# Typhoon submarine, the World's Largest Nuclear Submarine!



## pkpatriotic

Among the arsenal of the most advanced military superpowers, one weapon is the most feared. It's not the atomic bomb, it's even more powerful, while being almost undetectable and can launch a devastating surprise attack on almost any country in the world.

Operating underwater at pressures beyond the range of unaided human survivability, submarines, first widely used in World War I, are used by all major navies today. They are indeed, more powerful than an atomic bomb, since an Ohio class nuclear submarine can carry up to 32 Trident II D5 multiple warheads nuclear missiles. That is enough to wipe out an entire country. 

The roles of military submarines are almost limitless, but the most technologically advance ones are used for military purposes. The race to build the best submarine has been a continuous effort over decades, since it has been considered the ultimate stealth weapon.

The largest submarine in the world is...Russian. Surprised? You shouldn't be. The Russians have a thing for building the largest of almost everything and it's been well demonstrated in many military applications, like tanks, rockets, missiles, trucks, in fact the entire army.

The Typhoon class submarine is a type of nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine deployed by the Soviet Navy in the 1980s. With a maximum displacement of 48,000 tonnes, Typhoons are the largest class of submarine ever built. 

The largest submarine in the world is the Mk 941-U SSBN (Strategic Submarine Ballistic Nuclear) Typhoon', of the Shark (Akula)  class. For this, it has been included in the Guinness Record Book at the beginning of the 1980s.

Only six of them were built at the naval base in Severodvinsk and they were designed as a response to the US's construction of the first Ohio nuclear submarine with 24 ballistic missiles on board. The Russians succeeded in surpassing the Ohio, and the Mk 941-U SSBN Typhoon is, even today, the largest submarine in the world.

The dimensions of this leviathan are truly impressive. It's 564 feet long (172 meters), has a beam of 74.8 feet (22.8 meters), and an underwater displacement of 50,000 tons. The maximum speed is over 30 knots and it can stay submerged for 120 days, with a maximum crew complement of 130.

Its weaponry is also impressive. For close combat, it's got two torpedo tubes (one 533-mm torpedo tube and one 650-mm torpedo tube) and can carry up to 36 torpedoes at a time. Even more dangerous is the long-range nuclear arsenal it packs, 24 Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM) replete with 10 nuclear warheads each. These have a range of up to 10,000 km (6,213 miles).

Typhoon submarines are among the quietest sea vessels in operation, being quieter and yet more maneuverable than their predecessors and have a maximum diving depth of 500 meters (1,640 ft), with an operational one of 380 meters (1,246 ft).

Only one of these monsters is required to start a war with many of the world's countries and in the same end the war through its total annihilation ability.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## nitesh

pk sir, thanks for sharing, but heard that inside the submarine they have some special recreation facilities for sailors. Is it true?


----------



## pkpatriotic

nitesh said:


> pk sir, thanks for sharing, but heard that inside the submarine they have some special recreation facilities for sailors. Is it true?



Oh Really! 
If it is...........then plz share to us here....


----------



## JK!

Its true I think I've seen a picture of sailors in a hot tub on board a typhoon.


----------



## Trooper

that's great!!


----------



## nitesh

JK! said:


> Its true I think I've seen a picture of sailors in a hot tub on board a typhoon.



Thanks JK, can you please share those pictures.


----------



## Marshal

http://http://www.wat.tv/video/documentaire-exceptionnel-9wxf_9x3h_.html
http://http://in.youtube.com/watch?v=YXrQHk2AMX0&feature=related


----------



## Flintlock




----------



## Flintlock




----------



## JK!

Here is the hot tub Link the page is in Russian :

http://www.submarine.id.ru/thumbs/941/index.shtml

There also appears to be an onboard sauna


----------



## pkpatriotic

Dear nitesh, tkx upon highlighting the luxerious aspect of submarine, here are few pics, hope these wud be good enough:

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## nitesh

thanks a lot for sharing the pics, my intention about raising the point of recreation facilities that this sub is meant for long (very long) endurance missions. After all long mission and without recreation facilities will be bored.


----------



## batmannow

MY, dear PKPATROTIC....sir, very good input by you sir, but i would like to remind that , this post not belong this section of fourm .... it would be good in the NAVAL SECTION!!!

i hope that you will remember that, & also hope that you would not mind my reminder dear sir!
thanks


----------



## gubbi

A bit confusion here:

What the NATO assigned as Akula, the Russians call them as Typhoons.
What the NATO assigned as Typhoon, the Russians call them as Akula.

So which one are we actually talking about?


----------



## gubbi

pkpatriotic said:


> Dear nitesh, tkx upon highlighting the luxerious aspect of submarine, here are few pics, hope these wud be good enough:



Those are pics of, I believe, *Capt. Nemo*'s *Nautilus* without the ramming prow, no?


----------



## Arsalan

*WMD & Missiles *
Discussions related to Pakistan's civilian and military nuclear capability, various military missiles, space capability, etc

please respect the forum rules.
mods, it need your attention

regards!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## hardcore

gubbi said:


> A bit confusion here:
> 
> What the NATO assigned as Akula, the Russians call them as Typhoons.
> What the NATO assigned as Typhoon, the Russians call them as Akula.
> 
> So which one are we actually talking about?



Russian Name=Akula

NATO Reporting Name=Typhoon


----------



## justanobserver

> WHEN WILL INDIA GO NEAR OR ATLEAST HALF OF THAT ?



Well, we're getting one (for 10year lease) next year, the INS Chakra

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 500

gubbi said:


> A bit confusion here:
> 
> What the NATO assigned as Akula, the Russians call them as Typhoons.


No, what NATO assigned as "Akula" the Russians call "Shuka-B".



> What the NATO assigned as Typhoon, the Russians call them as Akula.


Thats correct.

Here a size comparsion:







front - the new Borei class SSBN (its about Ohio size), rear - Typhoon(Akula) SSBN.


----------



## Kinetic

gubbi said:


> A bit confusion here:
> 
> What the NATO assigned as Akula, the Russians call them as Typhoons.
> What the NATO assigned as Typhoon, the Russians call them as Akula.
> 
> So which one are we actually talking about?



*Actually it is about 941 Typhoon class SSBN, not 971 Akula class SSN. *


----------



## jha

500 said:


> No, what NATO assigned as "Akula" the Russians call "Shuka-B".
> 
> 
> Thats correct.
> 
> Here a size comparsion:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> front - the new Borei class SSBN (its about Ohio size), rear - Typhoon(Akula) SSBN.



BOREI class looks like an infant in front of Typhoon class.
BTW there was no need for a sub of that size imo..


----------



## 500

jha said:


> BOREI class looks like an infant in front of Typhoon class.
> BTW there was no need for a sub of that size imo..



R-39 missile which Typhoon used was too big - 90 tons compare to 32 tons for Trident I and 59 tons for Trident II.


----------



## Tshering22

Sheesh! Typhoons are COLOSSAL! Wonder what would IN sailors say after being used to the luxuries of this monster and getting into Arihant which is about half of this..


----------



## naumananjum

How much it costs??


----------



## The_magnificent

huge & luxurious


----------



## nightcrawler

500 said:


> R-39 missile which Typhoon used was too big - 90 tons compare to 32 tons for Trident I and 59 tons for Trident II.


 
Sir; you are mistaken. Mind if you look at the following link where I did a comparison of US/Russian ICBMs DefenceDog: Weapon Races-Strategic Ballistic Missile
++
your figures are extremely misleading:




*Updated Skiff is Sineva SLBM with 10 warheads & updated range of 7175 miles[+10000km] in service 2007&#8211;present. 2008 Oct. 11: The K-114 Tula submarine launched the R-29RM Sineva missile from Barents Sea to the equatorial region of the Pacific Ocean, demonstrating the maximum range of the vehicle, reaching 11,547 kilometers*
guess what its *lighter *than US counterparts

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Hindustani

pkpatriotic said:


> Dear nitesh, tkx upon highlighting the luxerious aspect of submarine, here are few pics, hope these wud be good enough:


 
Anyone watch the movie 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea


----------



## eagle20054



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## nightcrawler

^^ 
Thnx for wonderful sharing


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

nightcrawler said:


> Sir; you are mistaken. Mind if you look at the following link where I did a comparison of US/Russian ICBMs DefenceDog: Weapon Races-Strategic Ballistic Missile
> ++
> your figures are extremely misleading:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *Updated Skiff is Sineva SLBM with 10 warheads & updated range of 7175 miles[+10000km] in service 2007present. 2008 Oct. 11: The K-114 Tula submarine launched the R-29RM Sineva missile from Barents Sea to the equatorial region of the Pacific Ocean, demonstrating the maximum range of the vehicle, reaching 11,547 kilometers*
> guess what its *lighter *than US counterparts


 
Too bad it is liquid fueled.


----------



## Mutee

What about the American sea wolf class isn't it the largest?


----------



## nightcrawler

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Too bad it is liquid fueled.


 
so what??...ask engineers liquid propulsion isn't bad at all...& with all due respect; the enhanced burn out period with adequate specific impulse is liquid fuelled oriented


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

I think the Ohio class SSBN is the most superior by far, less noise and smaller size can carry more SLBMs and more MIRVs.

Also the W-88 warhead of Mark 5 is also superior to any Russian sea-based warhead.

Russia still can't replicate the American technology from 1990s.


----------



## Thomas

500 said:


> R-39 missile which Typhoon used was too big - 90 tons compare to 32 tons for Trident I and 59 tons for Trident II.


 
Russia in the past preferred large yield warheads which required larger missiles.


----------



## Project 627

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> Russia still can't replicate the American technology from 1990s.



Oh really, then what do say to fact that the new Yasen class submarine which is superior to the Virginia-class. 

Weapon and Technology: Project 885 Yasen / Granay (Severodvinsk class)

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

Ogannisyan8887 said:


> Oh really then what do say to fact that the new Yasen class submarine is superior to the Virginia-class.
> 
> Weapon and Technology: Project 885 Yasen / Granay (Severodvinsk class)


 
Russia can indeed match or surpass US in some areas, but i don't think they have superior air force and naval power than US military force of 1990 overall.

US in 1990 had 6 Nimitz class supercarriers and 8 Ohio class SSBNs, and greatest number of 3rd gen fighters and B-1 and B-52 strategic bombers.

Even i dislike US politically, but i have to admit they are simply too strong. And the best strategy to defend against them instead of challenging them directly.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## nightcrawler

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I think the Ohio class SSBN is the most superior by far, less noise and smaller size can carry more SLBMs and more MIRVs.
> 
> Russia still can't replicate the American technology from 1990s.


Above statements are extremely generalised & I will refrain from coomenting..


> Also the W-88 warhead of Mark 5 is also superior to any Russian sea-based warhead.


Sir I feel you are mistaken; here again I provide you the link..care to study the table comparing trident with Sineva. Yield is lower than Russian counterparts ++ you totally have excluded the no. of warheads parameter in your analysis.
DefenceDog: Weapon Races-Strategic Ballistic Missile

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ChineseTiger1986

nightcrawler said:


> Above statements are extremely generalised & I will refrain from coomenting..
> 
> Sir I feel you are mistaken; here again I provide you the link..care to study the table comparing trident with Sineva. Yield is lower than Russian counterparts ++ you totally have excluded the no. of warheads parameter in your analysis.
> DefenceDog: Weapon Races-Strategic Ballistic Missile


 
The Trident II missile has a total payload of 2800kg, so it can carry up to 8 warheads (350kg each) of Mark 5.

The yield is 8 X 475kt per missile which is 3.8mt and 24 missiles would yield 91.2mt maximum.

Lets say the Bulava missile has 10 X 150kt per missile which is 1.5mt and 16 missiles would only yield 24mt maximum.

Of course, the Ohio class has more firepower. The only problem US currently has only 400 warheads of Mark 5 in its inventory, but around 3000 of Mark 4 is also available.

Not mentioning their Trident II D5 missile has been successfully tested for the 135th times, it is the most reliable SLBMs by far.


----------



## sparrowhawk

Pak should buy one!! That would give us a guaranteed 2nd strike capability--the reason these were made in the first place. The idea was that they lie under the ice poles for up to six months and then resurface to launch all their nuclear warheads. Each one has about 15 odd nuclear SLBMs with MIRVs so each Typhoon has around a 100 nukes!! Awesome firepower --it was the most feared weapon of the cold war.

Got to admit the Russians are awesome at weapon design!! I read that these things are so huge they even had a swimming pool inside for the recreation of the sailors!! The movie Hunt for Red October featured a fictional Typhoon submarine -- it scared the US shitless when they found what the Soviets had in this sub!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## halfilhal

sparrowhawk said:


> Pak should buy one!! That would give us a guaranteed 2nd strike capability--the reason these were made in the first place. The idea was that they lie under the ice poles for up to six months and then resurface to launch all their nuclear warheads. Each one has about 15 odd nuclear SLBMs with MIRVs so each Typhoon has around a 100 nukes!! Awesome firepower --it was the most feared weapon of the cold war.
> 
> Got to admit the Russians are awesome at weapon design!! I read that these things are so huge they even had a swimming pool inside for the recreation of the sailors!! The movie Hunt for Red October featured a fictional Typhoon submarine -- it scared the US shitless when they found what the Soviets had in this sub!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Parmanu

halfilhal said:


>


----------



## kenyannoobie

ChineseTiger1986 said:


> I think the Ohio class SSBN is the most superior by far, less noise and smaller size can carry more SLBMs and more MIRVs.
> 
> Also the W-88 warhead of Mark 5 is also superior to any Russian sea-based warhead.
> 
> *Russia still can't replicate the American technology from 1990s*.



REAAALLLLLYYYY?? People say the damndest things on the internet! Fyi,when this thing came out in the 70s the CIA was still insisting Russia couldn't process the titanium necessary for such a fast deep diving sub. Its been 4 decades and the US still doesn't have anything like this-why???


----------



## Super Falcon

Typhoon submarine is officially retired fro. Russian navy


----------

