Biggest Submarines: The Big, The Famous And The Surprising

[@vladimirdyuzhev]

"... having a pool - at least, intentionally." LOL

[@StarFury2]

The joke itself sounded a bit unintentional, which made it even better! Good Lol

[@chanman819]

I often forget the Typhoon displaces about as much as an Iowa-class at standard load. That's absolutely nuts.

[@samuel5916]

Yeah it is, the thing that makes comparisons odd is that most Soviet subs were a double-hull design which means they had a lot of unusable space inside compared to their western counterparts. I’d be curious to know what the usable interior space of a Typhoon was compared to say an Ohio. Greater diving depth and potentially better able to take battle-damage but also much bigger and more expensive to build. 🤔

[@chanman819]

@@samuel5916 Diplomacy is sometimes a straight up dick measuring contest. In that regard, the Typhoons could be partly meant to show off both engineering capabilities (look at what we can build!) and as conspicuous consumption (look at what we can afford to waste resources on!). I mean, that's a big part of the job of aircraft carriers, but the Typhoon showed off a Soviet capability the Americans couldn't match, unlike any feasible carrier they could have made. Boomers also don't come with the expensive extras carriers need - the rest of the battle group, an airwing, thousands of sailors... in that respect, the Typhoon is way cheaper.

[@daszieher]

@@chanman819 and boomers bind a lot of resources trailing and countering them because you really don't want one of those things sneaking up your cracks unbeknownst to you.

[@samuel5916]

@@chanman819 Aircraft Carriers are also the most potent offensive weapon in modern warfare. Nothing can project that level of firepower on a moments notice to virtually any part of the planet. Except nukes but those are useless for obvious reasons.

[@Maverick966]

But remember that 48.000 tons is the displacement when the ballast tanks are fully flooded with water to submerge, the real displacement of the hull is 22.800 tons when the ballast tanks are empty when surfaced, so I wouldn't compare it to an Iowa which is 48.500 tons of steel.

[@Fortunes.Fool.]

Your unscripted work is better than most others’ scripted and edited work. Love it.

[@oliversmith9200]

I was about to write the same thing. The man knows and is comfortable expositing his knowledge ad hoc.

[@daszieher]

@@oliversmith9200 unscripted is the only way to see one's real knowledge.

[@TrojanHell]

The self crits on fabulous unscripted lectures and amazing self made infographics in bloody paint of all things are kinda sweet and humble to be honest. I hope H I knows hes doing extremely well and that its mostly a warning to first time viewers who will soon grow to appreciate him for his qualities.

[@andrewgalvin844]

Tour guide for a Typhoon: "To get to the swimming pool...make a right at the Ferris wheel...pass 'Build-A-Torpedo', left at the bowling alley...escalator down...".

[@Alex-cw3rz]

Broadside torpedoes is such a novel idea I imagine the space they take up is their main issue rather than anything particularly bad about them in terms of usefulness.

[@Garnish4Zombies]

"at least an intentional one..." funniest dark submarine joke ever

[@jurgenschuler8389]

I really appreciate you updating your videos instead of fire and forget. Thanks!

[@keys4147]

Babe wake up H I Sutton dropped

[@Arhiman93]

So, technically speaking, the second largest (by displacement) ship in the russian navy is the Dmitriy Donskoi, the last typhoon operative, only second to the Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier?

[@anuvisraa5786]

yes and they where the largest from a time the soviet aircraft carriers onli take the lead in the mid 80

[@ranekeisenkralle8265]

Fun factoid: The hulls were designated as TK-[number] - which was the Soviet designation for heavy cruisers.

[@dchiab818]

@@ranekeisenkralle8265 I thought that is for counter intelligent purpose, so other will think they are building cruisers.

[@ranekeisenkralle8265]

@@dchiab818 maybe in part, but given the sheer tonnage of those things, it does make sense regardless. Their regular subs are also classified as K-(number] - so basically cruisers

[@dchiab818]

@@ranekeisenkralle8265 ahh, understood

[@karm42yn]

I'm curious as to why was this video removed initially.

[@heinrichb]

A bunch of typos in dates (such as 2016 instead of 1916)

[@Mrbobinge]

Navy UK for 11 years. Nobody during the 60's ever mentioned such monsters lurking beneath our little frigates/destroyers. Submariners forbidden to mention such stuff, explains their smirk distain of us sun bathed fish-heads lounging on deck.

[@brotomann]

I really enjoy the unscripted videos. There is something that is immensely enjoyable about listening to someoen with obvious years of experience and expertise talk freely about the subject they are most interested in. I foresee your channel getting a lot more subscribers in the coming year now that The Algorithm is picking you up!

[@misterthemad994]

12:58 "mysterious circumstances" is an other way of saying that it was most likely accidentally rammed by an american cargo ship or bombed by mistake by an american flying boat and then sunk to the bottom of the sea, in the Caribbean. (Surcouf was one of the subs that served with the French free forces, the FFL.)

[@elanthys]

Yeah it’s the speculation as I read it too, but really the only thing we know for sure is it just vanished with all hands. Unless the wreck is found (and even then that’s not a given) we’ll never know for sure.

[@BeKindToBirds]

I adore Surcouf, what a fascinating ship. X-1 is beautiful too, I am much more interested in it and the K-class now.

[@johnnycab8986]

"Typhoon only had 20 missile tubes due to political reasons" How would this be possible given these were developed at the same time? Given how much development is needed, there's no way the Soviets saw the Ohio and based design considerations on that because Typhoon was in development in 1976, and Ohio class was commissioned in 1981...

[@colhammer1]

No script ftw.

[@1952jjp]

I have actually been on the USS Triton, (she was laid up not in service), because we were looking for older sonar and comm equipment that could be used to support the other 585 class subs. She was converted, for a brief period, into a Presidential escape sub and had double wide ladders (stairs for some people) and everything that went with that, was in semi-preservation in St Juliens Creek Annex in Portsmouth, Va. In her day she was a grand boat.

[@darthrex354]

So apparently that NECPA conversion was never officially confirmed, and she was scrapped without it being documented. I doubt it's classified information but it might be worth formally documenting your observations if it's not classified, since Triton was never on the list as a NEPCA platform and people might appreciate the confirmation of a direct witness to the conversions in documenting her history.

[@philkipnis740]

Mr. Sutton, you do such good work. Sir, you provide a wonderful service in your videos. You're most educational, you teaches all about not just the history of the Submarine by The goings-on and why they did it. All in all sir, I really respect your knowledge and enjoy your presentations. Please keep them coming, we really really need somebody of your caliber on KZbin.

[@michaeldy3157]

You can see the japanese sub launched seiren plane on display , at the smithsonian udvar h center. That place is incredible. A must see for anyone. Even non plane fans leave it amazed

[@bruh5361]

Did I miss something or is this a re-upload?

[@heinrichb]

Reupload due to typos in dates in the previous version

[@GeoPoliticsCommentry]

TY a sub talk about sub history that was perfectly narrated

[@AnonymousAlcoholic772]

Man, your stuff is most enjoyable. Before i found this channel, its hard to think of something i cared less about than subs. Now im binge watching

[@Josh-hr5mc]

I'm a simple man HI Sutton or Subbrief posts a video and I watch

[@huebdoo]

My Dad was on the HMCS Saskatoon / MooseJaw in WWII and worked the Radio / Radar room and was convinced that they chased down and sank the Surcouf and sank it by PEI as something / someone was sinking ships in the St. Lawrence and they believed whatever was doing it was around St. Pierre - Michelon ... He believed it was the Surcouf because it was the biggest ping he had ever seen when they were eco locating it and when they arrived at Halifax they were told it was an "exercise" and were not to talk about it. its believed the Surcouf went Vichy

[@joka7316]

What does vichy mean?

[@huebdoo]

@@joka7316 French who switched sides

[@hanspetergerber2248]

Thanks….👍

[@NoBullNate]

With all of the powers bestowed upon me by the youtubes, I am officially changing the name of the typhoon class to "the swimming pool class"

[@rameezahmed3863]

How do the submarines keep water out, the shaft is connected to the engine and it is a rotating mass, any gasket would wear out over time and when the submarine is subjected to high pressures while diving wouldn't that leak water into the interior? How do they manage to pull that off? Awesome content, got interested in this stuff after the TITAN submersible fiasco.

[@EFCasual]

There are many more high performance types of bearing/seal systems. Labyrinth seals, metal on metal seals, etc.

[@lqr824]

14:20 "One of the big what-ifs." Obviously the Panama is such a nice-to-have that all US battleships are Panamax, but what is the realistic strategic win from shutting it down? I don't think the US IN PRACTICE shipped that many ships from Pacific to Atlantic or vice versa, did it? And if it took an extra... how long? Three weeks? to go around Tierra del Fuego, was there any actual battle that would have turned out a bit different?

[@jameshusband3302]

The unscripted-ness made this video great. Both the spontaneity and your command of the English language make it wonderful.

[@jannegrey593]

Didn't I see this video already?

[@thomasdobson8978]

Tracking Typhoons in th "Sea of O" was the cool op for an American fast attack in the '80s. My boat was too old and broken down, so we didn't get such ops.

[@trey1531]

What was the purpose of a tanker/transport submarine?

[@darkelf2x1]

To get past naval blockades / resupply other submarines, For example the Germans during WWI had transport submarines to get past the RN blockades and transport valuable German dyes/chemicals to the US (when it was neutral) in exchange for US goods/resources. In WWII, Germany had transport submarines to resupply other submarines

[@andrewsuryali8540]

Nobody will ever be able to justify construction of this unless a mad scientist dictator gains control of Russia, but I bet with current tech you can build a hyper-Typhoon with 24 SLBM tubes, two additional arrays of 48 VLS tubes over each of the two pressure hulls to the sides of the SLBMs, mount up to 10 Poseidon supertorpedos up front, build a housing for a minisub (a la Belgorod) between the two rear pressure hulls, build UUV hangars where the old communication "balloons" used to be, and convert the top pressure hull and sail into a pass-through UAV hangar. I christen this monster the Apocalypse class.

[@stefanusloloanpieterhutaba2744]

the thing i can be amazed in every video you make is not the topics you talk about (although those topics are amazing still) its the fact thats its unscripted, because you must have one hell of a memory to remember all of these things on the go! cheers to you mate

[@YensR]

13:44 Wow! How many other submarines are there that are not left/right symmetric? The bridge/sail is offset quite a bit, that must create a turning force when submerged, surely? Can somebody expand on this, please?

[@Wallyworld30]

I found this channel a few weeks ago and I adore it. H I Sutton is the Drachinifel with a specialty in Submarines.

[@lqr824]

One thing I love in your approach is just a couple second pause on the more interesting slides to really take in what we're looking at, or have just learned. All other channels motormouth their way through, making it hard to take in. One constructive criticism is that I personally don't want to do all the calendar math in my head, nor care about the date. "It was the biggest from Feb 2016 for two years eight months." Haven't gotten to the end but a timeline and/or a side-to-side photo would be cool, though maybe you do exactly that. Just trifling matters, though, carry on good sir.

[@WildBillCox13]

Excellent coverage, well tailored to the intent. Also, some nice drawings here, Mr. Sutton. I especially appreciated the Surcouf armament schematic.

[@WildBillCox13]

Rewatching this I googled the Gyroplane and found your Covert Shores coverage. Thumbs up.

[@alistairclarke6726]

could a submarine survive a collision with the MV Estonia (1994) ?

[@HRODable]

Love the videos and the information BUT the lip smacking is a lil annoying and distracting

[@adamfrazer5150]

0:43 👌 Nicely done man 👍 The man was correct, Montana is beautiful.

[@petethebastard]

@18:04 ...Bloody hell! The absolute complexity of a sub, in one image!! Great vid!! I've just discovered this channel, via Sub Brief...

[@malakov5]

I have no idea how my KZbin got here but I love this content.

[@Abuosmanli]

Dude good video but damn you gotta stop your mouth noises. Smacking your lips and

[@submarineautist]

Just a small correction: The K-class was (in terms of displacement) the largest submarine only until 1918, which was when SM U142 was built and commissioned one day before the end of WW1. It displaced 2785 tons. de.wikipedia.org/wiki/SM_U_142 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SM_U-142

[@adamfrazer5150]

Recent subscriber : really enjoying your diagnostic approach to these complex beasts, helps fill in many blanks in my knowledge 👍🍻🇨🇦

[@jonaslippert6963]

why is the reupload? or is something different?

[@foowashere]

Corrected and improved, I think. :)

[@HISuttonCovertShores]

I made some tweaks (typos in dates, added USS Argonaut). KZbin doesn't allow much in the way of improvements so had to re-upload

[@jonaslippert6963]

@@HISuttonCovertShores okay thanks, I'll watch the New Part now, allways nice to see that some still care about there content and then improve it

[@rajonesi]

@@HISuttonCovertShores Good information in the video. One small issue, you have the Typhoon start date as April 1979 instead of September 1979.

[@mupdyke2]

I'm very curious to understand why modern submarines stopped implementing perpendicular and rear torpedo tubes? To me that seems like an obvious advantage, but I'm obviously not a submarine expert..... anyone care to enlighten my ignorance?

[@vonfaustien3957]

I'd say largely because sub are now more or less just cruise missle transports and they proably want the space for vertical launch tubes.

[@LegendaryPatMan]

Didn't this drop before Christmas?

[@HISuttonCovertShores]

I made some tweaks (typos in dates, added USS Argonaut). KZbin doesn't allow much in the way of improvements so had to re-upload

[@ardeladimwit]

please don't apologize for being unscripted-- it indicates that you know your stuff and not copying from Wikipedia or Military Factory, etc.

[@smaikzorin4492]

The author did not say one important thing, each Typhoon missile carried 6 individually targetable warheads and their total number is 120 on 20 missiles! Typhoon was called the killer of continents!!!

[@MisteriosGloriosos922]

*Thank you for posting all of your videos. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year!*

[@DAClarkism]

Excellent video, even if it was "unscripted" as you say. I've had the privilege of being on board an Ohio, and when you mentioned that the Typhoon was TWICE the size, my eye caught one of the little drawings of a 3-high rack (sleeping bunk for the folks following along), I about lost it dude! That thing is big! It's a shame all we ever see of it is that old nasty rusted pool and the Soviet sauna, because man, they must have built an incredible piece of equipment. Also, hats off to the Soviets for giving their boys a sauna and a swimming pool (though I doubt very seriously that's the reason they made the thing so large). If the US made a sub that large, I stagger to think how much firepower and capability we would cram into something that massive.

[@smaikzorin4492]

The author did not say that each Typhoon missile carried 10 individually targetable warheads, and their number is 200! The typhoon was called the killer of continents and its firepower is unsurpassed by anyone !!!!

[@shadowmihaiu]

On steam submarines, didn't you report in another video that there are no actual reports of steam-submarine disasters related to that design? Or did I misunderstand? Because here, you say there probably were several serious issues. Thanks for your presentations, they are very informative and interesting.

[@daniellafferety4025]

The Hms. Nautilus the one with side tubes. I wounder why side mounted torpedoes weren't built in to later model's as broadside bombardment was great British doctoren. So why don't we hear about broadside torpedoes launches. Also front and rear turet mounted torpedoes could rotate 180 degrees fier arch. Thuse ship doesn't need to change course. Just some one in charge of the torpedoe fore, aft torpedoe batter gets bearing set then the batter rotates. Turret mounted torpedoe fier. Bomb. The ship keep going. The ship has two front recoileless rocket howitzer. Fieing twelve shots. Then two rear torpedoe turrets. Then front rear 8 shot magazine for 4 tubes. And Nautilus like 8 side torpedoes launches with 12 shot magazine each. I wounder if time was suficient could a 78,000 ton none nuclear sub be bulit with masive surface and suboceianic fierpower. Radar, sonar. Have been built. So extreme range submersible be built. Exercise area, sauna, cold pluge. Soviets sub. What about a movie theater, or large mess hall? But a larger hospital surgeries areas. Dentist, optometrist. Would be more practical if all could be in a anything reconfigurable room. If planes could be launched underwater. Travel like a sub to surface then use rockets for flight. Find enemy attacks with rockets. Then return and submerged to get back to hanger deck. Then be retracted. These and the never produced aircraft carrier, /battle ship hybrid would be interesting. Sadly aircraft carrier rendered all other surface warships designs obsolete. And side torpedoe tubes vanished.

[@don_5283]

Torpedoes of the two World Wars were about 20 feet long. That means, if you want to be able to reload your tubes, you need at least another 20-25 feet behind the tubes to mount or maneuver torpedoes into place to slide into the tubes. If you want an internal torpedo room, with broadside torpedoes, that means a beam of at least 45 feet, not counting any extra diameter for double-hulls or ballast tanks or anything else. Considering the fairly luxurious Balaos of the US Navy in the Second World War had a beam of 27-ish feet... You're going to run into serious performance problems. External torpedo tubes are mostly a non-starter because of the complexity of mounting them and operating them, and difficulties with streamlining, and the practical inability to reload them under wartime conditions. There's just nothing gained that justifies the costs involved with trying to mount external manipulable torpedo tubes. In the world wars, tracking targets and aiming weapons was extremely complex and difficult, and even with the famed US Torpedo Data Computer, it would have been very difficult to plot simultaneous attacks on multiple targets. You don't need to turn the boat, as you can set the torpedoes' internal gyros to deflect off the centerline after launch, which lets you fire spreads of torpedoes in a 60 degree arc ahead or behind, and you couldn't practically aim more than a single spread forward and aft simultaneously anyway. Better to have fixed internal torpedo tubes, and the ability to carry reloads that you could use in the relative safety and stability of being submerged.

[@stevewindisch7400]

There were several types of external tubes in early subs (built pre- and during WW1), the French used them extensively, usually something called the "Drzewiecki Drop Collar" or derivatives there-of. The problem was that most of the weird schemes they used could not be trained and fired when submerged (even though the designers sometimes claimed they could, results showed otherwise in actual practice). They also all had reliability problems. I was surprised to hear of the broadside torps, because it makes little sense. Having all the air tanks, compressors, water-tight doors, etc. for torpedo tubes is a complex enterprise, and multiplying that with several locations is an unwelcome complication (besides all the internal space they take up). A sub would have to be stopped to use them because of the force of water along the hull drags them off course, and although battleships and cruisers had special devices for that, subs could not. Targeting Computer aimed Torpedoes that could do programmed turns fairly reliably came out by the late 20's and were adapted by most countries quickly... but some Whitehead types could do this back in late WW1, so the broadsides are even more odd... they must have known about that capability.

[@shaider1982]

15:04 I thought this would be SSN-571 (Nautilus). Amazing, the I-400 was even larger than some early nuclear subs.

[@AsbestosMuffins]

kind of makes sense when you think about it though, without the need for all the diesel fuel, you can make a sub that goes 2x as far, does 2x the work, for less size, plus nautilus was as much a test of nuclear tech as it was new hullforms so its not as big as it could have been built

[@Walkercolt1]

You forgot the BRAND NEW SSB WISCONSIN CLASS! Too long (1125") and too wide (165') to pass through the locks in the Panama Canal!!! My Cousin is a Master Chief Petty Officer in charge of Environmental Control. I toured his "boat" and it is AMAZING!!! "Sherwood Forest" is about 7-8 STORIES tall with 48 silos. "Boystown" and "Girlstown", the enlisted quarters are privacy roomettes and luxurious, the PO and Chiefs and Quarter Masters (and the four Warrants) rooms are cruise ship type while "Officer's Country" is palatial. The Captain is a nice man and the XO a nice woman. Four Lt. Commanders for each watch, three men, one woman-I'd guess a compliment of 500+ total. THEY WEAR BELL BOTTOMS (Enlisted) from the uniform store in New Orleans with 27" bells like the 1922 Naval Uniform and piped Pinafores and look like a MILLION DOLLARS lined-up for inspection with GOB hats! Dickies dungarees (bell-bottom pants) for work details with blue GOB hats! The six "Super-Boomers" are old-school Navy. ALL officers are "SIR". The families were fed a LAVIOUS buffet-I ate at the XO's table. The "Supers" NEVER come with-in sight of land. Timmy is the "Gold" crew. He earns 6 figures or very close to it. 100% titanium hulls...mike speed at below cavitation depth (about 250 meters) 77 knots (85 MPH) mike depth CLASSIFED but DEEPER than ANY normal part of the Atlantic (at LEAST 400 meters) she has "several" thrusters, little outboard motors, totally silent that can move her SIDEWAYS if needed WITHOUT the reactor running for a LONG time. Quote the XO "Wanna find us? Find the quietest place in the ocean, and THAT'S US!" "We hide in schools of shrimp or whales or sardines."

[@mupdyke2]

Absolutely AWESOME video....but hearing the first US nuclear missile sub named Ethan Allen class STILL has me roaring laughing!!!!

[@ShornDunlevy]

H I Sutton clearly should be working as a researcher for a large media outlet like the BBC. Apparently the BBC has over 1 million hours of video and audio recordings 99% of which will NEVER be used. Adam Curtis has made a good stab at using them to explain quirks of history but I for one would tune in BB4 4 11.30 PM every Tuesday for a H I Sutton 'chat'. About as British as it's possible to get.

[@GixxerZilla]

Fascinating

[@jjbeast8823]

cool vid! didnt know about most of these

[@longhaulblue]

I'm curious about the gun turrets. How do they shoot after being submerged underwater? I would think if they are constantly flooded with water that it would cause all sorts of problems to make them operational on the surface.

[@smaikzorin4492]

They are filled with water just before launching rockets!

[@goobfilmcast4239]

The IJN's idea of closing the Panama Canal was just a ridiculous pipe dream. Even if they could get there and drop bombs, the canal would likely be opened to some traffic after quick repairs. If the canal was closed indefinitely, the US would just send all the men and most of the material by train... east to west and enlarge and expand west coast shipyards in 12 or less months. None of it would have slowed the Manhattan Project and ultimate surrender anyway

[@bobmiller7502]

A swimming pool on a sub,,how radio rental is that??,, those crazy Russians goto love them,,thanks 4 sharing,don't know how I ended up here?? but glad i did now,,,xx

[@Svartalf14]

excuse me if this come completely out of nowhere. I've heard that recent submarines were prone to using some kind of hydropropulsion instead of screws, because it's more silent. Have you made a vid about this, so I can jump there right away? Were Typhoons actually equipped with such a device? (Ghosts of Red October, eat your heart out)

[@ianmcsherry5254]

He has made a video on the subject, if you check the list. Screws v. propulsors basically. There is nothing on the horizon like the fictional Red October.

[@peje1524]

This speaking with pauzes 🤮 Dislike and not recommend anymore

[@adamdubin1276]

Wasn't there at least one mission where an I-400 class launched planes that fire bombed the US Pacific Northwest?

[@kevlarburrito6693]

What's the difference between a "High Angle" gun and a howitzer? They seem to imply the same thing, no?

[@shaider1982]

I wonder if a large SSBN can be converted to a modern "milk cow" for AIP subs for fuel

[@daszieher]

I wonder why smaller subs are going through the pains of lugging fuel around and aren't powered by smaller reactors.

[@ricktoconnor]

@@daszieher small reactor tech is only becoming feasible recently with the development of small modular reactors. That being said, most non-big powers will prefer AIP or diesel simply as it is cheaper and because they dont have any ambition to do anything but defend at most their EEZs. So lugging around some fuel and AIP cells is enough.

[@daszieher]

@@ricktoconnor probably. But one sees how many states strive for an at least minimal involvement with nuclear power. So I believe cost only to be a side note with submarines.

[@ianmcsherry5254]

@@daszieher bear in mind that many nations still prefer not to dabble with militarised nuclear power. Japan being one long standing example. The recent advent of Australian involvement is causing a different kind of anxiety, that lack of preparedness, and nuclear support infrastructure, which cannot be built overnight. I know that the first generation of Australian nuclear propulsion specialists are currently in training, some here in Britain, some in the US, but it will be years before they are 100% ready to take charge on their own. Then, of course, the boat design is yet to be finalised. Amongst other things..

[@horsetowater]

@3:00 is a white elephant heavier than a pink elephant?

[@merafirewing6591]

Only your mom.

[@napalmholocaust9093]

Deja vu

[@siliconvalleyengineer5875]

the last Typhoon is in unseaworthy disrepair, there's been no maintenece of any kind. yet, this sub is put back to seas over and over again. you can bet that this worn out beat up sub is nolonger quite, and the Seawolves can find her when they want.

[@karrole88]

The famous Dimitri Donskoy the largest submarine in the world

[@yunassaxer7119]

[@nik3896]

How much cost in todays money billions dollars? Can find that info Yasen is 1.5 billions usd

[@GraemePayne1967Marine]

For Americans .... Meccano is the British equinalent of Erector sets.

[@darkprose]

Mustard has a great video on Japan’s I-4OO.

[@nitehawk86]

The Ethan Allen class submarine, filled with furniture for some reason.

[@bottomhat2534]

"The only submarine with a swimming pool. At least an intentional one." Ha!

[@TheStowAway594]

"the only submarine I know of of with a swimming pool...well and intentional one" lol

[@fidem15893]

The Sourcof looks like a Jules Verne machine. Really steampunk.

[@kiiiisu]

yhx! good video as always

[@petervonfroster8i]

i only miss the SM U-142 Class from WW1 in this List

[@jebise1126]

i wonder why external torpedo tubes are not used any more?

[@Eruthian]

Probably aquadynamic reasons to prevent avoidable noise sources.

[@jebise1126]

@@Eruthian cant be... i mean they were nicely integrated into double hulls. similar like oscar 2 has missiles on side

[@76dg15]

Pretty cool video overall

[@rcwagon]

Great comment: only one with a swimming pool - - intentionally.

[@黃鑫和]

I recognized your British accent.😊

[@Roedygr]

"simular" should be pronounced "similar:

[@tiborpurzsas2136]

The Soviets didn't fuck around

[@ramanjindal8669]

Recently found your gem channel by navel news website . Please 🙏 explain french barracuda class SSN if possible ( becz after cancellation of aukus deal , India comes in into equation to get this sub in future also french defence minister recently visit India to push this sub deal) Thankyou for this amazing content.

[@Cheka__]

Submarines can hide by going under water.

[@rainernissen718]

The usefulness/concept of ever larger subs escapes me, they are easier to detect/destroyed etc. simply because their footprint is just too big; besides build smaller and faster subs with a few less missiles and build more for less, the German AIP subs come to mind even though they "only" have torpedoes but they are incredible quiet, fast, very hard to detect and can stay submerged for a few month if so desired, so why not build them somewhat larger to carry a few missiles, they need a far smaller crew - mostly specialized crew - and sofar they are very sucessful; the very idea of a sub-carrier is in my opinion useless.

[@shaider1982]

Perhaps it's because the missiles need to be larger because the warheads are also larger due to difficulty in minturization by some countries.

[@mluby7828]

Is it true that larger means more detectable? That would be true for radar or active sonar but I'm not as certain it works that way for passive sonar. Perhaps magnetic sensors (or gravimetric sensors if those exist) can detect large subs more easily.

[@ricktoconnor]

There are benefits to larger submarines - up to a point; Ohio class carrying 24 D5 SLBMs on a crew of 155 is more efficient in terms of personnel per missile to the Lafayette/Benjamin Franklin class or even the contemporary British Vanguard class, which carried 16 missiles on a crew of 140 or 135. Being bigger gives more room and space for rafting and sound isolation, all other technology being equal. The German AIP submarines are not "fast"; at full speed they're just 20kts - same as most non-nuclear boats. At those speeds they are not stealthier than nuclear boats. Diesels and AIP are only acoustically stealthier than nuclear power at slow crawls of 5kts or less; and at those speeds any top-of-the line submarine - even nuclear - are already much quieter than the ambient ocean noise - to the point where people are talking about finding subs via the silent voids they represent. Smaller hulls are less detectable to active sonar due to reduction of target echo strength. However, even that is no longer enough; witness the Type 212CD German/Norwegian U-boat which is now resorting to faceting measures to reduce target echo strength (Mr Sutton made a video about it here: kzbin.info/www/bejne/bJmYdJaho6yAn6c), although said measures have helped result in a sub almost double the size of the original Type 212.

[@grantchallinor5263]

It's pretty simple to explain and understand why, out of necessity, the various reasons balistic missile submarines are so large. Russia, the US, China, the UK, France, and (I think) India have them. It's probably more cost-effective to build a large purpose-built ballistic-missile submarine with 16/20/24 missiles (and multiple warheads) rather than add a more limited number of ballistic missiles as part of the armament of a more "conventional" submarine. Doing the later would also probably introduce design and performance challenges to that submarine. Not all of every countries' ballistic missile submarines are ever at sea at the same time (let's hope we're never in a situation that that happens). Countries like France and the UK (with, I think 4 submarines each) always aim to have 1 of their submarines at sea (as a deterrent) so if the unthinkable happened, a platform is on station (or on its way) ready to strike. Each submarine's ballistic missile could (in theory) contain anything like 3-10 warheads.... All modern submarines are very quiet, probably some of the latest hunter-killer and AIP submarines (which you mentioned) are probably the very quietest, but a big ballistic missile submarine (though probably less stealthy) can reach its station and then just sit there waiting (virtually undetectable) at minimal or no speed...... The Russian Akula (which NATO calls the Typhoon) may not be so quiet by modern standards but it was considered so when it came out in the early 80s. My stepfather was onboard a UK boat in the very early 1980s and, prior to surfacing (somewhere in the North Atlantic) they checked the immediate vicinity by periscope.... When they surfaced, sat several 100 metres away on the surface was a brand new Акула (Typhoon) submarine. No one from "The West" had ever seen this submarine before (I think they were the first to see and photograph it) but apart from seeing it through the periscope, it was virtually silent and the British submarine's crew were quite surprised/shocked to see it there....

[@garynew9637]

Pretty good . Typhoon is amazing.

[@Deamon93IT]

Some of the names are surprising indeed. Anyway I wonder whether will see anything bigger than Typhoon, as it would require something truly enormous. Hell Typhoon herself displaces as much if not more than most of WWII battleships 😅

[@GIGABACHI]

I been told there's a point when making a Sub big starts to work against it. The magnetic signature of such a large metal object makes it easier to detect. Someone with more knowledge please chime in a explain facts from educated opinions.

[@TheFirebird123456]

There have been plans for submarine cargo ships and oil tankers as mentioned in the episode which would be equal to the typhoons. Those plans went nowhere but maybe in the future? I agree it probably won't be military.

[@vonfaustien3957]

​@@TheFirebird123456unless your having to ship under say an ice cap or are say smuggling stuff like the cartels transport would be cheaper with a surface ship. There's a reason no ones building large submarine transports

[@realvanman1]

The irony of a swimming pool on a ship has always been something to chuckle at.... But that of a swimming pool on a submarine is to comical to bear!!

[@MH5XXXX]

that is a BIG SUB but the pool is a nice idea.

[@michaelbrown-ub6jr]

Stop smacking your lips

[@adanedwardspencer6891]

I built a Typhoon class submarine, & it was known as the "Red October", & I landed up putting it in a fish tank, & I also built a German "U-Boat",& also the "Titanic 🚢", & I gave it to a mate. It looked awesome!

[@federicoxcc4966]

Question : does an EMP torpedo exist?

[@atunleashed]

Wait is this a repost? Thought I saw this a few weeks ago. Edit: Disregard, I read the comments 😂👌🏼👍🏼

[@iainwalker8701]

i like the videos being unscripted. Think audio would be a bit clearer if you used a pop-filter in-front of you microphone, I am no expert its just a thought.