Alfa class submarine
Description and History
Preproduction
The initial design work began in May 1960 by the Malakhit Design Bureau in St. Petersburg and was highly innovative, necessarily so to meet the demanding requirements – sufficient speed to successfully pursue any ship; the ability to avoid anti-submarine weapons and to ensure success in underwater combat; low detectability, in particular to airborne MAD arrays, and also especially to active sonars; minimal displacement and minimal crew complement. A special titanium alloy hull would be used to create a small, low drag, 1,500 ton, six compartment vessel capable of very high speeds (in excess of 40 knots) and deep diving. The submarine would operate as an interceptor, staying in harbour or on patrol route and then racing out to reach an approaching fleet. A high-power liquid-metal-cooled nuclear plant was devised meaning extensive automation would also greatly reduce the needed crew numbers to just 16 highly trained men. The practical problems with the design quickly became apparent and in 1963 the design team was replaced and a less radical design was proposed, increasing all main dimensions and the vessel weight by 800 tons and almost tripling the crew.
A prototype, Project 661 or K-162 (since 1978 K-222) (referred to by NATO as the Papa class), was built at the SEVMASH shipyard in Severodvinsk and completed in 1972. The long build-time was caused by numerous design flaws and difficulties in manufacture. Extensively tested and reconfigured, it was taken out of service following a reactor accident in 1980. It reportedly had a top speed of 44.7 knots and a claimed dive depth of 800 m. This combined with other reports created some alarm in the U.S. Navy and prompted the rapid development of the ADCAP torpedo program and the Sea Lance missile programs projects (the latter was cancelled when more definitive information about the Soviet project was known). The creation of the high-speed Spearfish torpedo by the Royal Navy was also a response to the threat posed by the reported capabilities of the Alfa.
Production
Production started in 1974 as Project 705 with construction at both the Admiralty yard, Leningrad and at Sevmashpredpriyatiye (SEVMASH – Northern Machinebuilding Enterprise), Severodvinsk. The lead unit was a Project 705 design and all subsequent were 705K. The first vessel was commissioned in 1971.
Project 705 boats were intended to be an experimental platform themselves, to test all innovations and rectify their faults, that would afterwards found a new generation of submarines. This highly experimental nature mostly predetermined their future.
In 1981, with the completion of the seventh vessel, production ended. All vessels were assigned to the Northern Fleet.
Vessels
Alfa class significant dates
#
Shipyard
Laid down
Launched
Commissioned
Status
K-64
Leningrad
June 2, 1968
April 22, 1969
December 31, 1971
Decommissioned August 19, 1974 for scrapping
K-123
SEVMASH, Severodvinsk
December 22, 1967
April 4, 1976
December 12, 1977
Decommissioned July 31, 1996 for scrapping
K-316
Leningrad
April 26, 1969
July 25, 1974
September 30, 1978
Decommissioned April 19, 1990 for scrapping
K-432
SEVMASH, Severodvinsk
November 12, 1967
November 3, 1977
December 31, 1978
Decommissioned April 19, 1990 for scrapping
K-373
Leningrad
June 26, 1972
April 19, 1978
December 29, 1979
Decommissioned April 19, 1990 for scrapping
K-493
SEVMASH, Severodvinsk
January 21, 1972
September 21, 1980
September 30, 1981
Decommissioned April 19, 1990 for scrapping
K-463
Leningrad
June 26, 1975
March 30, 1981
December 30, 1981
Decommissioned April 19, 1990 for scrapping
Decommissioning
The first vessel was decommissioned in 1974 and all seven before the end of 1990. The K-123 underwent a refit between 1983 and 1992 and had its reactor compartment replaced with a VM-4 pressurized water reactor. After being used for training it officially was decommissioned July 31, 1996.
General characteristics
Displacement: 2,300 tons surfaced, 3,200 tons submerged
Length: 81.4 m
Beam: 9.5 m
Draft: 7.6 m
Depth:
Usual operation: 350 m
Test depth: 400 m
Crush depth: possibly over 1300 m, depth figure contradicted by an authoritative Russian publication.
Compartments: 6
Complement: 27 officers, 4-18 under-officers; Russian source – 32
Reactor: OK-550 reactor or BM-40A reactor, lead-bismuth cooled fast reactor, 155 MW
Steam turbines: OK-7K, 40,000 shp
Propulsion: 1 propeller
Speed (submerged): ~40 knots
Armament: 6 x 533 mm torpedo tubes:
18 SET-65 or 53-65K torpedoes (or)
20 VA-111 Shkval torpedoes (or)
21 SS-N-15 cruise missiles (or)
12 SS-N-16 cruise missiles (or)
24 mines
Systems:
Topol MRK.50 (Snoop Tray) surface search radar
Sozh navigation system radar
MG-21 Rosa underwater communications
Molniya satellite communications
Vint & Tissa radio communications antennas
Accord combat control system
Leningrad-705 fire control system
Ocean active/passive sonar
MG-24 luch mine detection sonar
Yenisei sonar intercept receiver
Bukhta ESM/ECM
Chrome-KM IFF
Propulsion
The power plant for the boat was a lead-bismuth cooled fast reactor. Such reactors have a number of advantages over older types:
Due to higher coolant temperature, their energy efficiency is up to 1.5 times higher.
Lifetime without refueling can be increased more easily, in part due to higher efficiency.
Liquid lead-bismuth systems can’t cause an explosion and quickly solidify in case of a leak, greatly improving safety.
LCFRs are much lighter and smaller than water-cooled reactors, which was the primary factor when considering power plant choice for Lira.
Even though 1960s technology was barely sufficient to produce reliable LCFRs, which are even today considered challenging, their advantages were considered compelling. Two power plants were developed independently, BM-40A by Gidropress (Hydropress) in Leningrad and OK-550 by the OKBM design bureau in Nizhniy Novgorod, both using a eutectic lead-bismuth solution for the primary cooling stage, and both producing 155 MW of power.
Designed burst speed in tests was 4345 knots (8083 km/h; 4952 mph) for all vessels, and speeds of 4142 knots (7678 km/h; 4748 mph) could be sustained. Acceleration to the top speed took one minute and reversing 180 degrees at full speed took just 40 seconds. This degree of maneuverability exceeds all other submarines and most torpedoes that were in service at the time. Indeed, during training the boats proved to successfully evade torpedoes launched by other submarines, which required introduction of faster torpedoes such as the American ADCAP or British Spearfish. However, the price for this was a very high noise level at burst speed, as for any body moving through water at high speed. The tactical speed, where the noise would be similar to other submarines, is about 2025 knots (3746 km/h; 2329 mph).
Propulsion was provided by the main screw with 30 MW steam turbines, and two 100 kW electric-powered screws served as an additional propulsion system for maneuvering, quieter ‘creeping’ (low speed tactical maneuvering), and for emergency propulsion in the event of reactor, turbine, or main screw problems. Backup power systems included a 500 kW diesel generator and a set of zinc-silver batteries.
The OK-550 plant was used on Project 705, but later, on 705K, the BM-40A plant was installed due to the low reliability of the OK-550. While more reliable, BM-40A still turned out to be much more demanding in maintenance than older pressurized water reactors. The issue is that the lead/bismuth eutectic solution solidifies at 125 C (257 F). If ever hardened, it would be impossible to restart the reactor, since the fuel assemblies would be frozen in the solidified coolant. Thus, whenever the reactor is shut down, the liquid coolant must be heated externally with superheated steam. Near the piers where the submarines were moored, a special facility was constructed to deliver superheated steam to the vessels’ reactors when the reactors were shut down. A smaller ship was also stationed at the pier to deliver steam from its steam plant to the Alfa submarines.
Coastal facilities were treated with much less attention than the submarines and often turned out unable to heat the submarines reactors. Consequently the plants had to be kept running even while the subs were in harbour. The facilities completely broke down early in the 1980s and since then the reactors of all operational Alfa submarines were kept constantly running. While the BM-40A reactors are able to work for many years without stopping, they were not specifically designed for such treatment and any serious reactor maintenance became impossible. This led to a number of failures, including coolant leaks and one reactor broken down and frozen while at sea. However, constantly running the reactors proved better than relying on the coastal facilities. Four vessels were decommissioned due to freezing of the coolant.
Both the OK-550 and the BM-40A designs were single-use reactors and could not be refueled as the coolant would inevitably freeze in the process. This was compensated for by a much longer lifetime on their only load (up to 15 years), after which the reactors would be completely replaced. While such a solution could potentially decrease service times and increase reliability, it is still more expensive, and the idea of single-use reactors was unpopular in the 1970s. Furthermore, Project 705 does not have a modular design that would allow quick replacement of reactors, so such maintenance would take at least as long as refueling a normal submarine.
Hull
Like all Soviet nuclear submarines, Project 705 used a double hull, where the internal hull withstands the pressure and the outer one protects it and provides an optimal hydrodynamic shape. However, unlike almost all other submarines, the hulls of the Lira had variable diameters. The shape is optimized for minimal active sonar signature and minimal water resistance and, although it complicated the design, it was essential for providing required maneuverability.
Apart from the prototypes, Project 705 and 705K submarines were built with titanium alloy hulls, which was revolutionary in terms of submarine design at the time due to the cost of titanium and the technologies and equipment needed to work with it. The difficulties in the engineering became apparent in the first submarine that was quickly decommissioned after cracks developed in the hull. Later metallurgy and welding technology were improved and no hull problems were experienced on subsequent vessels. American intelligence services became aware of the use of titanium alloys in the construction by retrieving metal shavings that fell from a truck as it left the St. Petersburg ship yard.
The internal pressure hull was separated into six watertight compartments, of which only the third (center) compartment was manned and others were accessible only for maintenance. The third compartment had reinforced spherical bulkheads that could withstand the pressure at the test depth and offered additional protection to the crew in case of attack. To further enhance survivability, the ship was equipped with an ejectable rescue capsule.
The hull was designed for extreme depths, below the deep sound layer (at 1 km), but complete redesign of the plumbing and other inter-hull systems was delayed. According to some information, one of the submarines was tested on depths up to 1300 meters but submerging to such depths and returning caused permanent damage to equipment, which in a few cycles would make the vessel very unreliable. This test may have been conducted just prior to decommissioning.
Control system
A suite of new systems was developed for these submarines, including:
Akkord(Accord) combat information and control system, which received and processed hydroacoustic, television, radar and navigation data from other systems, determining other ships, submarines and torpedoes location and speed and predicted trajectory. Information was displayed on control terminals, along with recommendations for operating a single submarine, both for attack and torpedo evasion, or commanding a group of submarines.
Sargan weapon control system controlling attack, torpedo homing and use of countermeasures, both by human command and automatically if required
Okean(Ocean) automated hydroacoustic (sonar) system that provided target data to other systems and eliminated the need for crew members working with detection equipment
Sozh navigation system and Boksit (Bauxite) course control system, which integrated course, depth, trim and speed control, for manual, automated and programmed maneuvering
Ritm(Rhythm) system controlling operation of all machinery aboard, eliminating the need for any personnel servicing reactor and other machinery, which was the main factor in reducing crew complement
Alfa radiation monitoring system
TV-1 television optical system for outside observation
All the systems of the submarine were fully automated and all operations requiring human decision were performed from the control room. While such automation is common on aircraft, other military ships and submarines have multiple, separate teams performing these tasks. Crew interference was required only for course changes or combat and no maintenance was performed at sea. Due to these systems, the combat shift of Lira submarines consisted only of 8 officers stationed in the control room. While nuclear submarines typically have 120 to 160 crew members, the initially proposed crew number was 14 – all officers except the cook. Later it was considered more practical to have additional crew aboard that could be trained to operate the new generation of submarines and the number was increased to 27 officers and 4 under-officers. Also, given that most of the electronics were newly developed and failures were expected, additional crew was stationed to monitor their performance. Some reliability problems have been connected with electronics, and it is possible that some accidents could have been foreseen with more mature and better developed monitoring systems. Overall performance was considered good for an experimental system.
The main reason behind the small crew complement and high automation was not just to allow a reduction in the size of the submarine, but rather to provide an advantage in reaction speed by replacing long chains of command with instant electronics, speeding up any action.
Impact
Alfas, as with almost all other nuclear submarines, were never actually used in combat and didn’t perform any important tasks except power demonstration. However, the Soviet government still made good use of them, by exaggerating the planned number of vessels[citation needed], which were assumed to allow naval superiority to be gained by shadowing major ship groups and destroying them in case of war. The US replied by starting the ADCAP program, and the British Royal Navy the Spearfish torpedo program, to create torpedoes with the range, speed, and intelligence to reliably pursue Alfa class submarines.
The Lira submarines were intended to be only the first for a new generation of light, fast submarines and before their decommissioning there was already a family of derivative designs, including Project 705D, armed with long-range 650 mm torpedoes, and the Project 705A ballistic missile variant that was intended be able to defend itself successfully against attack submarines, therefore not needing patrolled bastions. However, the main thrust of Russian/Soviet SSN development was instead focused toward the larger, quieter boats that eventually became the Shchuka (NATO designation Akula).
The technologies and solutions developed, tested and perfected on Lira formed the ground for future designs. The suite of submarine control systems was later used in Shchuka (NATO designation Akula), or Project 971 attack submarines that have a crew of 50, which is more than Lira but still less than half as many as other attack submarines. Shchuka submarines in their design represent a hybrid of Lira and Improved 688 Los Angeles -class, using a large passive sonar array, towed sonar array and further reduced noise level.
Project 885 Yasen, or Severodvinsk class multipurpose submarines, the first of was announced to be launched in late 2009 and to be commissioned in 2010, finally implements ideas of 705A and 705K, only in a Shchuka-style hull.[citation needed] They are intended to combine the ability to launch a variety of long-range nuclear missiles and engage hostile submarines or ships at long range, though without the many defects of the Lira class. The missiles carried include 3K-10 Granat with 2500-3000 km range, and new Kh-101 and Kh-102 with range up to 5000 km. Their displacement is reduced compared to Shchuka, dive depth and maneuverability are significally improved, due to more modern reactor and smaller displacement. Noise reduction is allegedly improved, with additional use of acoustical decoupling between internal and external hulls. Automation matches Lira’s level.
Alfa class submarines in fiction
Two Alfa class submarines (the fictional V. K. Konovalov and E.S. Politovsky) are featured in Tom Clancy novel, The Hunt for Red October. The E.S. Politovsky sinks due to a catastrophic reactor meltdown via a loss-of-coolant emergency – Clancy assumed that the reactor used very high pressure water coolant – while Konovalov is rammed by Red October and subsequently sinks. In the film adaptation, only Konovalov appears, and she is sunk by one of her own torpedoes.
Clancy’s SSN also features Alfas sold to the Chinese by the Russians.
Alfas also appear in Bruce Sterling novel Islands in the Net.
The novel To Kill the Potemkin tells of the undersea battle between an unknown type of subamrine – which proves to be a prototype Alfa – and the fictituous USN sub USS Baracudda. Set in 1968, the story has more than a few parallels with the true story of the loss of the American sub USS Scorpion.
The rebuilding of Alfa-class submarines is featured prominently in Michael DiMercurio’s Emergency Deep.
There is also a rebuilt Alfa in Jan Guillou’s book Madame Terror. The Palestinian intelligence agency has bought and modernized the sub with a new diesel electric power plant – speed and performance, however, improbably stayed the same – and a groundbreaking system of detection.[clarification needed] The submarine in the novel also carried a midget sub in the compartment originally housing the reactor.
Tom Clancy’s Novel Red Storm Rising features a naval assault on a Russian bomber base by Los Angeles-class attack submarines using Tomahawks, which are counterattacked by an Alfa. The Alfa sinks two of three 688 class boats, but is ultimately sunk by HMS Torbay.
See also
Wikimedia Commons has media related to: Alfa class submarines
References
^ a b c d e f g Podvodnaya lodka-istrebitel Pr.705(705K), special issue “Tayfun”, Sankt Peterburg, 2002
^ a b c d e f g h i Podvodnye Lodki, Tom I, Chast 2,Yu.V. Apalkov, Sankt Peterburg, 2003, ISBN 5-8172-0072-4
^ a b c d e f g Podvodnye Lodki, Yu.V. Apalkov, Sankt Peterburg, 2002, ISBN 5-8172-0069-4
^ a b Federation of American Scientists (December 08, 1998). “Run Silent, Run Deep”. Military Analysis Network. http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/deep.htm. Retrieved 2006-03-18.
^ List of Russian missiles Note: Kh- and X- prefixes mean the same. The Russian prefix is -, which reads as “Kh”, but is written exactly like X.
^ Speeding up the Development of Advanced Strategic Weapons
^ Kh-101 specifications
^ Federation of American Scientists
^ GlobalSecurity.org article
Further reading
Preston, Antony (2002). The World Worst Warships. London: Conway Maritime Press. ISBN 0-85177-754-6.
Polmar, Norman and Moore, K. J. (2003). Cold War Submarines: The Design and Construction of U.S. and Soviet Submarines, 1945-2001. Dulles, Virginia: Potomac Books Inc.. ISBN 1574885944.
External links
the Environmental Foundation Bellona: Nuclear Energy
Bellona: Spent nuclear fuel from liquid metal cooled reactor unloaded in Gremikha
Global Security: Project 705 Lira Alfa class Attack Submarine
Federation of American Scientists
The Russian Northern Fleet Nuclear-powered vessels
Storm of Deep (Russian)
Article in Russian Language (Russian)
Article in Russian Language from Russian Submarines (Russian)
CIA Case Study, “Unravelling a Cold War Mystery The ALFA SSN: Challenging Paradigms, Finding New Truths, 196979″
v d e
Alfa-class submarine
K-64 K-123 K-316 K-373 K-377 K-432 K-463 K-493
List of Soviet and Russian submarines List of Soviet and Russian submarine classes
v d e
Groundbreaking submarines
Drebbel’s submarine (1620) Turtle (1775) Nautilus (1800) Brandtaucher (1850) H.L. Hunley (1863) Plongeur (1863) Ictineo II (1864) Submarino Peral (1888) Gymnote (1888) USS Holland (1897) German Type XXI (1944) USS Albacore (1953) USS Nautilus (1954) Zulu class SSB (1955) USS Halibut (1960) USS Narwhal (1967) K-377 (1977)
v d e
Soviet and Russian submarines after 1945
Ballistic missile nuclear submarines – SSBN
658 Hotel 667A Yankee 667B Delta I 667BD Delta II 667BDR Delta III 941 Typhoon 667BDRM Delta IV 935/955 Borei
Cruise missile nuclear submarines – SSGN
659 Echo I 675 Echo II 670 Charlie I 670M Charlie II 661 Papa 949 Oscar I 949A Oscar II
Nuclear attack submarines – SSN
627A November 671 Victor I 671RT Victor II 671RTM Victor III 705/705K Alfa 945 Sierra I 945A Sierra II 685 Mike 971 Akula 885 Graney
Conventional attack submarines
611 Zulu 613 Whiskey 615 Quebec 617 Whale 633 Romeo 641 Foxtrot 641B Tango 877 Kilo 636 Improved Kilo 677 Lada
Auxiliary submarines
690 Bravo 940 India 1710 Beluga 1840 Lima 865 Losos
Categories: Submarine classes | Alfa class submarines | Russian and Soviet navy submarine classes | Nuclear-powered shipsHidden categories: All articles with unsourced statements | Articles with unsourced statements from August 2009 | All pages needing cleanup | Wikipedia articles needing clarification from February 2009
I am Quality Dress Products writer, reports some information about nimh smart battery charger , powerbook g3 charger.
