome stuff, very informative and interesting. Was just thinking about this boat the other day when I saw it in a news article, even better to have someone talk about it so excellent stuff Jive!
One sub I would love to see you do a video on would be the I-400, I know its end of WWII and you stick to Cold War Subs, but I just think that it is a submarine class of its own.
@Jive Turkey. QM2/SS Arriving. I love these lectures. Everytime you start, I get a flash back to Sub School and expect you to preface the lecture with "Pencils down"
I Just want to let you know, that theese submarine review videos are one of the best content on UA-cam, ceep doing them. I would also appreciate some videos that explain different aspects of submarines, like sonar or propulsion.
Jive, a quick question about sonar loudness: A sperm whale is the loudest of all animals and its sonar can produce a Sonic injury to a human being when he is in the beam. Is Naval sonar, seemingly at a higher frequency, equally loud at 230 plus decibels?
I read that a submarine had targeted and had a good hit on an American CVN, and would have hit it if it had been more than a simulation/ war game. However, hitting a CVN and sinking it or even putting it out of action is a different thing altogether.
@@josephkane825 I appreciate the distinction you are making, however, wouldn't getting close enough to launch an autonomous weapon be considered "bad"? Could not have been a good day for the screen commander.
@@DrNickAG I agree with you completely! I remember about thirty years ago, or so, that a Soviet submarine surfaced and banged into the bottom of a CVN. Yes, the fact that any sub was able to torpedo a CVN is very bad. The fact that a noisy as hell Soviet sub accidently surfaced into the keel of a CVN in the middle of a full destroyer screen tells me that the US Navy is living under a delusion when it comes to enemy submarine danger! I remember when a new Soviet submarine was reportedly made with a Titanium hull. It could reportedly go down to and operate at 4,000 feet depth or so. At that depth, it would likely survive a US nuclear torpedo detonating at 1,000 feet. Noisy or not, crude or not, dangerous to their own crew as to the enemy or not, some of their submarines are a real threat to the US Navy, and I am quite alarmed about what I see as complacency on the part of US Navy propaganda about our superior invincibility! I see big men with big expensive toys, lots of political influence and little true patriotic intent!
@@josephkane825 Exercises like these are pretty useless in terms of such information without the full context though. I don't remember the details but I'm pretty sure it wasn't as impressive as it sounds. It reminds me of that exercise simulating a fleet similar to that of Iran, where speedboats successfully sunk a carrier and most of its escort. The USA wanted to start over because they lost. It sounds great and all, until you get the full information. Turns out the exercise was quite a bit of a mess and the USA didn't want to start it over because they lost, but because the exercise was senseless. The enemy had speedboats that carried missiles so heavy they'd sink them instantly. That's ignoring the lightspeed motorcycles and so on too. More importantly, it didn't simulate the fleet of Iran, but a fleet similar to that of Iraq or Iran. Turns out that no carriers were sunk in the following war in Iraq a few years later.
Plz make a video about DEGAUSSING. How effective is this? Is the boat complete unmagnetized? Maybe the difference between pre and post degaussed boat! Thx
It throws off MAD sensors, magnetic mines, and makes the hulls Signature magnetically more attuned to Earth’s background as far as ocean based magnetics goes
m1tglied: Degaussing and Deperming are well established technologies which are extremely effective when well designed, and performed regularly. They have been used since at least early WWII.
The sub commenced “degaussing” at pier side….it’s actually deperming. Degaussing is a system built into the ship/boat and it changes with the earths magnetic field as the ship travels. Deperming is done after the ship/boat is built. It alters the magnetic signature that is built into the ship to a null. Deperming would not need to be repeated unless significant repairs or alterations were made to the hill.
The whole “at 1 yard” thing is simultaneously epic and hecking freaky. I can only imagine that they way they determine that is either with something outstandingly technologically advanced or hilariously simple
There’s a documentary and book of the same name that describes the lol worthy ways we were able to sneak up on soviet boats and record them during the Cold War...
YY: The "At one yard" is a reference level and not necessarily the actual distance at which the measurement was taken. Similar to deciBells per millivolt, dBmv. The reference level can be calculated from measurements take even at long distances and adjusted for signal loss in water.
Are the sound measurements in these videos comparable? So same speed, same conditions? I think it is pretty hard to believe that this submarine is noisier (under electric power) than the Shang-B under nuclear power.
Kapitän Turkey - absolutely been loving your videos, so happy I found this channel thanks to The War Zone. Also, congrats on being a writer over there now, that's a great community as well. Looking forward to more content!!
Those noise parameters for the 636 don't make sense. Numerous declassified sources place them significantly lower, even as low as 105dB, and that's conservative. In your previous video you gave the estimated noise levels of the latest Type 93 as 110dB, which is at about the level of a 971. So now the relatively modern diesel-electric sub is somehow noisier than a nuke? Gimme a break.
The measurements are just specifics. Maybe some noisy diesel engine was not isolated properly and was noisy. If you measure another sub of the same class it will also be different. You can't use a single measurement to call the whole class noisy
Is that dB reading of the diesels running? Putting to sea for trials you’d assume they deployed with diesels running then run on batteries? This sub is designed to run very quiet at 3-4 knots with the prop being turned not by the main shaft but by a quieter system aided by two aux pumps to help make small course corrections located under the rear planes. I’d agree this is a very quiet vessel.
117 dB is insane. Most sources reckon around 105. Still, if I'm understanding things right, that's still only 1km of attenuation before it drop below ambient in sea state 1.
Haven't been following much of this since the early 2000's so didn't know they put the Kilos back in production. Any reason why they didn't go with a pumpjet like the Kilo-class 'Alrosa' in the Black Sea Fleet?
Pumpjets eat batteries like crazy, you need high energy propulsion to use them. Like nuclear. They are also more useful at high speeds. Alrosa is just a test sub that stuck around for 30 years, she could have special missions like swimmer delivery.
Hi Jive, thanks for another great video! Would you consider making a video of a hypothetical USN SSK type submarine. One where you use your knowledge and let us know what you think would be a good set of systems. Thanks again!
@@SubBrief curious to know your thoughts about a modern USN SSK, or at least one more modern than the Barbel class. I made a hypothetical one for Cold Waters that I based on the Sturgeon class hull as a 'modern' SSK. Modern spherical and towed array, top speed 22kts, quieter than the Narwhal, but it made me wonder if it was such a sub was practical when the Narwhal was pretty darn quiet, wouldn't need to snorkel or run an AIP system, AND faster.... But I come up with crazy ideas... Like squeezing a small VLS system into the Sturgeon class boats to add 3 or 6 VLS tubes as a "what if" update.
At 5:35 you said an american boat has to rip the topside appart to load new torpedos, could you elaborate? Maybe make it into one of your whiteboard episodes?
the 1yd sound check, reminds me about a story here in Norway, about an sonar operator reported that he heard someone that had fallen down some stairs just over there, and pointed toward the bulkhead, almost as it was just a few meters away! if it's tru or not, how know.... one thing I experienced is that it's not so smart to play cat and mouse with a Norwegian submarine at it's home turf
Hey Jive, what are your thoughts on why USN doesn't employ diesel/electrics boats rather to have all nuclear? From what I've heard D/E''s can be super quiet(submerged)like Germany's Type 212. Granted D/E's don't have the nuke boat's endurance but what about operating costs, deployment in waters relatively close to mainland support(the Med, E.Pacific)? What other limitations/bonus' D/E's have than nukes?
When the Royal Navy had its budget cut massively they had huge and painful choices to make, lost their big carriers, the Fleet Air Arm gave their F4s and Buccaneers to the RAF, lost their air dropped nuclear role, ton of ships and more relevantly they had to choose between SSN/SSBN or SSK/SSBN. The Admiralty went 100% nuclear for subs. The operational range, capability and endurance to project naval power was just too great to discard. You are spot on for advantages of SSK. In shallow, noisy waters, short patrols length with a limited defence budget then SSK are great value. Sat in ambush on convoys/fleets they are deadly but if detected its dead. The SSK slow speeds are no help once weapons are after it. If in deep water that 300’ test depth of the imp Kilo is another disadvantage as you know how shallow to run counter fire too. Most SSN could run far deeper and faster. I can’t talk for the USN but best guess is they’d rather run SSN as even their budget is finite and they have huge oceans to dominate in a timely manner.
@@stevepirie8130 British SSNs can barely project any power. There only ever was 7 of them which after including training and scheduled repair means that in wartime their sole mission will be babysitting SSBNs. Choosing them instead of way cheaper SS boats, which could be built in larger numbers was caused by misguided pride of a former maritime superpower and saving-face-measures in face of 1990s spending cuts.
Regarding loading of torps: Germany did the same at least with the 205, 206 and 206A class diesel subs. I don't know, how the loading is done on the class 212A.
@@SubBrief If you are interested in the source: "Eberhard Rössler: Die Torpedos der deutschen U-Boote: Entwicklung, Herstellung und Eigenschaften der deutschen Marine-Torpedos. Hardcover, 2005" The front cover shows also this loading technique. The old German subs of the Bundesmarine didn't have enough space to load torps from inside the submarine into the tubes.
Reading up on open info sources they modified the hull shape to improve hydrodynamics after reported issues of crew complaints ref rolling in heavy seas near the surface. I’d imagine that’s when they had to snorkel. Could it simply be they only need the lower mounted rudder due to their lower speeds and don’t need so much? Must save on weight?
That's actually a REALLY good question. I know they've been struggling hard financially for quite a while, I'd imagine they might be focusing on export. I know they've exported at least one of their newer boats to India, an Akula. Now I'm curious as well.
They are modernising many old Kilos right now. There were rumors circa 2015 that the russians wanted to buy the romanian Kilo to refurbish and sell to some asian country
They have to do both. When you make a new version, and fires a fancy weapon on it, people get interested and start buying more of your stuff, albeit the export version aren't quite as good
more than 40 kilos were sold outside out of 70 that were build. so it seems they mostly export those. well that is good for country. but i dont think they sold much of their nuclear submarines.
TBH nowadays a throw away nano drone costing only tens of dollars with a mic could fly right up to it, even drop a dipping mic. A drone the size and weight of mobile phone can fly at speeds in excess of 50mph for upto an hour.
What kind of operational range would you expect these diesel submarines to have? I can certainly understand building these for the Black Sea Fleet, where range is hardly an issue, but the Pacific Fleet seems like a different story. Is it likely that Russia would only use these boats in the Korea/Japan/northern China area, or would they have the range to operate farther out into the central Pacific or the South China Sea?
Electric Boat has a much different method of pressure vessel fabrication that what you showed here. I would bet that (from what I saw here) our sub crush depths are substantially greater than the published and tested crush depths. In addition, because of our method of fabrication, (In addition to the material specifications) our subs could take a proportionally greater explosive impact before failure. I was really surprised to see their partially completed hull sections being built like that!
greetings how can i get a picture of my pop master chief armand louis lepage usn? i lost the only pic of him in uniform. last station skaggs / mare island, CA., retired @ 1968(?) ty great work luv the sub briefs.
Once again, an amazing video. A fun lecture and so much info! I'm suprised you aren't teaching at a naval school. Is 117 Db loud? How about giving out a grade for silence so we land lovers get an idea of how quiet a sub is?
It’s loud for Atlantic Operations; it’s a bitch for South East Asia Operations though because that area is naturally loud, all the biological signatures, underwater seismic activity and last but not least, all the shipping. That’s why the Navy is a bit more concerned about diesel boats there...
They can extrapolate a reading from distance to calculate what is from the source.... its a calculation that takes into account at sea conditions, distance, water density and sensitivity of the measuring device.
Nice analysis, but I can’t see how the 636 underwater top speed could be almost 50% higher than in the basic 877 model. Such a speed bump would need a lot more horsepower from the main electric motor and/or hydrodynamic improvements, wich doesn’t seem the case. Don’t have the equation on hand, but each extra knot means a lot of extra horsepower
NATO has thoroughly examined Polish Kilo class ORP Orzeł (877E). Anyway, while not most modern/capable/best looking submarine, it sure has some 'british' aesthetics to it and one of most _classic_ submarine looks ever.
Jive, what was you retirement rank at discharge? How would you class the retirement benefits and pension after 20 years of service time? You also get lifetime healthcare right? I'm considering a career in the Navy and want to get some real life info as far as long term planning goes, not the usual recruiter BS that can't be trusted ;) Really appreciate any help you can give, Thanks!
I have a good pension that I can live off of, thus I am doing UA-cam videos intead of working at Walmart. ;-) Health care is the best thing ever. It's not free, but it's very very cheap. VA health care is free if you are disabled while in the military.
Wait what? I can't believe how noisy the imp. Kilo II is then? I mean, its louder than a bloody improved Shang SSN. And I always believed, those Diesel-Subs were the quietest subs out there. Which leads me to the next question: Jive, could you do a relative Chart (no absolute Numbers because they are classified) with noise levels of current SSNs and Diesel Subs?
Not really. You see, non-stressed O is pronounced like A or shwa, so it would be [nəvərɐˈsʲijsk]. Similarly, "Severodvinsk" is pronounced [sʲɪvʲɪrɐdˈvinsk]
This guy is khan academy for midshipmen at Annapolis
lol
for a brief moment i thought about the wrath of khan
@@thomas.02 when I saw the comment I was gonna reply "yeah wrath of khan academy" then I saw your reply beat me to it. Good job, great minds think alike. lol
Kilo II, or 4.4 pounds in the US
@@alexandercain8904 Russian Kilo II (NATO code name: Russian 4.4 pound class)
The "At one yard" is a reference level and not necessarily the actual distance at which the measurement was taken. Similar to deciBells per millivolt, dBmv. The reference level can be calculated from measurements take even at long distances and adjusted for signal loss in water.
“117 DB at one yard, how we got that measurement is none of your damn business”
Darn it Jive, you said you were going to stop ratchet strapping Leroy to the hull.
Is this close enough? -Leroy
Jive Turkey poor guy is still half deaf from the time you strapped him to an Alfa, darn thing was loud enough to nearly blow out his eardrums
117db?
I think this went like this:
"Vadim! The Americans are listening. Turn on the music!"
It's scary to find out a Seawolf/Virginia/Ohio can cruise at the same or higher speed at 90-95db, the same level as ocean background noise.
@@TonymanCS
Propaganda.
Id like you to put a microphone 30cm from the seawolf, I bet my ass its gonna be louder then what you say.
@@rzu1474 You not gonna take my first place, I just ate Mexican food.
@@rzu1474 Doubtful since the US apparently managed to sneak up on this Russian sub and get all those readings. Wouldn't surprise me if they somehow recorded that noise level from literally 1 meter away, it's been done before.
@@jguthrie "Sonobuoys"; don't forget them.
How did we get that Measurement?
It was after 10:00 pm and someone called Noise Control, Next thing was that there was a Knock at the Conning Tower door, with some Council staffer in a High-Viz holding a ClipBoard and a Noise Meter.
"Excuse me sir, but it's now 10:30 pm on a Weekday and you're making more than 70 dB, I'm going to be issuing you an instant $100 fine and a noise abatement notice, if you continue and we get called out again - we will be confiscating your SONAR array and your Engines"
The West used it's most potent and devestating asset to get the information:
Excessive Local Bureaucracy.
Damn, son! The Homeowners Association is Special Forces now?
At 1 Yard ... You can hear Dimitri listen to Kalinka-Remix then, too. Or someone dropping his coffee mug.
Probably hardbass nowadays.
Me thinking : " how you get that measurement"
Jive turkey: "that's none of your damn business"
Me: " fair enough"
Thank you Jive, I know you put a lot of time into these. The effort shows, very well done!
This is the only somewhat technical information I could find on youtube on submarines and under sea warfare. Good channel dude!
Thank you Rolly
This style of video totally reminds me of Drachinifel style videos.
Just a Russian guy passing by :)
Only for the Algorithm of cuz ;)
I like your vids! Спасибо very much!
Quick question: is it possible to mask a submarines sound signature by making more noise. Say if you were taking a your brand new nuclear boat for a spin for the first time and you added 1-2 more pumps or generators, just to make some more noise. Prevents the enemy from knowing too much
Yes. But pointless. Unless the subs are just for show. At some point it will have to be operated in "silence"
@@mostlymessingabout surely it's no different to war mode radar? There's still a point to it even if it will ultimately be heard.
Not pointless, like the luneberg lenses the F-22 has mounted that make them bigger on radar, I suspect that is done by everybody. On the case of a sub it is even easyer, since you can just turn the 'noisemaker' off on a short notice and be full combat quiet...
@@eduardocharlier7560 Exactly. And you don't need it to be anything functional like a pump or a generator...
Every country that builds subs will perform "quietness" testing to verify the sub meets design standards and fleet requirements. This is the critical phase when other nations want to be in the right place at the right time so they can get that critical data.
I can imagine the crew of a Virginia class just silently snickering as they follow a Kilo around measuring its sound signature :D
It's pretty intense.
@@Komsomolskaya I would imagine ever nation that has submarines is spying on every other nations submarines, and that includes NATO submarines spying on US and other NATO submarines. I suppose it gives the guys something to do to stop them getting bored.
A Victoria class submarine destroyed a Virginia class during an exercise. The American's later came on board and were dumbfounded on how such a vessel could do that. I find it funny how the Americans constantly think their the best, even though they quite often get destroyed during international exercises. ( A little side note, American aircraft carriers are not as invincible as people think they are; A Victoria class sunk one plus over half her strike group in one exercise. True story from a former submariner. Americans hate that one.)
@@chrispitre2052 yeah the virginia and ohios arent as silent as one may think... but those seawolfs are a scary bit of tech. and you wouldnt know it but if theirs a virginia or ohio around you can be damned sure there is a seawolf lurking nearby looking for kilo 2s....
@@chrispitre2052 and you know this how?
I'm loving this content Jive. As far as I know you are the only person on yt who is delivering this kind of analysis and information for subs. I enjoy your game streams as well but I always look forward to these technical lectures.
Thank you.
How do you tell a sailor from the North Fleet?
He glows in the dark.
lolz
Now that is genuine Russian Navy humor... almost fell out of my chair. Salute.
can you white board torpedo loading techniques at dock
good idea
@@SubBrief as a Brit I'd be interested in how the US reload trident at Dock, as a visiting US Submariner went white as a bedsheet after seeing the UK used forklifts at some delicate part where you guys obviously had a issue/accident in the past
Thanks for another great informative video Jive! Sure do like playing the sneaky Kilo in Cold Waters :)
we did that this evening. it was great.
Could watch your videos for hours. Especially fun listening to a sub brief while simulating combat on the computer with the boat your briefing us.
Awesome stuff, very informative and interesting. Was just thinking about this boat the other day when I saw it in a news article, even better to have someone talk about it so excellent stuff Jive!
Another great video Jive! Thanks for the info!! Very cool stuff. Really enjoy watching these.
Glad to hear it.
One sub I would love to see you do a video on would be the I-400, I know its end of WWII and you stick to Cold War Subs, but I just think that it is a submarine class of its own.
We'll see about that.
@@SubBriefYYEEEEESSSS
@@SubBrief I'm a big World War 2 nut :)
I'd like that to. Modern stuff is a bit difficult for a landlubber layman to get into.
Can't get enough of these. INSTA CLICK
@Jive Turkey. QM2/SS Arriving. I love these lectures. Everytime you start, I get a flash back to Sub School and expect you to preface the lecture with "Pencils down"
Sorry for the flashbacks and you're welcome
Thanks for the brief.
I Just want to let you know, that theese submarine review videos are one of the best content on UA-cam, ceep doing them. I would also appreciate some videos that explain different aspects of submarines, like sonar or propulsion.
A comparison sub brief on the improved Kilo vis Collins class would be interesting . . .
Jive, a quick question about sonar loudness: A sperm whale is the loudest of all animals and its sonar can produce a Sonic injury to a human being when he is in the beam. Is Naval sonar, seemingly at a higher frequency, equally loud at 230 plus decibels?
Exact power levels are not public, but it's comparable to the whales.
Captain Jive is the UA-cam's jane's 360.
Have you done a review of the Swedish Sterling engine sub and the “sinking” of the US CVN?
We could also do a vid on all the other NATO diesel electrics that "sunk" US CVN in exercises.
I read that a submarine had targeted and had a good hit on an American CVN, and would have hit it if it had been more than a simulation/ war game. However, hitting a CVN and sinking it or even putting it out of action is a different thing altogether.
@@josephkane825 I appreciate the distinction you are making, however, wouldn't getting close enough to launch an autonomous weapon be considered "bad"? Could not have been a good day for the screen commander.
@@DrNickAG I agree with you completely! I remember about thirty years ago, or so, that a Soviet submarine surfaced and banged into the bottom of a CVN. Yes, the fact that any sub was able to torpedo a CVN is very bad. The fact that a noisy as hell Soviet sub accidently surfaced into the keel of a CVN in the middle of a full destroyer screen tells me that the US Navy is living under a delusion when it comes to enemy submarine danger! I remember when a new Soviet submarine was reportedly made with a Titanium hull. It could reportedly go down to and operate at 4,000 feet depth or so. At that depth, it would likely survive a US nuclear torpedo detonating at 1,000 feet.
Noisy or not, crude or not, dangerous to their own crew as to the enemy or not, some of their submarines are a real threat to the US Navy, and I am quite alarmed about what I see as complacency on the part of US Navy propaganda about our superior invincibility! I see big men with big expensive toys, lots of political influence and little true patriotic intent!
@@josephkane825 Exercises like these are pretty useless in terms of such information without the full context though. I don't remember the details but I'm pretty sure it wasn't as impressive as it sounds.
It reminds me of that exercise simulating a fleet similar to that of Iran, where speedboats successfully sunk a carrier and most of its escort. The USA wanted to start over because they lost. It sounds great and all, until you get the full information.
Turns out the exercise was quite a bit of a mess and the USA didn't want to start it over because they lost, but because the exercise was senseless. The enemy had speedboats that carried missiles so heavy they'd sink them instantly. That's ignoring the lightspeed motorcycles and so on too. More importantly, it didn't simulate the fleet of Iran, but a fleet similar to that of Iraq or Iran. Turns out that no carriers were sunk in the following war in Iraq a few years later.
Plz make a video about DEGAUSSING. How effective is this? Is the boat complete unmagnetized? Maybe the difference between pre and post degaussed boat!
Thx
It throws off MAD sensors, magnetic mines, and makes the hulls Signature magnetically more attuned to Earth’s background as far as ocean based magnetics goes
m1tglied: Degaussing and Deperming are well established technologies which are extremely effective when well designed, and performed regularly. They have been used since at least early WWII.
Love these vids Cap! Keep 'em coming!
Monday, Wednesday and Friday
The sub commenced “degaussing” at pier side….it’s actually deperming. Degaussing is a system built into the ship/boat and it changes with the earths magnetic field as the ship travels. Deperming is done after the ship/boat is built. It alters the magnetic signature that is built into the ship to a null. Deperming would not need to be repeated unless significant repairs or alterations were made to the hill.
The whole “at 1 yard” thing is simultaneously epic and hecking freaky. I can only imagine that they way they determine that is either with something outstandingly technologically advanced or hilariously simple
There’s a documentary and book of the same name that describes the lol worthy ways we were able to sneak up on soviet boats and record them during the Cold War...
YY: The "At one yard" is a reference level and not necessarily the actual distance at which the measurement was taken. Similar to deciBells per millivolt, dBmv. The reference level can be calculated from measurements take even at long distances and adjusted for signal loss in water.
"Jive's fighting ships- Submarine DLC pack".
Hey Jive I’m officially starting the process to join the Navy, shipping out sometime next year. Thank you for being a role model
Are the sound measurements in these videos comparable? So same speed, same conditions?
I think it is pretty hard to believe that this submarine is noisier (under electric power) than the Shang-B under nuclear power.
it has Windows in conning Tower? i thought that was only for designs that were intended for use in polar regions
rtepeat after me: Eee-gorr NOT i-ger. :) Great tech brief, like everytime. Thank you SO much!
Love these overviews, keep them going, and thanks.
Thank you. Will Do.
FYI, it is "ad-mril-ty". Not admirAlity.
On an RT video they said that it produces only 30dB at one meter from the hull!
well, ok. lol
@@SubBrief117 dB at what speed is the question
Thank you sir
Kapitän Turkey - absolutely been loving your videos, so happy I found this channel thanks to The War Zone. Also, congrats on being a writer over there now, that's a great community as well. Looking forward to more content!!
Thank you
SWEET REPORT!
Can you make a video on the Project 20120 Sargan, It's surely an interesting submarine that started as a kilo
I have to google that reference.
That would be a "sarov"
Great video
Those noise parameters for the 636 don't make sense. Numerous declassified sources place them significantly lower, even as low as 105dB, and that's conservative. In your previous video you gave the estimated noise levels of the latest Type 93 as 110dB, which is at about the level of a 971. So now the relatively modern diesel-electric sub is somehow noisier than a nuke? Gimme a break.
The measurements are just specifics. Maybe some noisy diesel engine was not isolated properly and was noisy. If you measure another sub of the same class it will also be different. You can't use a single measurement to call the whole class noisy
Is that dB reading of the diesels running?
Putting to sea for trials you’d assume they deployed with diesels running then run on batteries?
This sub is designed to run very quiet at 3-4 knots with the prop being turned not by the main shaft but by a quieter system aided by two aux pumps to help make small course corrections located under the rear planes. I’d agree this is a very quiet vessel.
Love these videos, can't wait for the next one!
Monday at 4:30pm Eastern
117 dB is insane. Most sources reckon around 105. Still, if I'm understanding things right, that's still only 1km of attenuation before it drop below ambient in sea state 1.
Haven't been following much of this since the early 2000's so didn't know they put the Kilos back in production. Any reason why they didn't go with a pumpjet like the Kilo-class 'Alrosa' in the Black Sea Fleet?
Pumpjets eat batteries like crazy, you need high energy propulsion to use them. Like nuclear. They are also more useful at high speeds. Alrosa is just a test sub that stuck around for 30 years, she could have special missions like swimmer delivery.
Hi Jive, thanks for another great video! Would you consider making a video of a hypothetical USN SSK type submarine. One where you use your knowledge and let us know what you think would be a good set of systems. Thanks again!
I'll give you want ever you want, Chronus.
@@SubBrief curious to know your thoughts about a modern USN SSK, or at least one more modern than the Barbel class. I made a hypothetical one for Cold Waters that I based on the Sturgeon class hull as a 'modern' SSK. Modern spherical and towed array, top speed 22kts, quieter than the Narwhal, but it made me wonder if it was such a sub was practical when the Narwhal was pretty darn quiet, wouldn't need to snorkel or run an AIP system, AND faster....
But I come up with crazy ideas... Like squeezing a small VLS system into the Sturgeon class boats to add 3 or 6 VLS tubes as a "what if" update.
As always, great video, but it's not "NOVO-ROSS-KIS" (cracked up at this one), it's "NOVO-ROSS-IYSK" with the stress on "I".
I tend to bumble through words
I would say the coded comms for the UWT would be hail or what ever you guys call underwater text message..
At 5:35 you said an american boat has to rip the topside appart to load new torpedos, could you elaborate? Maybe make it into one of your whiteboard episodes?
Here you go! ua-cam.com/video/fVypntc6wN8/v-deo.html
Think they just lost one of these today.
Hey Jive could you do a video about the Akula (Project 971)?
Yes.
@@SubBrief yay, thanks, it's my favorite sub
the 1yd sound check, reminds me about a story here in Norway, about an sonar operator reported that he heard someone that had fallen down some stairs just over there, and pointed toward the bulkhead, almost as it was just a few meters away!
if it's tru or not, how know.... one thing I experienced is that it's not so smart to play cat and mouse with a Norwegian submarine at it's home turf
Been watching for a while now. Bought Cold Waters after watching your vids. Many many hours stalking and sinking.
The improved ones are as quiet as heck anyone seen the news lately about them kilos near the British coastline
You know diesel electrics are only quiet while they are drifting along at 3 knots, if they have to move they get loud.
Hey Jive, what are your thoughts on why USN doesn't employ diesel/electrics boats rather to have all nuclear? From what I've heard D/E''s can be super quiet(submerged)like Germany's Type 212. Granted D/E's don't have the nuke boat's endurance but what about operating costs, deployment in waters relatively close to mainland support(the Med, E.Pacific)? What other limitations/bonus' D/E's have than nukes?
That's why the US has allies
When the Royal Navy had its budget cut massively they had huge and painful choices to make, lost their big carriers, the Fleet Air Arm gave their F4s and Buccaneers to the RAF, lost their air dropped nuclear role, ton of ships and more relevantly they had to choose between SSN/SSBN or SSK/SSBN.
The Admiralty went 100% nuclear for subs. The operational range, capability and endurance to project naval power was just too great to discard.
You are spot on for advantages of SSK. In shallow, noisy waters, short patrols length with a limited defence budget then SSK are great value. Sat in ambush on convoys/fleets they are deadly but if detected its dead. The SSK slow speeds are no help once weapons are after it. If in deep water that 300’ test depth of the imp Kilo is another disadvantage as you know how shallow to run counter fire too. Most SSN could run far deeper and faster.
I can’t talk for the USN but best guess is they’d rather run SSN as even their budget is finite and they have huge oceans to dominate in a timely manner.
@@stevepirie8130 British SSNs can barely project any power. There only ever was 7 of them which after including training and scheduled repair means that in wartime their sole mission will be babysitting SSBNs. Choosing them instead of way cheaper SS boats, which could be built in larger numbers was caused by misguided pride of a former maritime superpower and saving-face-measures in face of 1990s spending cuts.
Is this the Lada class or just a newer Kilo?
It's different form the LADA class. I should probably do the LADA soon to prevent confusion.
Regarding loading of torps: Germany did the same at least with the 205, 206 and 206A class diesel subs. I don't know, how the loading is done on the class 212A.
Good info. Thank you.
@@SubBrief If you are interested in the source: "Eberhard Rössler: Die Torpedos der deutschen U-Boote: Entwicklung, Herstellung und Eigenschaften der deutschen Marine-Torpedos. Hardcover, 2005" The front cover shows also this loading technique. The old German subs of the Bundesmarine didn't have enough space to load torps from inside the submarine into the tubes.
When these tests are underway the testers know that the opposing side would be listening in. So cook up the data and not give out too much.
That’s why sometime the F-35 fly with radar reflector to cook up those RCS number.
Killer content Jive!
Hey weasel, thank you.
Can you do a video about submarine anchor usage?
Jive, what’s the advantage or disadvantage of not having a top stabilizer fin? Why does the Kilo not have one?
That is a little too deep for me. Maybe a Naval Architect can answer that.
one sure thing is that it induces roll (as a disadvantage)
Good question 👍🏻
Reading up on open info sources they modified the hull shape to improve hydrodynamics after reported issues of crew complaints ref rolling in heavy seas near the surface. I’d imagine that’s when they had to snorkel.
Could it simply be they only need the lower mounted rudder due to their lower speeds and don’t need so much?
Must save on weight?
I wonder why it doesn't have a rudder surface up top like a lot of other subs.
Nice overview.
Thank you.
So, is the current Russian shipbuilding primarily for their fleet or for sale? Or are they raising money with SSK sales to pay for new SSNs?
some is for sale and a lot of is refurbishing old hulls.
That's actually a REALLY good question. I know they've been struggling hard financially for quite a while, I'd imagine they might be focusing on export. I know they've exported at least one of their newer boats to India, an Akula. Now I'm curious as well.
They are modernising many old Kilos right now. There were rumors circa 2015 that the russians wanted to buy the romanian Kilo to refurbish and sell to some asian country
They have to do both. When you make a new version, and fires a fancy weapon on it, people get interested and start buying more of your stuff, albeit the export version aren't quite as good
more than 40 kilos were sold outside out of 70 that were build. so it seems they mostly export those. well that is good for country. but i dont think they sold much of their nuclear submarines.
TBH nowadays a throw away nano drone costing only tens of dollars with a mic could fly right up to it, even drop a dipping mic. A drone the size and weight of mobile phone can fly at speeds in excess of 50mph for upto an hour.
What kind of operational range would you expect these diesel submarines to have? I can certainly understand building these for the Black Sea Fleet, where range is hardly an issue, but the Pacific Fleet seems like a different story. Is it likely that Russia would only use these boats in the Korea/Japan/northern China area, or would they have the range to operate farther out into the central Pacific or the South China Sea?
SHE IS MORE THAN A TONN THAN KILO
Electric Boat has a much different method of pressure vessel fabrication that what you showed here. I would bet that (from what I saw here) our sub crush depths are substantially greater than the published and tested crush depths. In addition, because of our method of fabrication, (In addition to the material specifications) our subs could take a proportionally greater explosive impact before failure. I was really surprised to see their partially completed hull sections being built like that!
Yeah, Admiralty Shipyard procedures are unconventional by western standards.
Electric builds submarines several times the size of Admiralty, which only does diesel-electric.
Jive, love these informative videos. What are your sources for this info?
as he said, none of your damn business
greetings how can i get a picture of my pop master chief armand louis lepage usn? i lost the only pic of him in uniform. last station skaggs / mare island, CA., retired @ 1968(?) ty great work luv the sub briefs.
Once again, an amazing video. A fun lecture and so much info! I'm suprised you aren't teaching at a naval school. Is 117 Db loud? How about giving out a grade for silence so we land lovers get an idea of how quiet a sub is?
It’s loud for Atlantic Operations; it’s a bitch for South East Asia Operations though because that area is naturally loud, all the biological signatures, underwater seismic activity and last but not least, all the shipping.
That’s why the Navy is a bit more concerned about diesel boats there...
@@tyvernoverlord5363 What about Indian Ocean?
They are sure of the sub that they dare to show its propeller. The ability to cut under-sea cables is worring. Nice info. Keep it up.
interesting that the boat does not have rudder extending above the propeller. Is there a reason for this? Is it common on Russian boats?
I wondered this as well.
It has one below the prop and I forgot what caused that design
"... skewed seven blade, as expected". Is there a significance to "seven", the fact that it's an odd number of blades, or that it's skewed?
it's lucky
A popular design, even number of blades could lead to vibration afaik
117db at one yard...... So are we Inverted top gun rolling on these things now??? I'd live to see "maverick" giving the kilo the bird.
Well, we gotta keep up foreign relations somehow.
They can extrapolate a reading from distance to calculate what is from the source.... its a calculation that takes into account at sea conditions, distance, water density and sensitivity of the measuring device.
Nice analysis, but I can’t see how the 636 underwater top speed could be almost 50% higher than in the basic 877 model. Such a speed bump would need a lot more horsepower from the main electric motor and/or hydrodynamic improvements, wich doesn’t seem the case. Don’t have the equation on hand, but each extra knot means a lot of extra horsepower
Good point! There a lot of factors in Turns per Knot other than horsepower. Think about screw blade size and bite.
NATO has thoroughly examined Polish Kilo class ORP Orzeł (877E). Anyway, while not most modern/capable/best looking submarine, it sure has some 'british' aesthetics to it and one of most _classic_ submarine looks ever.
Can she load Shikval’s??
"how we got that measurement is none of your business" insta doubt of presented information ensues
Never trust a Jive Turkey.
Jive, what was you retirement rank at discharge? How would you class the retirement benefits and pension after 20 years of service time? You also get lifetime healthcare right? I'm considering a career in the Navy and want to get some real life info as far as long term planning goes, not the usual recruiter BS that can't be trusted ;) Really appreciate any help you can give, Thanks!
I have a good pension that I can live off of, thus I am doing UA-cam videos intead of working at Walmart. ;-) Health care is the best thing ever. It's not free, but it's very very cheap. VA health care is free if you are disabled while in the military.
i like russian submarine cause of the swimming pool and the jakuzi and those wonderful gyms what a hotel
Love these
Iran has Kilo SSKs. Scary thought.
What's with the bizarre propulsion on the back of one of these?
Wait what? I can't believe how noisy the imp. Kilo II is then? I mean, its louder than a bloody improved Shang SSN. And I always believed, those Diesel-Subs were the quietest subs out there. Which leads me to the next question: Jive, could you do a relative Chart (no absolute Numbers because they are classified) with noise levels of current SSNs and Diesel Subs?
That's just some intel statement. Looks like bullshit in the greater picture, maybe russkies knew they were being recorded and made some noise lol
I do want to know how the hell did you manage to go near it with less than a meter . :-)
lol
great video as always captain! Are Jewgeni and Boris still out there in their van? ;-)
They hang out in the Den now. It's too hot outside.
I tracked a Kilo in 83. Was a big deal back then.
Were you on subs?
I wonder if any country has ever made a nuclear boat that charged batteries so it could run as quietly as a diesel boat on batteries?
Please do French Scorpeone video!
these are great
Thank you.
3M-54 Kalibr missiles.
Jive, "Novorossiysk" is pronounced "know-vo-ross-EEE-sk". Additionally, "Severodvinsk" is pronounced "seh-vehr-OH-dvihn-sk".
Not really. You see, non-stressed O is pronounced like A or shwa, so it would be [nəvərɐˈsʲijsk]. Similarly, "Severodvinsk" is pronounced [sʲɪvʲɪrɐdˈvinsk]