I had a book back in the seventies called "The K Class" (sadly, no longer in my possession) but vividly remember the description on the back in which it referenced the story of a "K-class" Captain inspecting his boat and contacting his First Officer via intercom with the immortal phrase " I say No 1, my end's diving. What's your end doing?". Sums them up perfectly.
Thanks for this interesting history. As a young marine engineer in 1982, I worked at Norfolk Naval Shipyard. Directly across the river from the yard was the mothballed USS Triton among a few old surface combatants. On several occasions engineers from our office were sent to Triton to canabalize components to use on ongoing sub overhauls. So, this is the first detail I have ever heard about the design concept and purpose of the ship.
On the subject of the complicated nature of Soviet submarine safety, a while back I started doing a deep dive into all fatalities on Soviet nuclear submarines I could find. There were a LOT of fatalities, and eventually I gave up finding them all (this was a single slide of a longer presentation). But for all the accidents, especially reactor accidents, on an Alfa I could only find one fatality: a man overboard. There were probably a few cancer deaths, but those were hard to track down for any reactor accident.
Conscripts are not ideal for submarines. Most submarines were delivered in safe condition but crews didn't maintain their boat and just passed on to the next crew the accumulated wear and tear. As fire was the main cause of most accidents, accumulated wear and tear can mean a spark, a faulty gauge or something as anodine but accidents have an origin. In my opinion a submarine has to be crewed by professionals. Russia has changed since the Soviet days, crews are professionals and much better care is taken of the boat during a crew's tour. (edited for having used ship instead of boat, I don't want to get keeled :)
@@mikecimerian6913 About conscripts, may I remind you that the German army that kicked the butt of the English was all conscripts. Not to talk about the Finns and the Israelis.
@@ulfosterberg9116 , this might be true for the army, but Mike was clearly referring to conscripts on subs and he clearly has a point. The soviet system of "boat crews" - where one crew would be transferred together from boat to boat - was also a major factor here. The accident numbers speak for themselves, and they would have been much higher if not for the relatively high quality soviet subs (with escape systems) and the heroic actions of some crew. K-429 sums up the situation quite well.
I would honestly forgive the Alfa's, mostly because this wasn't the Soviets' first foray into liquid metal (K27, around a decade before, mind you as you said, you're forgiving the one-offs), and therefore had the experience to deem it necessary for their needs (It wasn't like they didn't understand the issues with liquid metal needing to be kept on, given by now they already had basically shelved K27 after a reactor incident and had battled with keeping her turned on for half a decade before that incident), and the idea of an "always on" reactor somewhat befitting the interceptor submarines' "always-ready" role unlike the one-offs. The half hour or hour or such startup procedure of a water reactor would likely be too much time lost for it's role, meaning a similar water reactor would be 'always-on' anyways. It's an issue of course for maintenance and such however.
The space saving nature of the reactor and the nature of the submarine forgive the design choice in my opinion, it gives the Alfa its most important trait in a way the water-cooled alternatives could not. I would choose many, many other choices as the "worst" before the alfa- how about November? The Romeo class? Juliet? I love all of them for aesthetics, but both are far too noisy for their generations. At least the alfa remained in service, able to survive and do combat, for some time. November was from a noise and performance perspective almost dead on arrival, and Romeo was an odd middle ground between Whiskey's numbers and Tango's capabilities. Juliet's readying time and short radar range made it hazardously susceptible to counterfire before it could get its missiles off, with a substandard speed and sonar if it didn't opt to use the missiles it was designed for. I certainly would not choose Alfa.
what about liquid metal cooling concept, in worst case scenario you have spillage of molten metal that solidifies on contact with submarine structure and all your radiation is limited to affected reactor compartment, no water to leak, no radiation to spread besides direct contact with now solid metal in engine room. lirteraly drag it to a deep ocean sink it and it affects nothing unlike water based reactors that spread radiations to atmosphere, water, soil as water penetrates everywhere carrying radiation waste. yes there are corrosion problems with lead but i bet with more research it could be made less corrosive and practical.
@@rcajavus8141 Actually it can get worse than that, how do we know? It did. K27 suffered a type of accident where the uranium rods sort of 'broke down' and later offgassed from the coolant system into the boat, irradiating the entire crew through the air. Oh, and regarding the whole 'sink it in deep water'? Good idea, and there was even treaties and laws saying you must sink a submarine at a certain depth. Too bad this was the russians. They scuttled it much later by *Ramming it* in shallow water. It's visible by satellite to this day and attempts are being made to recover and raise the wreck before something happens. an account for your reading if you'd like, its an interesting ship to look up: "At 11:35 everything was peaceful," he said. "The bulkheads were open. I was in the fifth compartment, next to the fourth compartment with the two nuclear reactors, talking to some crew members there. We suddenly noticed some people running. "We had a radiation detector in the compartment, but it was switched off. To be honest, we hadn't paid much attention to the radiation dosimeters we were given. But then, our radiation supervisor switched on the detector in the compartment and it went off the scale. He looked surprised and worried." They did not understand what had happened immediately because the radioactive gas had no odour or colour. But two hours later, some crewmen came out of the fourth compartment - and some of them had to be carried, because they could not walk, CWO Mazurenko said. He put it down to fatigue, because the crew had spent three days with almost no sleep. The submarine headed back to its base on the Kola Peninsula, by the Barents Sea, which took five hours. As the sub approached, the base's command fled the dockside, because special radiation alarms onshore were emitting a deafening roar, CWO Mazurenko recalled. Soon after, the base commander picked up the captain in a car, but most of the crew had to walk 2km (1.2 miles) back to their barracks under their own steam. Several specialist crew members were left on board the toxic sub for about a day, because they were under orders to keep watch. Some have blamed K-27's Capt Pavel Leonov over the accident, but CWO Mazurenko says the captain faced a life-or-death choice. "When the sub surfaced to make the trip back to the docks, the division ordered it to cut its engines and await special instructions. The captain, however, decided to keep going, because if the sub stopped for several hours nobody would survive long enough to get it back to base." The crew of 144 were poisoned - nine died of radiation sickness soon after the emergency, and the others were ill for years before their premature deaths.
Why do I feel the Titan is included. Edit: the comment was wrote immediately after the video was published (for once YT got me the feed), reading the title of the video and relating it to the current Titan situation.
@@interstellarsurferctually titan beat the hunley. The hunley actually made between five and eight dives prior to being a total lost, but lost more crew members since three full crews drowned, titan had four before now.
Miss seeing your uploads as often. Understandable though, life has a way of taking up time. Thanks for the effort/time you invest as it is, it's greatly appreciated.
I think the North Korean subs deserve inclusion. So dubious they don't even go out to sea but rather are limited to patrolling the shore line. Painted bright green and red (sometimes all pink) perhaps to make them easier to find when they sink.
They seem more like a single-use concept. One has to wonder, because many of them may just be fodder or they may be more like a torpedo or mine merged with a manned submersible.
To be honest, considered their opponent, South Korea don't have shallow surface submarine. the North Korea submarines do enjoy homefield advantage for attacking unsuspecting vessels where ships can travel but large submarines cannot, while South Korea subs mainly have to content with China and Japan, yes, including Japan as maritime rival despite being part of the Pacific Allies with USA.
The green works quite well in the shallow water where NK subs work. These subs are not expected to go into the Sea of Japan, but to lie in ambush near ports. For what the likely battle plan a Korean War would follow, the subs the NK have are going to do the job.
Another great video! I always look forward to your uploads, and I enjoy this format. I'd love to see more of this simple easy to digest style video in between your larger investigations/projects. You could even do top 5 lists based on specific criteria like reliability, how quiet they are, how much more advanced they were at launch than their peers/revolutionary, etc.
What i like the most is that you're not having any bias while recording your clips. A pretty balanced view of your topics and great knowledge. Thanks for your work and for sharing it.
@@HISuttonCovertShoresit’s way too soon, but might you do one for submersibles? I’m presuming the Italian manned torpedo base ones might make the list, along with the aborted SEAL delivery vehicle (caught on fire didn’t it?)? Maybe another list for research submersibles? Maybe not tourist subs.
I also like the Tank Museum videos. I'm pretty sure I've like every video on this channel. This was another interesting one which I really enjoyed. Thanks for taking time to make it.
Almost all the "Cruiser" submarines were a bad idea, because big guns require an oversized hull they were slow to dive and surface and were not very agile. But the guns are actually a "problem" in their own right because of shell handling. In a surface ship this happens vertically...shells and charges just go up and down....but now we have to move big shells horizontally on one of these large vessels and move them around fast enough to maintain a reasonable rate of fire......so anything bigger than 6" required more than simple muscle power to move them around!
Agreed. There a way to go about it, and still respect the families, but unless you are a news organization, I think its best to wait until after the situation has come to an end.
I disagree, i would love to know his thoughts and in depth analysis on that situation. You already know he would be respectable. Getting the news about it from "news sources" who have less idea what they are talking about is frustrating. I understand what you mean though. It is life and death situation. Deserves some tact.
Yea, the only person we need to report on that news is Ollie Williams. “We go to the scene with Ollie Williams.” “What it’s like out there, Ollie?” “They ded!!!” “Thanks Ollie.”
It would be interesting to hear your analysis of the Titan incident once more information is known. The company is currently being slagged for not following testing procedures and making statements like, "We don't want a bunch of 50 year old white men involved in our design" when asked about why they didn't consult experienced submarine engineers during their design phase.
and rightly so. Whatever caused the accidents, both are serious problems with the company's attitude and practices, things that have no place in the industry (or indeed any industry).
"We don't want a bunch of 50 year old white men involved in our design" sounds a lot like "man those experts are expensive, why hire them when we can hire cheap fresh grads?"
I read they actually did have an experienced guy, he had decades of knowledge. They hired him for safety inspection and advisory consultant, they fired him for causing excessive delays in the design and manufacturing.
Yeah, I myself and unsure of which to consider it. Especially considering it is not an independent seafaring vessel. Whichever it is, though, it is the most despicable of its type.
The Kaiten was very good at exactly one role: attacking protected harbors. By 1944 the Type C midget was too large to carry on the larger Japanese submarines and the reasonably successful missions early in the war had an appalling survival rate (0% until Guadalcanal if you include returning to Japanese lines). Carrying four or six of these to attack Humboldt Bay, Ulithi, or Palau was a decent use of materials and gave you four chances to hit a target rather than two. In every other way it was a terrible weapon system. The only positives at all are it actually gave the Type D cargo submarines teeth (at best two torpedo tubes that were often removed, though they never hit anything) and once they were launched as a distraction to save the mother submarine, and both of those are niche/caused by hyper-specialized Japanese submarine production.
The Kaitan was a manned torpedo with limited controls and meant for a one-way suicidal attack. It really should have worked better than it did. Only one Kaitan ever successfully hit a ship. In this case, the oiler USS Mississinewa was sunk in Ulithi.
Will you do a video on the titanic submersible story? I know it's a bit out of your normal stuff but I feel you'd be able to give an interesting and knowledgeable video on it.
I second this request. It sure hear a lot of strange things about which I'm pretty sure aren't true. People seem hung up on the Bluetooth game controller. I personally think that is a non-issue. I'd be really interested to hear H I Sutton's thought about the submarine.
@@ddegnI agree, the USN uses Xbox controllers for their periscopes without issues. Plus the sub has 4 different methods to release the ballast and resurface so I'm betting something else, probably hull related, for the loss.
@@diltzm "probably hull related" I would have thought any hull problem would be immediately catastrophic. Based one the sonar buoys picking up sounds, it appears there are people still alive (at least that's what I heard yesterday). I'd be curious to learn about the ways the ballast can be released. I wonder if the pressure deformed the release mechanisms. If you know of any good videos which go into detail about the release mechanisms, I'd like to know about them.
About 1974 I bought the book "The K class" from an open air bookstall in Govan. When I read it I discovered that K13, the one which sank on trials, had been built only quarter of a mile away. It was a fascinating read. Did you write it? Recently I found the Battle of May Island on line. Of course, the resurrected hull of K13 was involved. A few weeks ago I eventually went to Elder Park opposite Fairfield's shipyard and saw the memorial to those lost in the accident caused by "two many holes". And I phographed each side.
Great post - really enjoyed your choices. I never knew anything at all about radar picket subs, so thanks for the education! At some point, please continue the Tank Museum theme and do a top 5 list!
You didn't mention the Isaac Peral, pride of the Spanish Navy. Thought this would be your number one. When talking about the USS Triton, no mention of it being in the NECPA program; basically able to accommodate the US President in the event of nuclear war, this was never mentioned publicly and wouldn't be due to security concerns, so is technically in the realm of rumor. As an old bubblehead, we thought this to be almost common knowledge. I liked your video, will look for more.
I remember seeing the Biber on Salvage Squad. It managed to Dive. And - importantly for the occupant - Surface. In a flooded, controlled dry-dock environment. As far as I know, this makes it the last WW2 vintage submarine capable of diving.
The statistics on the Bieber, if you read Rohwer's chronology of the war at sea are just depressing like "50 sent out, none returned, 30 sent out, 2 returned etc" Basically the single operator not only had to cope with the carbon monoxide from a gasoline engine (a truck engine basically) but also with staying awake for prolonged periods of time. Most of them used Pervitin (Meth) to stay awake but generally simply crewing this thing was too much. It could have been successful if used against strategic point targets like ex HMS Royal Sovreign (aborted) or the Nijmegen bridge but in a general patrol role it was suicide
There is a good reason that most submarines of any particular era tend to collect in a size band, and that is because that is what works from an engineering perspective. Anything extraordinarily large or small for its time tends to be an operational failure for engineering reasons. Large: Triton, Surcouf, K class, M class, Argonaut, I 400. Small: every minisub every built for combat. Yes, they had some successes, but in every class made by all nations they suffered proportionally much greater losses than they inflicted.
AIP propulsion never materialized, lead boat of class will reportedly be retired early due to extent of its issues. Plus points, large sonar, powerful weapons and typical (high) Russian standards of stealth
Very informative hearing about the 'Duds' of the Sub Service. Thanks H I. Unfortunately a very topical video as the Titan Submersible going down at the Titanic Wreck in the news. Any chance you could give us your awesome insight into that vehicle and the technologies that created it and others of it's ilk?
My inexpert view is that Surcouf is/was absolutely the best of the cruiser submarine iterations suggested by planners for persecution of the Guerre de Course. A compromise in every sense of the world, she was too lively for 8" gun duels or bombardments, too large for the ease of maneuvering and short diving times required of any submarine warship, her hull pierced in too many places for dependable submerged watertight integrity. in short, Surcouf was perfect for WW1, when maritime patrol/ASW aviation was in its infancy. For the '20s and early '30s she still seemed ahead of her time. The late '30s and the war years exploded her proponents' many claims as unreasonable. At least four allied assets - from merchant ships to ASW aircraft - claimed to have rammed, sunk, or otherwise interacted with her on the night of her disappearance. The fog of war? Or an ongoing series of unfortunate events? We may never know.
For what it is worth, criticisms are normally a) moving turret might have leaked, possibly causing its loss b) aircraft usefulness for spotting, c) concept of surface raiding submarine d) $$$$$$ My piece on her www.hisutton.com/Surcouf.html
Series 3 'Salvage Squad' episode 5 they renovated a Biber class sub and took it for a short, shallow test dive in a dock. Very interesting series. This episode is on UA-cam.
I LOVE your videos.... I cant get enough... I wish you did nothing except for eat, sleep, and make your fantastic videos! Cant wait for the next one!! Cheers!
I think it's a bit extreme to definitively say Biber was the worst. The only argument given for why it's the worst of all time (!) were the problems with the gasoline engine, which were indeed gruelling, but could later be fixed. Apart from this issue, Marder was described as a relatively elegant vehicle, considering its highly simplified design. Manned torpedoes like Marder were much more problematic in terms of risking the suffocation of its one-man crew, as there wasn't enough oxygen for longer expeditions, so if you really want a German design to take the #1 spot, it should be that one. Here are some additional (dis)honorable mentions: - the Japanese Kaidai-1-class, which was forced to have four (!) propeller shafts as Japan was unable to import more powerful diesel engines. - and the Sen-Taka-class (better known as I-201), which might seem surprising, but the truth is that they were very impractical because they had literally thousands of small batteries to achieve the high voltage and high amperage required for the 5000 hp power output. It also had to have four electric motors on two shafts so that the voltage could be "divided into four", which led to noise problems. While 19 knots was said to be the theoretically attainable speed, these practical concerns limited the submarine to about 17, which is in the ballpark of what what Type XXI was capable of, while also having much higher submerged range (135 nm @ 3 knots vs 487 nm @ 3 knots) and being a lot quieter. At the end of the war, only three of these subs were built, none of which were combat-ready. - the Oberon-class submarine: actually not terrible, but frustrating for how lackluster they were. Despite being Britain's main class of conventional submarines in the Cold War, these were not a lot better than Type XXI, although they certainly benefitted from less rushed design and construction. Most conventional Soviet submarines in the Cold War until Kilo-class were similarly unimpressive. - the Quebec-class submarine, which is mainly a stupid design for its implementation of liquid oxygen as the only oxygen supply for its closed-cycle engine when running underwater. Since the liquid oxygen evaporated steadily, this submarine was strategically very limited, even just for coastal usage.
All reasonable points, but sticking to Biber. Saying it could have been fixed, when over 300 were built... Far from a fan of Marder in this sense, many of the issues were shared (plus Molch, Delfin, Hai etc)
@@HISuttonCovertShores Just to be clear here (my wording was ambiguous, sorry): The problems with Biber */were/* later fixed with a special suction device, which is why I don't think Biber is the very worst thing that was ever built. But yeah, most German late-war midget subs were problematic due to the haste and desperation with which they were developed, the only exception being the teardrop-shaped Delphin, which was hard to develop as an offensive weapon without losing its impressive speed (most people in the KM were vehemently against Japanese-style suicide weapons and attaching torpedoes would add significant drag). Interestingly, the US Navy's history of developing the teardrop shape also started with considerations to develop modern midget subs, an interesting parallel, but a different story...
According to some accounts, included in Norman Olhers book "Blitzed : Drugs in Nazi Germany" (2016), a major factor n the failure of one-man submarine operations in the Channel after D-Day was the issue of Methamphetamine tablets to the crews. Wired up to stay awake while awaiting launches, and then during long arduous solo missions, barely trained crew members already disadvantaged by the limitations of a midget sub just got disoriented and couldn't find their targets. Add in issues with lack of oxygen, fumes, visibiility, reliability, and no wonder they were useless.
The main issue with kaiten was its inherently bad idea of how to find and hit the target: the pilot was expected to spot the enemy through the scope, and then proceed with a rather complicated attack pattern, checking through the scope if necessary. However, kaiten was not very agile. It was fast - but then, the speed meant the periscope could hardly be used, plus it would immediately give off a warning to the ship being attacked. Yet if the kaiten slowed down then the target ship could run away. The concept as a whole was deeply flawed - from what I've read the main reason why it was in service till the end of the war were the super optimistic reports after its first deployment and in several actions afterwards. Only after the war the Japanese learned that actually it scored barely any hits, and in total more submarines and IJN personnel was killed in kaiten operations than the US Navy ships and people.
PS There was, interestingly, one very good design of a midget submarine - the German Seehund. It had the crew of two, decent autonomy and weaponry consisting of two torpedoes. Very few were lost, and they actually scored some hits.
USS Triton was converted to a more conventional attack submarine, and served as such reasonably well. It was retired when the costly maintenance of her two nuclear power plants met an era of budget cuts. She was kept in reserve for quite a while but with years obsolescence probably came her one-off equipment. IMO, if one wanted a poor US submarine design, the Navy-built S-class boats might be good targets. Built in some quantity, performed poorly, and very few if any were still in service when WW2 arrived (some Electric Boat-built S-boats were, and some did combat patrols).
In the photo comparing the size of the USS Triton to another submarine, I believe that other submarine is one of the Skipjack-class boats. The Skipjack boats were the first US nuclear submarines that utilized the Albacore-style cylindrical hull we're familiar with today. (Skipjacks were approx. 250 feet in length; today's Virginia-class boats are either 377 or 460 fleet--depending on their capabilities.)
Common H i Sutton! We want your take on the Oceangate Titan! Even if you aren’t an expect on deep ocean exploration subs, it would be so interesting to get your perspective on the design of that sub. Maybe you can compare the titan incident to other historical sub disasters. All in due time of course
You are probably getting this a lot but it was really cool to hear you on the "Cold Front" podcast. Made me feel like a hip insider since I already knew of you.
So a radar picket sub would have to be surfaced, presumably for long periods of time, in order to fulfill its intended role…yeah why not make it nuclear powered so it could also stay submerged almost indefinitely!
I actually toured the TRITON as she was within the mothballed fleet at Norfolk Naval Ship Yard, in Portsmouth, Va. and trained on her S3G reactor plant prototype in Ballston Spa in NY. The photo of her next to a smaller sub was there, the sub next to her appears to be a SKIPJACK . Sub school in Connecticut had war prize mini-subs all over, the grounds, the same as pictured, and more, along with WWII fleet boats headed to scrap, or as museums. Pretty cool. Star Trek had just come out, but couldn't remotely compare to all the stuff that surrounded me. Cold War days . Of course, that was in '69 or so.
I want to learn more about those steam powered subs. Are they using sea water? I would assume theyd have to desalinate the water before use to prevent residue buildups.
Video on Steam Powered submarines ua-cam.com/video/pg_j8_NjZxw/v-deo.html And one particularly interesting design ua-cam.com/video/67IritgM79U/v-deo.html
Dear Sir, Thanks for your content. Bear in mind lead is now used in Next-gen Small-Medium Reactors by Blykalla. Energy is a different topic, but you left no explanation, just number 2.
Fun video....I think I would put the British M-class at the top of the pile (3 were built). Trying to get a sub to do the job of a (small) battleship is a fundamentally flawed concept (much like the hybrid battleship/aircraft carrier, or even the idea of large calibre guns on an aircraft carrier). It had to surface to fire (duh) and RELOAD. I would love to know what the recoil did to the boat. I would also include any boat designed to carry aircraft, though I can at least see some rationale.
A bit surprised to not hear about the type 091s considering they are rather noisy while not being that fast, but I supposee going after someone´s first attempt at a nuclear submarine is kinda mean.
To further emphasize the bulk of the Triton, it was too big for its building slip. Part of the bow was cut away from the hull during building to clear a railroad track that it was blocking and reattached later. The stern was built separately and attached later (it being somewhat difficult to build a ship when the ass end is already sticking out into the river), and after completing the sail it was realized that it was too high to clear the gantry over the slip during launch, so another big chunk was cut off to be reattached later.
The early Soviet nuclear subs were an accident waiting to happen. Two reactors with only four control rods per. The early US subs used the S2C reactor with 12 control rods (triple redundancy). I'm surprised they didn't have a dozen "Widowmakers".
In my navy days, I was on a 𝑆𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑔𝑒𝑜𝑛 class boat. Among the ranks of chief petty officers, one had been on 𝑁𝑎𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑙𝑢𝑠 when she went under the Arctic ice & another, the chief torpedoman's mate, had been on 𝑇𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑛 for her circumnavigation. It was hilariously easy to get these two arguing over which boat was better; by the time I met them, it was a well rehearsed argument, polished as a vaudeville comedy act. In private, TMC would admit 𝑇𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑛 was something of a white elephant, but swore it was the most comfortable boat for a junior enlisted man short of a ballistic missile submarine.
sorry humans invented writing to record ideas, not to use to make others quess what was meant to be recorded, whole british "pronounciation" is just a way of class struggle where upper classes abused writing to make lower classes never compatible - again, sorry please make british use letters as they were meant to be used, to communicate and not to rule others
If we take into account the resources devoted to the submarine and the benefit derived from it then the Japan's aircraft carrying subs would probably rank first since the mission they were designed for, to put out of commission the Panama Canal, was never accomplished nor even undertaken.
yeah i thought about it, it is a contender, especially the later ones where you cannot excuse them for being the first nuclear sub Type-092, Type-033G, Type-035 and Type-039 too
I so want my own personal, modernized, version of Surcoulf with rail cannon and laser-based AA weapons, essentially a submersible cruiser, but just for my pleasure. 😂 As for the Alpha, one thing for sure, they were crazy submarines, that's all I can say. The Iranian submarine is essentially just a large mini-submarine with limited diving and endurance. The promise of one or two man submarines was seductive, I think, and I'm still emfatuated with them. The Biber is probably the ultimate expression of this seduction without fulfillment. If it worked it could have really made it tough for the enemy, it just didn't work. The Italians in the cold war made some interesting small submarines that I have heard very little about since I was in the Navy, I wonder what they are doing now. My background is my wife and I were submarine hunters in the Navy during the Cold War, that's where I met her. Not many couples can say they got together in such a manner. 😅
Yeah, you HAD to include the 'K' class. Unavoidable, really. There was nothing horribly wrong with the basic IDEA, just that the technology of the time was very simply not up to the challenge.
Seems there is a lot of overlap between "5 Worst Submarines Ever*" and the potential list of "5 Most Interesting Submarines*". *refers to submarines to see active service.
What can you tell us about the Collins class submarine? They have a terrible reputation in Australia....largely brought about by extended development problems and associated political fallout. What are your thoughts on their capabilities in their mature, fully developed form?
Some wag from the US Navy remarked on the Alfa class - and the noise it made "You don't hunt deer on a motorcycle"
I had a book back in the seventies called "The K Class" (sadly, no longer in my possession) but vividly remember the description on the back in which it referenced the story of a "K-class" Captain inspecting his boat and contacting his First Officer via intercom with the immortal phrase " I say No 1, my end's diving. What's your end doing?". Sums them up perfectly.
Thanks for this interesting history. As a young marine engineer in 1982, I worked at Norfolk Naval Shipyard. Directly across the river from the yard was the mothballed USS Triton among a few old surface combatants. On several occasions engineers from our office were sent to Triton to canabalize components to use on ongoing sub overhauls. So, this is the first detail I have ever heard about the design concept and purpose of the ship.
I read that the Triton was made more for testing designs more than being a real attack sub. also didn't it had two reactors.
@@Rumtrinker Yes, they were going to make follow-on designs if it performed well.
On the subject of the complicated nature of Soviet submarine safety, a while back I started doing a deep dive into all fatalities on Soviet nuclear submarines I could find. There were a LOT of fatalities, and eventually I gave up finding them all (this was a single slide of a longer presentation).
But for all the accidents, especially reactor accidents, on an Alfa I could only find one fatality: a man overboard.
There were probably a few cancer deaths, but those were hard to track down for any reactor accident.
Conscripts are not ideal for submarines. Most submarines were delivered in safe condition but crews didn't maintain their boat and just passed on to the next crew the accumulated wear and tear. As fire was the main cause of most accidents, accumulated wear and tear can mean a spark, a faulty gauge or something as anodine but accidents have an origin. In my opinion a submarine has to be crewed by professionals. Russia has changed since the Soviet days, crews are professionals and much better care is taken of the boat during a crew's tour. (edited for having used ship instead of boat, I don't want to get keeled :)
Soviet submarine what?
"Safety" is not a word in the Russian dictionary.
@@LMB222I am sure they have a word for stupid.
@@mikecimerian6913 About conscripts, may I remind you that the German army that kicked the butt of the English was all conscripts. Not to talk about the Finns and the Israelis.
@@ulfosterberg9116 , this might be true for the army, but Mike was clearly referring to conscripts on subs and he clearly has a point. The soviet system of "boat crews" - where one crew would be transferred together from boat to boat - was also a major factor here. The accident numbers speak for themselves, and they would have been much higher if not for the relatively high quality soviet subs (with escape systems) and the heroic actions of some crew. K-429 sums up the situation quite well.
I would honestly forgive the Alfa's, mostly because this wasn't the Soviets' first foray into liquid metal (K27, around a decade before, mind you as you said, you're forgiving the one-offs), and therefore had the experience to deem it necessary for their needs (It wasn't like they didn't understand the issues with liquid metal needing to be kept on, given by now they already had basically shelved K27 after a reactor incident and had battled with keeping her turned on for half a decade before that incident), and the idea of an "always on" reactor somewhat befitting the interceptor submarines' "always-ready" role unlike the one-offs. The half hour or hour or such startup procedure of a water reactor would likely be too much time lost for it's role, meaning a similar water reactor would be 'always-on' anyways. It's an issue of course for maintenance and such however.
The space saving nature of the reactor and the nature of the submarine forgive the design choice in my opinion, it gives the Alfa its most important trait in a way the water-cooled alternatives could not. I would choose many, many other choices as the "worst" before the alfa- how about November? The Romeo class? Juliet? I love all of them for aesthetics, but both are far too noisy for their generations. At least the alfa remained in service, able to survive and do combat, for some time. November was from a noise and performance perspective almost dead on arrival, and Romeo was an odd middle ground between Whiskey's numbers and Tango's capabilities. Juliet's readying time and short radar range made it hazardously susceptible to counterfire before it could get its missiles off, with a substandard speed and sonar if it didn't opt to use the missiles it was designed for. I certainly would not choose Alfa.
AYO the highfleet loremaster himself!
what about liquid metal cooling concept, in worst case scenario you have spillage of molten metal that solidifies on contact with submarine structure and all your radiation is limited to affected reactor compartment, no water to leak, no radiation to spread besides direct contact with now solid metal in engine room. lirteraly drag it to a deep ocean sink it and it affects nothing unlike water based reactors that spread radiations to atmosphere, water, soil as water penetrates everywhere carrying radiation waste. yes there are corrosion problems with lead but i bet with more research it could be made less corrosive and practical.
@@rcajavus8141 Actually it can get worse than that, how do we know? It did. K27 suffered a type of accident where the uranium rods sort of 'broke down' and later offgassed from the coolant system into the boat, irradiating the entire crew through the air. Oh, and regarding the whole 'sink it in deep water'? Good idea, and there was even treaties and laws saying you must sink a submarine at a certain depth. Too bad this was the russians. They scuttled it much later by *Ramming it* in shallow water. It's visible by satellite to this day and attempts are being made to recover and raise the wreck before something happens.
an account for your reading if you'd like, its an interesting ship to look up:
"At 11:35 everything was peaceful," he said.
"The bulkheads were open. I was in the fifth compartment, next to the fourth compartment with the two nuclear reactors, talking to some crew members there. We suddenly noticed some people running.
"We had a radiation detector in the compartment, but it was switched off. To be honest, we hadn't paid much attention to the radiation dosimeters we were given. But then, our radiation supervisor switched on the detector in the compartment and it went off the scale. He looked surprised and worried."
They did not understand what had happened immediately because the radioactive gas had no odour or colour. But two hours later, some crewmen came out of the fourth compartment - and some of them had to be carried, because they could not walk, CWO Mazurenko said.
He put it down to fatigue, because the crew had spent three days with almost no sleep.
The submarine headed back to its base on the Kola Peninsula, by the Barents Sea, which took five hours.
As the sub approached, the base's command fled the dockside, because special radiation alarms onshore were emitting a deafening roar, CWO Mazurenko recalled.
Soon after, the base commander picked up the captain in a car, but most of the crew had to walk 2km (1.2 miles) back to their barracks under their own steam.
Several specialist crew members were left on board the toxic sub for about a day, because they were under orders to keep watch.
Some have blamed K-27's Capt Pavel Leonov over the accident, but CWO Mazurenko says the captain faced a life-or-death choice.
"When the sub surfaced to make the trip back to the docks, the division ordered it to cut its engines and await special instructions. The captain, however, decided to keep going, because if the sub stopped for several hours nobody would survive long enough to get it back to base."
The crew of 144 were poisoned - nine died of radiation sickness soon after the emergency, and the others were ill for years before their premature deaths.
@@1KosovoJeSrbija1 happy to see I'm recognizable, heh.
Why do I feel the Titan is included.
Edit: the comment was wrote immediately after the video was published (for once YT got me the feed), reading the title of the video and relating it to the current Titan situation.
Because it should be. Titan is challenging the CSS Hunley for voyage to loss ratio.
That's what I immediately thought!!!!
@@interstellarsurferctually titan beat the hunley. The hunley actually made between five and eight dives prior to being a total lost, but lost more crew members since three full crews drowned, titan had four before now.
Wokism!
I don't think it should be, calling a carbon fiber filament and epoxy tube deathtrap a submarine is a bit of a stretch
Welcome back again. I haven't seen your new videos in a while.
Miss seeing your uploads as often. Understandable though, life has a way of taking up time. Thanks for the effort/time you invest as it is, it's greatly appreciated.
I think the North Korean subs deserve inclusion. So dubious they don't even go out to sea but rather are limited to patrolling the shore line. Painted bright green and red (sometimes all pink) perhaps to make them easier to find when they sink.
I thought about it, but landed on Fateh Class
They seem more like a single-use concept. One has to wonder, because many of them may just be fodder or they may be more like a torpedo or mine merged with a manned submersible.
To be honest, considered their opponent, South Korea don't have shallow surface submarine. the North Korea submarines do enjoy homefield advantage for attacking unsuspecting vessels where ships can travel but large submarines cannot, while South Korea subs mainly have to content with China and Japan, yes, including Japan as maritime rival despite being part of the Pacific Allies with USA.
Isn’t one of their sub types just a Russian design they bought, which was based off of a German ww2 sub
The green works quite well in the shallow water where NK subs work. These subs are not expected to go into the Sea of Japan, but to lie in ambush near ports. For what the likely battle plan a Korean War would follow, the subs the NK have are going to do the job.
Glad to have you back. I checked your channel a couple of days ago and found nothing, so must have just missed this. Great video as always.
thank you!
I nominate the 'Titan" built and designed by one guy's company as literally the WORST device to submerge in water with a human in it.
CSS Hunley has entered the chat.
Another great video! I always look forward to your uploads, and I enjoy this format. I'd love to see more of this simple easy to digest style video in between your larger investigations/projects. You could even do top 5 lists based on specific criteria like reliability, how quiet they are, how much more advanced they were at launch than their peers/revolutionary, etc.
What i like the most is that you're not having any bias while recording your clips.
A pretty balanced view of your topics and great knowledge.
Thanks for your work and for sharing it.
Glad you like them!
@@HISuttonCovertShoresit’s way too soon, but might you do one for submersibles? I’m presuming the Italian manned torpedo base ones might make the list, along with the aborted SEAL delivery vehicle (caught on fire didn’t it?)? Maybe another list for research submersibles? Maybe not tourist subs.
I also like the Tank Museum videos.
I'm pretty sure I've like every video on this channel. This was another interesting one which I really enjoyed. Thanks for taking time to make it.
Thank you very much!
Almost all the "Cruiser" submarines were a bad idea, because big guns require an oversized hull they were slow to dive and surface and were not very agile. But the guns are actually a "problem" in their own right because of shell handling. In a surface ship this happens vertically...shells and charges just go up and down....but now we have to move big shells horizontally on one of these large vessels and move them around fast enough to maintain a reasonable rate of fire......so anything bigger than 6" required more than simple muscle power to move them around!
Respect for not trying to monetise that unfortunate situation, like many of your peers have been doing.
Agreed. There a way to go about it, and still respect the families, but unless you are a news organization, I think its best to wait until after the situation has come to an end.
By monetizing do you mean they gave good information and as such should not get paid for their work? Commie much?
I disagree, i would love to know his thoughts and in depth analysis on that situation.
You already know he would be respectable.
Getting the news about it from "news sources" who have less idea what they are talking about is frustrating.
I understand what you mean though. It is life and death situation. Deserves some tact.
Yea, the only person we need to report on that news is Ollie Williams.
“We go to the scene with Ollie Williams.”
“What it’s like out there, Ollie?”
“They ded!!!”
“Thanks Ollie.”
I'm not monetized on UA-cam
It would be interesting to hear your analysis of the Titan incident once more information is known. The company is currently being slagged for not following testing procedures and making statements like, "We don't want a bunch of 50 year old white men involved in our design" when asked about why they didn't consult experienced submarine engineers during their design phase.
and rightly so.
Whatever caused the accidents, both are serious problems with the company's attitude and practices, things that have no place in the industry (or indeed any industry).
i can highly reccomend subbrief on youtube
"We don't want a bunch of 50 year old white men involved in our design" sounds a lot like "man those experts are expensive, why hire them when we can hire cheap fresh grads?"
I read they actually did have an experienced guy, he had decades of knowledge. They hired him for safety inspection and advisory consultant, they fired him for causing excessive delays in the design and manufacturing.
@@rockbutcher Are you familiar with the term "tragic irony"?
Glad to see the kaiten in there. I remember recommending it on the original tweet and I think it more than deserves the worst-in-submarine title.
Is the Kaiten even technically a submarine? It's more of a manned torpedo
Yeah, I myself and unsure of which to consider it. Especially considering it is not an independent seafaring vessel. Whichever it is, though, it is the most despicable of its type.
@@The_Moxxie Only of it's type as far as I know.
The Kaiten was very good at exactly one role: attacking protected harbors. By 1944 the Type C midget was too large to carry on the larger Japanese submarines and the reasonably successful missions early in the war had an appalling survival rate (0% until Guadalcanal if you include returning to Japanese lines). Carrying four or six of these to attack Humboldt Bay, Ulithi, or Palau was a decent use of materials and gave you four chances to hit a target rather than two.
In every other way it was a terrible weapon system. The only positives at all are it actually gave the Type D cargo submarines teeth (at best two torpedo tubes that were often removed, though they never hit anything) and once they were launched as a distraction to save the mother submarine, and both of those are niche/caused by hyper-specialized Japanese submarine production.
The Kaitan was a manned torpedo with limited controls and meant for a one-way suicidal attack. It really should have worked better than it did. Only one Kaitan ever successfully hit a ship. In this case, the oiler USS Mississinewa was sunk in Ulithi.
Will you do a video on the titanic submersible story? I know it's a bit out of your normal stuff but I feel you'd be able to give an interesting and knowledgeable video on it.
I second this request. It sure hear a lot of strange things about which I'm pretty sure aren't true.
People seem hung up on the Bluetooth game controller. I personally think that is a non-issue. I'd be really interested to hear H I Sutton's thought about the submarine.
@@ddegnI agree, the USN uses Xbox controllers for their periscopes without issues. Plus the sub has 4 different methods to release the ballast and resurface so I'm betting something else, probably hull related, for the loss.
@@diltzm "probably hull related"
I would have thought any hull problem would be immediately catastrophic. Based one the sonar buoys picking up sounds, it appears there are people still alive (at least that's what I heard yesterday).
I'd be curious to learn about the ways the ballast can be released. I wonder if the pressure deformed the release mechanisms.
If you know of any good videos which go into detail about the release mechanisms, I'd like to know about them.
@@diltzm "probably hull related"
You called it. Apparently the sounds they heard were unrelated.
About 1974 I bought the book "The K class" from an open air bookstall in Govan.
When I read it I discovered that K13, the one which sank on trials, had been built only quarter of a mile away.
It was a fascinating read. Did you write it?
Recently I found the Battle of May Island on line. Of course, the resurrected hull of K13 was involved.
A few weeks ago I eventually went to Elder Park opposite Fairfield's shipyard and saw the memorial to those lost in the accident caused by "two many holes".
And I phographed each side.
My Grandmother's cousin surname Neville drowned in the K13.
Great post - really enjoyed your choices. I never knew anything at all about radar picket subs, so thanks for the education! At some point, please continue the Tank Museum theme and do a top 5 list!
You didn't mention the Isaac Peral, pride of the Spanish Navy. Thought this would be your number one. When talking about the USS Triton, no mention of it being in the NECPA program; basically able to accommodate the US President in the event of nuclear war, this was never mentioned publicly and wouldn't be due to security concerns, so is technically in the realm of rumor. As an old bubblehead, we thought this to be almost common knowledge. I liked your video, will look for more.
I remember seeing the Biber on Salvage Squad.
It managed to Dive. And - importantly for the occupant - Surface. In a flooded, controlled dry-dock environment.
As far as I know, this makes it the last WW2 vintage submarine capable of diving.
The statistics on the Bieber, if you read Rohwer's chronology of the war at sea are just depressing like "50 sent out, none returned, 30 sent out, 2 returned etc" Basically the single operator not only had to cope with the carbon monoxide from a gasoline engine (a truck engine basically) but also with staying awake for prolonged periods of time. Most of them used Pervitin (Meth) to stay awake but generally simply crewing this thing was too much. It could have been successful if used against strategic point targets like ex HMS Royal Sovreign (aborted) or the Nijmegen bridge but in a general patrol role it was suicide
I was wondering how it managed to stay upright after launching a torpedo and losing all that weight from one side.
There is a good reason that most submarines of any particular era tend to collect in a size band, and that is because that is what works from an engineering perspective. Anything extraordinarily large or small for its time tends to be an operational failure for engineering reasons.
Large: Triton, Surcouf, K class, M class, Argonaut, I 400.
Small: every minisub every built for combat. Yes, they had some successes, but in every class made by all nations they suffered proportionally much greater losses than they inflicted.
The Italian Maiale counts as a minisub, and they got quite a few merchant ships and 2 battleships.
Greatly appreciated. These are gems
Thanks for listening
@@HISuttonCovertShores The pleasure is mine. Thank you
absolutely love the unscripted nature of your videos. nearly died of laughter at forgetting what you had picked for number 2.
Just wondering as I'm not that knowledgeable on submarines what is wrong with the Lada class?
AIP propulsion never materialized, lead boat of class will reportedly be retired early due to extent of its issues.
Plus points, large sonar, powerful weapons and typical (high) Russian standards of stealth
@@HISuttonCovertShores Thank you
considering they are still making kilos when they have newer design something is really wrong.
Very informative hearing about the 'Duds' of the Sub Service. Thanks H I. Unfortunately a very topical video as the Titan Submersible going down at the Titanic Wreck in the news.
Any chance you could give us your awesome insight into that vehicle and the technologies that created it and others of it's ilk?
i'm always delighted to see whenever you post a new video, thank you for this excellent content
I always look forward to your uploads, and I enjoy this format.
Thanks for making these videos! I really appreciate your content and perspective. I look forward to watching every time I open UA-cam.
Welcome back Mr. Sutton
My inexpert view is that Surcouf is/was absolutely the best of the cruiser submarine iterations suggested by planners for persecution of the Guerre de Course.
A compromise in every sense of the world, she was too lively for 8" gun duels or bombardments, too large for the ease of maneuvering and short diving times required of any submarine warship, her hull pierced in too many places for dependable submerged watertight integrity. in short, Surcouf was perfect for WW1, when maritime patrol/ASW aviation was in its infancy. For the '20s and early '30s she still seemed ahead of her time. The late '30s and the war years exploded her proponents' many claims as unreasonable.
At least four allied assets - from merchant ships to ASW aircraft - claimed to have rammed, sunk, or otherwise interacted with her on the night of her disappearance. The fog of war? Or an ongoing series of unfortunate events? We may never know.
For what it is worth, criticisms are normally a) moving turret might have leaked, possibly causing its loss b) aircraft usefulness for spotting, c) concept of surface raiding submarine d) $$$$$$
My piece on her www.hisutton.com/Surcouf.html
@@HISuttonCovertShores Thanks. Will read.
@@HISuttonCovertShores Nice article. Much appreciated.
A helo? Wow. How forward thinking.
Your graphics are lovely, btw.
There's a rumor going about the wreck has been located recently but I have not been able to find any conclusive proof
Series 3 'Salvage Squad' episode 5 they renovated a Biber class sub and took it for a short, shallow test dive in a dock. Very interesting series. This episode is on UA-cam.
I was half-expecting the Upholder/Victoria class to be mentioned but clearly, it was quite easy to find five that were much worse.
Long time no see, i am glad you’re still active
I LOVE your videos.... I cant get enough... I wish you did nothing except for eat, sleep, and make your fantastic videos! Cant wait for the next one!! Cheers!
How mean. I think he should also be allowed to use the restroom once in a while. I agree with the rest.
@@ddegn I think he would be best served by a bucket and privacy curtain.... just like those poor souls on the Titanic submersible.... RIP
Glad I subscribed to this channel, I’ve waited a long time to finally see a video uploaded
I was literally hitting refresh on this channels page over the last few days. Love this content, even if it is unprepared. : p
I think it's a bit extreme to definitively say Biber was the worst. The only argument given for why it's the worst of all time (!) were the problems with the gasoline engine, which were indeed gruelling, but could later be fixed. Apart from this issue, Marder was described as a relatively elegant vehicle, considering its highly simplified design. Manned torpedoes like Marder were much more problematic in terms of risking the suffocation of its one-man crew, as there wasn't enough oxygen for longer expeditions, so if you really want a German design to take the #1 spot, it should be that one. Here are some additional (dis)honorable mentions:
- the Japanese Kaidai-1-class, which was forced to have four (!) propeller shafts as Japan was unable to import more powerful diesel engines.
- and the Sen-Taka-class (better known as I-201), which might seem surprising, but the truth is that they were very impractical because they had literally thousands of small batteries to achieve the high voltage and high amperage required for the 5000 hp power output. It also had to have four electric motors on two shafts so that the voltage could be "divided into four", which led to noise problems. While 19 knots was said to be the theoretically attainable speed, these practical concerns limited the submarine to about 17, which is in the ballpark of what what Type XXI was capable of, while also having much higher submerged range (135 nm @ 3 knots vs 487 nm @ 3 knots) and being a lot quieter. At the end of the war, only three of these subs were built, none of which were combat-ready.
- the Oberon-class submarine: actually not terrible, but frustrating for how lackluster they were. Despite being Britain's main class of conventional submarines in the Cold War, these were not a lot better than Type XXI, although they certainly benefitted from less rushed design and construction. Most conventional Soviet submarines in the Cold War until Kilo-class were similarly unimpressive.
- the Quebec-class submarine, which is mainly a stupid design for its implementation of liquid oxygen as the only oxygen supply for its closed-cycle engine when running underwater. Since the liquid oxygen evaporated steadily, this submarine was strategically very limited, even just for coastal usage.
All reasonable points, but sticking to Biber. Saying it could have been fixed, when over 300 were built...
Far from a fan of Marder in this sense, many of the issues were shared (plus Molch, Delfin, Hai etc)
@@HISuttonCovertShores Just to be clear here (my wording was ambiguous, sorry): The problems with Biber */were/* later fixed with a special suction device, which is why I don't think Biber is the very worst thing that was ever built.
But yeah, most German late-war midget subs were problematic due to the haste and desperation with which they were developed, the only exception being the teardrop-shaped Delphin, which was hard to develop as an offensive weapon without losing its impressive speed (most people in the KM were vehemently against Japanese-style suicide weapons and attaching torpedoes would add significant drag). Interestingly, the US Navy's history of developing the teardrop shape also started with considerations to develop modern midget subs, an interesting parallel, but a different story...
Love your content, glad to see you back :)
According to some accounts, included in Norman Olhers book "Blitzed : Drugs in Nazi Germany" (2016), a major factor n the failure of one-man submarine operations in the Channel after D-Day was the issue of Methamphetamine tablets to the crews. Wired up to stay awake while awaiting launches, and then during long arduous solo missions, barely trained crew members already disadvantaged by the limitations of a midget sub just got disoriented and couldn't find their targets. Add in issues with lack of oxygen, fumes, visibiility, reliability, and no wonder they were useless.
The main issue with kaiten was its inherently bad idea of how to find and hit the target: the pilot was expected to spot the enemy through the scope, and then proceed with a rather complicated attack pattern, checking through the scope if necessary.
However, kaiten was not very agile. It was fast - but then, the speed meant the periscope could hardly be used, plus it would immediately give off a warning to the ship being attacked. Yet if the kaiten slowed down then the target ship could run away.
The concept as a whole was deeply flawed - from what I've read the main reason why it was in service till the end of the war were the super optimistic reports after its first deployment and in several actions afterwards.
Only after the war the Japanese learned that actually it scored barely any hits, and in total more submarines and IJN personnel was killed in kaiten operations than the US Navy ships and people.
PS There was, interestingly, one very good design of a midget submarine - the German Seehund. It had the crew of two, decent autonomy and weaponry consisting of two torpedoes. Very few were lost, and they actually scored some hits.
USS Triton was converted to a more conventional attack submarine, and served as such reasonably well. It was retired when the costly maintenance of her two nuclear power plants met an era of budget cuts. She was kept in reserve for quite a while but with years obsolescence probably came her one-off equipment. IMO, if one wanted a poor US submarine design, the Navy-built S-class boats might be good targets. Built in some quantity, performed poorly, and very few if any were still in service when WW2 arrived (some Electric Boat-built S-boats were, and some did combat patrols).
The Kaiten was too fast, what does that mean? The pilot had difficulty aiming?
Yes, pretty much
@@HISuttonCovertShores I see, must have been a crazy wild ride. Well... You only had to do it once...
In the photo comparing the size of the USS Triton to another submarine, I believe that other submarine is one of the Skipjack-class boats. The Skipjack boats were the first US nuclear submarines that utilized the Albacore-style cylindrical hull we're familiar with today. (Skipjacks were approx. 250 feet in length; today's Virginia-class boats are either 377 or 460 fleet--depending on their capabilities.)
yep
Video been out 7 days and the universe already giving us the need for an update.
Common H i Sutton! We want your take on the Oceangate Titan! Even if you aren’t an expect on deep ocean exploration subs, it would be so interesting to get your perspective on the design of that sub. Maybe you can compare the titan incident to other historical sub disasters. All in due time of course
Glad to see you posting videos again!!
You are probably getting this a lot but it was really cool to hear you on the "Cold Front" podcast. Made me feel like a hip insider since I already knew of you.
13:57 - I seen a Marder like mini sub in the Narvik naval museum, and that gave me chills....
Number 1: Ocean Gate Titan
Hoping Sutton makes a video on OceanGates Titan, curious to know your thoughts on the design.
So a radar picket sub would have to be surfaced, presumably for long periods of time, in order to fulfill its intended role…yeah why not make it nuclear powered so it could also stay submerged almost indefinitely!
Fascinating video! More of these, please.
I actually toured the TRITON as she was within the mothballed fleet at Norfolk Naval Ship Yard, in Portsmouth, Va.
and trained on her S3G reactor plant prototype in Ballston Spa in NY.
The photo of her next to a smaller sub was there,
the sub next to her appears to be a SKIPJACK .
Sub school in Connecticut had war prize mini-subs all over, the grounds, the same as pictured, and more,
along with WWII fleet boats headed to scrap, or as museums.
Pretty cool. Star Trek had just come out, but
couldn't remotely compare to all the stuff
that surrounded me.
Cold War days .
Of course, that was in '69 or so.
I want to learn more about those steam powered subs. Are they using sea water? I would assume theyd have to desalinate the water before use to prevent residue buildups.
Video on Steam Powered submarines ua-cam.com/video/pg_j8_NjZxw/v-deo.html
And one particularly interesting design ua-cam.com/video/67IritgM79U/v-deo.html
@@HISuttonCovertShores You rock, man.
Dear Sir, Thanks for your content. Bear in mind lead is now used in Next-gen Small-Medium Reactors by Blykalla.
Energy is a different topic, but you left no explanation, just number 2.
Fun video....I think I would put the British M-class at the top of the pile (3 were built). Trying to get a sub to do the job of a (small) battleship is a fundamentally flawed concept (much like the hybrid battleship/aircraft carrier, or even the idea of large calibre guns on an aircraft carrier). It had to surface to fire (duh) and RELOAD. I would love to know what the recoil did to the boat. I would also include any boat designed to carry aircraft, though I can at least see some rationale.
I will never understand how you create these breathtaking illustrations in MS Paint.
You forgot to include the Titan
A bit surprised to not hear about the type 091s considering they are rather noisy while not being that fast, but I supposee going after someone´s first attempt at a nuclear submarine is kinda mean.
I thought about it, plus Type-035 and North Korean boats... but landed on Fateh
Seems to me a "Bottom 5" list for submarines is likely to be more literal than most.
Under pressure?
What do you think of Australia’s Collins Class. Getting old now and overdue for replacement.
Anyone know if any of those Alpha's haven't been disassembled, who do I talk to about buying one?
That USS Triton submarine gives me the impression of the Glomar Explorer.
Comment on early words in video; Wow. I never thought of the K class as low hanging fruit before. It just seemed odd to hear it put that way.
To further emphasize the bulk of the Triton, it was too big for its building slip. Part of the bow was cut away from the hull during building to clear a railroad track that it was blocking and reattached later. The stern was built separately and attached later (it being somewhat difficult to build a ship when the ass end is already sticking out into the river), and after completing the sail it was realized that it was too high to clear the gantry over the slip during launch, so another big chunk was cut off to be reattached later.
if only they had some way of measuring and calculating the dimensions.... like it was done by toddlers in kindergarten
@@rcajavus8141
Oh come now, let's give the engineers some credit. That's at least 4th grade math.
Can you talk about small submarines? Where do they exist, what are they used for?
German Type 201 was also a rather bad design considering it really liked to corode
The Fact That Oceangate Titan Isn't In This Tells Me It's So Fcking Bad That Its Excluded Here
Aren't the bottom 5 submarines technically the best submarines?
11:46 I laughed! Please never script these, it’s so much better this way.
Great video! Thanks very much.
You are welcome!
THE LEGEND IS BACK!!!
The early Soviet nuclear subs were an accident waiting to happen. Two reactors with only four control rods per. The early US subs used the S2C reactor with 12 control rods (triple redundancy). I'm surprised they didn't have a dozen "Widowmakers".
For me it's the British "M" class from the 1920's. It looked really cool but that deck gun was way too big.
In my navy days, I was on a 𝑆𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑔𝑒𝑜𝑛 class boat. Among the ranks of chief petty officers, one had been on 𝑁𝑎𝑢𝑡𝑖𝑙𝑢𝑠 when she went under the Arctic ice & another, the chief torpedoman's mate, had been on 𝑇𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑛 for her circumnavigation. It was hilariously easy to get these two arguing over which boat was better; by the time I met them, it was a well rehearsed argument, polished as a vaudeville comedy act. In private, TMC would admit 𝑇𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑜𝑛 was something of a white elephant, but swore it was the most comfortable boat for a junior enlisted man short of a ballistic missile submarine.
The ‘i’ in Biber is pronounced like the ‘ea’ in the English beaver. Same meaning, too.
sorry humans invented writing to record ideas, not to use to make others quess what was meant to be recorded, whole british "pronounciation" is just a way of class struggle where upper classes abused writing to make lower classes never compatible - again, sorry please make british use letters as they were meant to be used, to communicate and not to rule others
Glad your back :)
If we take into account the resources devoted to the submarine and the benefit derived from it then the Japan's aircraft carrying subs would probably rank first since the mission they were designed for, to put out of commission the Panama Canal, was never accomplished nor even undertaken.
Surprised the Type 091 didn't make the list. Poor radiation shielding probably made it more dangerous for the crew vs the enemy.
yeah i thought about it, it is a contender, especially the later ones where you cannot excuse them for being the first nuclear sub
Type-092, Type-033G, Type-035 and Type-039 too
A reactor cooled by Liquid Metal sure sounds cool but such a insane concept and it’s of course in a Russian sub.
If it is intended to sail and intercept at any minute you need immediate power.
I hate how the alpha is on the list. you gotta admit it looks really cool and the escape capsule is a great feature.
Worst submarine has to be the USS Hunley during the American Civil War.
3:20 diving depth 61 meters
I so want my own personal, modernized, version of Surcoulf with rail cannon and laser-based AA weapons, essentially a submersible cruiser, but just for my pleasure. 😂
As for the Alpha, one thing for sure, they were crazy submarines, that's all I can say.
The Iranian submarine is essentially just a large mini-submarine with limited diving and endurance.
The promise of one or two man submarines was seductive, I think, and I'm still emfatuated with them. The Biber is probably the ultimate expression of this seduction without fulfillment. If it worked it could have really made it tough for the enemy, it just didn't work.
The Italians in the cold war made some interesting small submarines that I have heard very little about since I was in the Navy, I wonder what they are doing now.
My background is my wife and I were submarine hunters in the Navy during the Cold War, that's where I met her. Not many couples can say they got together in such a manner. 😅
I’ll be honest, I expected a lot of inter war US boats .
HMS X1 has to be up there. Spent more time laid up for repairs than at sea.
"U406 suffers failure at launch, _AGAAAAAIIIINNNNN!!!!_ "
I've got an entry for the 5 worst submersibles ever.
gotta admit the HMS X-1 looks awesome
Yeah, you HAD to include the 'K' class. Unavoidable, really. There was nothing horribly wrong with the basic IDEA, just that the technology of the time was very simply not up to the challenge.
Seems there is a lot of overlap between "5 Worst Submarines Ever*" and the potential list of "5 Most Interesting Submarines*". *refers to submarines to see active service.
7 mins of this is all I could take.
well the keiten proabbly should be classed as insane, it was a case where if the thing hit target the crew were basically expendable.
What can you tell us about the Collins class submarine?
They have a terrible reputation in Australia....largely brought about by extended development problems and associated political fallout.
What are your thoughts on their capabilities in their mature, fully developed form?
Interesting choices especially in times of "unmanned" subs...
Really cool! Always look forward to your content. Love when you preempt the trolls.