Home
Latest images
Register
Log inProject 885M is the most advanced submarine of its kind in the world. Nobody can compare with him. It is much more automated than the Vigrinia SSN, which has to take almost twice as much on board. He is heavily armed. It is obvious that such a modern ship will face many childhood problems. Everything is new there. The construction is successful since they have already ordered 9 ships in total. This article is bushit.
+84
TMA1
ALAMO
Arkanghelsk
Krepost
Mir
Podlodka77
owais.usmani
ult
lancelot
limb
Kiko
magnumcromagnon
Rasisuki Nebia
lyle6
andalusia
LMFS
miroslav
xeno
ultimatewarrior
thegopnik
Rodion_Romanovic
miketheterrible
Labrador
mnztr
Ned86
franco
hoom
PapaDragon
walle83
KiloGolf
Hole
verkhoturye51
Tsavo Lion
Peŕrier
Singular_Transform
Arrow
Project Canada
Honesroc
Tolstoy
Singular_trafo
SeigSoloyvov
Isos
nastle77
slasher
Svyatoslavich
Big_Gazza
artjomh
Morpheus Eberhardt
JohninMK
GunshipDemocracy
Stealthflanker
RTN
jhelb
Kimppis
Dima
Werewolf
mack8
flamming_python
eridan
kvs
Zivo
sepheronx
max steel
Austin
chicken
par far
Mike E
KomissarBojanchev
Flyingdutchman
collegeboy16
etaepsilonk
navyfield
calripson
Vann7
George1
dionis
TheArmenian
Hachimoto
TR1
Viktor
GarryB
runaway
Admin
Russian Patriot
88 posters
Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion
Arrow- Posts : 3449
Points : 3439
Join date : 2012-02-12
owais.usmani likes this post
Tsavo Lion- Posts : 5960
Points : 5912
Join date : 2016-08-15
Location : AZ, USA
it will be the most advanced submarine of its kind in the world only after its childhood problems r gone.Project 885M is the most advanced submarine of its kind in the world. Nobody can compare with him. ..He is heavily armed. It is obvious that such a modern ship will face many childhood problems.
owais.usmani- Posts : 1825
Points : 1821
Join date : 2019-03-27
Age : 38
https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/10383411
"Sevmash" is preparing to build fifth generation nuclear submarines
MOSCOW, December 30. / TASS /. JSC PO Sevmash (part of the United Shipbuilding Corporation) is preparing production for the construction of nuclear submarines (nuclear submarines) of the fifth generation, Director General of the enterprise Mikhail Budnichenko told TASS.
"Today, Sevmash is preparing for the construction of the next, fifth generation nuclear submarine. Active technical re-equipment is underway: new electric and gas welding, woodworking, foundry, metal-cutting, forging and pressing and other equipment is supplied to workshops and divisions," he said. Today marks the 40th anniversary of the transfer of the lead nuclear submarine of Project 949 to the fleet.
According to him, in 2020 the enterprise put into operation 895 pieces of equipment. "In 2021, we plan to expand the funding limit. For testing and completion of nuclear submarines, the reconstruction of deep-water and shallow-water production embankments, transborder routes was carried out," Budnichenko added.
According to the general director, Sevmash is also preparing to introduce a modular method of building nuclear submarines.
GarryB and Big_Gazza like this post
andalusia- Posts : 771
Points : 835
Join date : 2013-09-30
I saw these two articles an would like people's thoughts; is it true that AI could make submarines obsolete?
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/could-age-submarines-be-coming-end-173213
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/rip-could-submarines-be-obsolete-2050-175852
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/could-age-submarines-be-coming-end-173213
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/rip-could-submarines-be-obsolete-2050-175852
Singular_Transform- Posts : 1032
Points : 1014
Join date : 2016-11-13
- Post n°505
Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion
Singular_Transform Fri Jan 15, 2021 4:02 pm
andalusia wrote:I saw these two articles an would like people's thoughts; is it true that AI could make submarines obsolete?
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/could-age-submarines-be-coming-end-173213
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/rip-could-submarines-be-obsolete-2050-175852
Few interesting thing.
First, the crew on the submarine not there for fun, but because the equipment development/maintanance/ manufacturing to replace/eliminate them is too expansive.
So, saying that the unmanned ships/subs could be manufactured/commisioned in greater number becasue they cheap is false.
The smaller ships/subarines cheap, but they are less capable and slower than the bigger ones.
One big nuclear ship doesn't cost way more than one small , one 10 000T cost less than ten 1000T .
So, a 3000 T nucelar unmanned submarine will cost more than a Vriginia, has to design tighter standards than the human one - because there is no one to fix any issue.
lyle6
lyle6- Posts : 2578
Points : 2572
Join date : 2020-09-13
Location : Philippines
Arguably much of the maintenance on submarines are devoted to life support systems. Take the humans away and the costly, voluminous and energy intensive life support services would no longer be needed, and thus designers can be free to significantly uprate, and duplicate much of the vessel's combat and support systems as well as making use of potentially human hazardous measures to ensure stability of the vessel's systems.
Singular_Transform- Posts : 1032
Points : 1014
Join date : 2016-11-13
- Post n°507
Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion
Singular_Transform Fri Jan 15, 2021 6:35 pm
lyle6 wrote:Arguably much of the maintenance on submarines are devoted to life support systems. Take the humans away and the costly, voluminous and energy intensive life support services would no longer be needed, and thus designers can be free to significantly uprate, and duplicate much of the vessel's combat and support systems as well as making use of potentially human hazardous measures to ensure stability of the vessel's systems.
Again, you presume the humans are there for fun, not because without them the cost os the ship increase dramatically.
Everything that you wrote increase the final cost of the ship.
Check the Yassen vs Virginia.
The Virginia class is a fully manual, cheap submarine that require more than twice as many hand than the Yassen.
Yassen has way higher automation, best part of the submarine doesn't need humans in normal operation, but the cost of it is the cost- twice as much expansive than the Virginia.
So, if we go further, all benefit that you mentioned could be fully realised by moving a 10 person team into the excape pod of the yassen, and leave the left of the submarine as fully autonomous.
Remove the excape pod, and you get a submarine without any human, add it and there is a crew for it.
See ?
Now, the question, what could be the cost of the removal of that 50-54 pair of hands from the Yassen ? If the benefit is this big then why not cut back the manning to ten, and make recognise all advantage mentioned above?
Maybe the advantages cost way more than the benefit you receive ? Or the designers of the Yassen simply stupid ? Or they know exactly that without the 50 hands the submarine will be way more expensive , or less capable ?
LMFS- Posts : 5158
Points : 5154
Join date : 2018-03-03
Cheapo UAVs may do well without crew, a high value ship or sub with a crew can be repaired and kept in combat in situations where an unmanned one would not, until we create also R2 droids at least...
GarryB- Posts : 40515
Points : 41015
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
The new lada subs are essentially Kilo class subs with the same firepower but half the crew size.
Reduced crew is desirable but no crew... makes it rather easy to destroy in moral terms.
Shoot down a US plane over Iran and watch America go apeshit... shoot down an American unmanned drone and they deny anything happened but Iran gets a brand new drone to inspect and take to pieces...
Making subs totally unmanned is like making a fighter drone unmanned... it makes some sense but in practise it is hard to say what the real implications might be... especially if hacked and used by the enemy... what happens when the first unmanned Virginia class SSN is hacked by Iran and disappears and is seen in an Iranian port...
Reduced crew is desirable but no crew... makes it rather easy to destroy in moral terms.
Shoot down a US plane over Iran and watch America go apeshit... shoot down an American unmanned drone and they deny anything happened but Iran gets a brand new drone to inspect and take to pieces...
Making subs totally unmanned is like making a fighter drone unmanned... it makes some sense but in practise it is hard to say what the real implications might be... especially if hacked and used by the enemy... what happens when the first unmanned Virginia class SSN is hacked by Iran and disappears and is seen in an Iranian port...
dino00 likes this post
Singular_Transform- Posts : 1032
Points : 1014
Join date : 2016-11-13
- Post n°510
Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion
Singular_Transform Sat Jan 16, 2021 6:14 am
LMFS wrote:Cheapo UAVs may do well without crew, a high value ship or sub with a crew can be repaired and kept in combat in situations where an unmanned one would not, until we create also R2 droids at least...
Russia is the most advanced regards of unmanned underwater systems.
They have carrier submarine launche,d and many more under construciton, and there are nuclear powered Poseidon uncerwater vehicles.
LMFS- Posts : 5158
Points : 5154
Join date : 2018-03-03
Singular_Transform wrote:
Russia is the most advanced regards of unmanned underwater systems.
They have carrier submarine launche,d and many more under construciton, and there are nuclear powered Poseidon uncerwater vehicles.
The sub they used at the Marianas trench was self navigating, I am sure the USN has not missed the practical demonstration of such advanced dual-purpose technology that would be also necessary for Poseidon and other UUVs.
lyle6- Posts : 2578
Points : 2572
Join date : 2020-09-13
Location : Philippines
Singular_Transform wrote:
Again, you presume the humans are there for fun, not because without them the cost os the ship increase dramatically.
Everything that you wrote increase the final cost of the ship.
Check the Yassen vs Virginia.
The Virginia class is a fully manual, cheap submarine that require more than twice as many hand than the Yassen.
Yassen has way higher automation, best part of the submarine doesn't need humans in normal operation, but the cost of it is the cost- twice as much expansive than the Virginia.
Yasen is nowhere near as expensive as the Virginia, let alone twice that. Try a quarter ($ 725 million 2019 dollars*) of the cost of the Virginia ($ 2.8 billion 2019 dollars*) while maintaining an insane technical overmatch in almost all levels. The much higher purchasing power of the Ruble might skew the comparison somewhat, but there is little to say that automation confers the gross cost increase that would effectively discourage pursuing this characteristic even further.
Singular_Transform wrote:
So, if we go further, all benefit that you mentioned could be fully realised by moving a 10 person team into the excape pod of the yassen, and leave the left of the submarine as fully autonomous.
Remove the excape pod, and you get a submarine without any human, add it and there is a crew for it.
See ?
Now, the question, what could be the cost of the removal of that 50-54 pair of hands from the Yassen ? If the benefit is this big then why not cut back the manning to ten, and make recognise all advantage mentioned above?
Maybe the advantages cost way more than the benefit you receive ? Or the designers of the Yassen simply stupid ? Or they know exactly that without the 50 hands the submarine will be way more expensive , or less capable ?
I'd imagine the drastic reductions in manning might have resulted in changes to the doctrine and training for the subs. Not as straighforward to change procedures and practices and personnel as it is getting new kit. That much dudes is also probably the limit of what could be feasibly achieved with mechanisation in subs at the current levels of available technology without requiring much more substantial investments than what is provided, so yes it does boil down to cost at the end. Still, the trend is there: the new boats have been shedding manpower like crazy its not really beyond the realm of belief if they did manage to lower it down to that much eventually.
*wiki numbers
kvs likes this post
Singular_Transform- Posts : 1032
Points : 1014
Join date : 2016-11-13
- Post n°513
Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion
Singular_Transform Sat Jan 16, 2021 12:27 pm
lyle6 wrote:
Yasen is nowhere near as expensive as the Virginia, let alone twice that. Try a quarter ($ 725 million 2019 dollars*) of the cost of the Virginia ($ 2.8 billion 2019 dollars*) while maintaining an insane technical overmatch in almost all levels. The much higher purchasing power of the Ruble might skew the comparison somewhat, but there is little to say that automation confers the gross cost increase that would effectively discourage pursuing this characteristic even further.
I'd imagine the drastic reductions in manning might have resulted in changes to the doctrine and training for the subs. Not as straighforward to change procedures and practices and personnel as it is getting new kit. That much dudes is also probably the limit of what could be feasibly achieved with mechanisation in subs at the current levels of available technology without requiring much more substantial investments than what is provided, so yes it does boil down to cost at the end. Still, the trend is there: the new boats have been shedding manpower like crazy its not really beyond the realm of belief if they did manage to lower it down to that much eventually.
*wiki numbers
One Yassen worth 50 modern fighter jets, one Vriginia worth 20. One Nimitz worth 80-100.
The exchange rate meaningless, that showing only the relations between the two country.
New boats doesn't show manning improvements, reference :
Sturgeo: 107
Los Angeles:129
Seawolf:140
Virginia:135
Alfa:31
Akula:73
Yassen-M:64
The USA increased the manning of submarines by each generation.
No current submarine get close to the automation of the 60s vintage Alfa submarines. That used humans for decision making only.
owais.usmani likes this post
GarryB- Posts : 40515
Points : 41015
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
To be fair the Alpha was a much smaller sub than any of the others mentioned.
Victor III had about 100 crew, and about 60 for Sierra, while Akula I had about 73 crew while the later II and III models had 62, and the compliment for Yasen is 85, while Yasen-M is 64...
So there is a clear trend to reduce crew size...
Keep in mind a subs crew needs to operate 24/7 so generally you have to triple your operational crew, because you have to have three shifts of crews that work 8 hours a day each, so you have 8 hours of work, 8 hours of sleep and 8 hours to eat and exercise or rest or whatever...
Of course commanders probably work for 12 hour shifts... for instance the Lada class SSKs have a crew of 35, so probably 10 in each operational shift, with the remaining 5 in specialist positions like doctor and dentist and three commanders... subs captain and a deputy and first officer that could share command of the vessel...
This means at any 8 hour period there would be 12 or 13 people operating and running the sub, there will be another 11 or so asleep and a further 11 or 12 people eating or filling in time reading or exercising.
The Soviets always had smaller crews than western subs and the western countries often claimed the main reason they have so many in their subs is that they will have more bodies to fix problems like flooding and hull breaches or fires etc.
Victor III had about 100 crew, and about 60 for Sierra, while Akula I had about 73 crew while the later II and III models had 62, and the compliment for Yasen is 85, while Yasen-M is 64...
So there is a clear trend to reduce crew size...
Keep in mind a subs crew needs to operate 24/7 so generally you have to triple your operational crew, because you have to have three shifts of crews that work 8 hours a day each, so you have 8 hours of work, 8 hours of sleep and 8 hours to eat and exercise or rest or whatever...
Of course commanders probably work for 12 hour shifts... for instance the Lada class SSKs have a crew of 35, so probably 10 in each operational shift, with the remaining 5 in specialist positions like doctor and dentist and three commanders... subs captain and a deputy and first officer that could share command of the vessel...
This means at any 8 hour period there would be 12 or 13 people operating and running the sub, there will be another 11 or so asleep and a further 11 or 12 people eating or filling in time reading or exercising.
The Soviets always had smaller crews than western subs and the western countries often claimed the main reason they have so many in their subs is that they will have more bodies to fix problems like flooding and hull breaches or fires etc.
Singular_Transform- Posts : 1032
Points : 1014
Join date : 2016-11-13
- Post n°515
Re: Russian Nuclear Submarine Force: Discussion
Singular_Transform Sun Jan 17, 2021 5:43 am
GarryB wrote:To be fair the Alpha was a much smaller sub than any of the others mentioned.
Victor III had about 100 crew, and about 60 for Sierra, while Akula I had about 73 crew while the later II and III models had 62, and the compliment for Yasen is 85, while Yasen-M is 64...
So there is a clear trend to reduce crew size...
Keep in mind a subs crew needs to operate 24/7 so generally you have to triple your operational crew, because you have to have three shifts of crews that work 8 hours a day each, so you have 8 hours of work, 8 hours of sleep and 8 hours to eat and exercise or rest or whatever...
Of course commanders probably work for 12 hour shifts... for instance the Lada class SSKs have a crew of 35, so probably 10 in each operational shift, with the remaining 5 in specialist positions like doctor and dentist and three commanders... subs captain and a deputy and first officer that could share command of the vessel...
This means at any 8 hour period there would be 12 or 13 people operating and running the sub, there will be another 11 or so asleep and a further 11 or 12 people eating or filling in time reading or exercising.
The Soviets always had smaller crews than western subs and the western countries often claimed the main reason they have so many in their subs is that they will have more bodies to fix problems like flooding and hull breaches or fires etc.
There are differences regards of lead boats/later boats, but definitivly no real drop in the manning of each generation .
The Alfa was designed originally for 14 man crew, they increased the number later on , due to training / maintanance requirements.
But ,again, the Yassen has a huge escape capsule, that can accomodate the whole crew ,and the submarine should be in fully overpressurised state for extreme deep diving.
The current Russian submarines most likelly has overpressurigins system in the engineering spaces, to be able to dive extreme deeps.
GarryB- Posts : 40515
Points : 41015
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
Soviet and Russian subs have had more automation than the west, it was noted by the Americans in the 1980s...
LMFS- Posts : 5158
Points : 5154
Join date : 2018-03-03
Sevmash will shorten the construction period of nuclear submarines
This will be possible through the use of a new block-modular method
MOSCOW, January 19. / TASS /. The production association "Northern Machine-Building Enterprise" ("Sevmash", part of the United Shipbuilding Corporation) will shorten the construction period of nuclear submarines through the use of a new block-modular method. This was announced on Tuesday by the press service of the enterprise.
"The block-modular method introduced at Sevmash will reduce the slipway period for building nuclear submarines by 18 months. The use of the new technology for creating nuclear submarines will also improve the quality of work and reduce labor intensity by assembling the hull of submarines from large block modules of a high degree of readiness," they informed in the press service.
According to the company, the new method was developed by the company's specialists under the leadership of General Director Mikhail Budnichenko in cooperation with the Malakhit and Rubin Central Design Bureaus, as well as the Center for Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Technologies.
Aleksandr Spiridonov, chief technical manager for special projects and armament at the Sevmash design bureau, said that the company also plans to "introduce advanced computer-aided design systems based on digital models, new non-destructive testing methods, and technologies for manufacturing ship structures in" exact geometry. " , Sevmash's tasks include changing the procedure for hydraulic testing of the main hull of the submarine - transferring tests from the slipway to a specialized area, as well as organizing the parallel production of technological modules for nuclear submarines and functional modules saturated with equipment, systems and cable routes.
https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/10491731
This will be possible through the use of a new block-modular method
MOSCOW, January 19. / TASS /. The production association "Northern Machine-Building Enterprise" ("Sevmash", part of the United Shipbuilding Corporation) will shorten the construction period of nuclear submarines through the use of a new block-modular method. This was announced on Tuesday by the press service of the enterprise.
"The block-modular method introduced at Sevmash will reduce the slipway period for building nuclear submarines by 18 months. The use of the new technology for creating nuclear submarines will also improve the quality of work and reduce labor intensity by assembling the hull of submarines from large block modules of a high degree of readiness," they informed in the press service.
According to the company, the new method was developed by the company's specialists under the leadership of General Director Mikhail Budnichenko in cooperation with the Malakhit and Rubin Central Design Bureaus, as well as the Center for Shipbuilding and Ship Repair Technologies.
Aleksandr Spiridonov, chief technical manager for special projects and armament at the Sevmash design bureau, said that the company also plans to "introduce advanced computer-aided design systems based on digital models, new non-destructive testing methods, and technologies for manufacturing ship structures in" exact geometry. " , Sevmash's tasks include changing the procedure for hydraulic testing of the main hull of the submarine - transferring tests from the slipway to a specialized area, as well as organizing the parallel production of technological modules for nuclear submarines and functional modules saturated with equipment, systems and cable routes.
https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/10491731
dino00 likes this post
Arrow- Posts : 3449
Points : 3439
Join date : 2012-02-12
The US has been using this method for a long time. You can see how they are doing incredibly fast production of Virginia.
Russia is still far from having such capabilities.
Russia is still far from having such capabilities.
Rasisuki Nebia- Posts : 136
Points : 138
Join date : 2020-12-24
I think most agree that they're behind in the field of shipbuilding, with that said the pace they've been improving is really not bad considering how rough the last 20 years were for Russia
Big_Gazza and owais.usmani like this post
Arrow- Posts : 3449
Points : 3439
Join date : 2012-02-12
Not only ships. Watch the amazing F 35 production bluntly.
Isos- Posts : 11598
Points : 11566
Join date : 2015-11-06
Rasisuki Nebia wrote:I think most agree that they're behind in the field of shipbuilding, with that said the pace they've been improving is really not bad considering how rough the last 20 years were for Russia
Their problems are the bad infrastructure and lack of investment in the navy, ground and air forces have the priority.
The ships they make are good. Compare that to the German frigates that are upside down or the US freedom class that is totally useless.
Japan/south korea make US ships and not their own designs even if they have a nice naval industry.
UK destroyers were louder than carriers and they suck. Their QE2 carriers are a failure as a concept (based around f-35 and don't have a real landing zone because of the skijump).
Chinese have lot of issues on engines. And their ships have still to prove something.
Only France and Italy know how to make something good in the west and surpringly they are not that expensive but they lack good weapons.
GarryB and lancelot like this post
GarryB- Posts : 40515
Points : 41015
Join date : 2010-03-30
Location : New Zealand
The US has been using this method for a long time. You can see how they are doing incredibly fast production of Virginia.
Russia is still far from having such capabilities.
Russia does not need enormous numbers of new ships and subs for the moment.
New ship building technologies didn't just fall from the sky, Russia paid France (for Mistrals) and South Korea (various new shipyards) for boat building technologies and techniques.
I think most agree that they're behind in the field of shipbuilding, with that said the pace they've been improving is really not bad considering how rough the last 20 years were for Russia
They have gone from cold war situation to having to make vastly more advanced and capable vessels over a period of very few orders and not a lot of commercial orders either... the fact that they still exist is a miracle, yet they seem to be coping with the jobs they have been getting despite funding not being up front... remember it is not just a shipyard, but also companies and sub contractors that make parts and provide materials that need to perform properly.
You can boast about how wonderful Virginia Class sub production has been going but how much of it with substandard steel that could fail in certain operational conditions.
Not only ships. Watch the amazing F 35 production bluntly.
F-35 production is a joke, that aircraft has so many problems... many of them quite fundamental, yet they blindly keep making the things like nothing is wrong... that is not something to be proud of.
Their problems are the bad infrastructure and lack of investment in the navy, ground and air forces have the priority.
And that is key because their Navy and shipping fleet are not a priority or focus... but in the near future they are going to have to focus more and more on trade partners who really do want to trade fairly who don't share a land border with Russia, so shipping becomes a rather more important component of their economy.
The ships they make are good. Compare that to the German frigates that are upside down or the US freedom class that is totally useless.
Another good point... the Corvettes they are building are better than most western frigates and destroyers, and are rather better than the products the amazing US MIC have come up with in the last few years.... need I point out Ford class carriers, Zumwalt class destroyers, and LCS class bits of crap?
Their solution to the LCS fiasco was an european frigate not that much different from a Russian Gorshkov conceptually.
UK destroyers were louder than carriers and they suck.
Not to mention overheating propulsion systems... and the less said about SSKs the better...
The main problem for the Russians is that they still have a lot of stuff left over from the cold war and not enough to replace it... but they have set in motion plans to create modern modular capable new ship designs... they have a variety of fleets in different situations and environments and honestly one Corvette design likely wont cut it in all the different situations, but larger ships can be more flexible and dynamic, so a couple of Corvette designs, and a single Frigate and Destroyer and Cruiser type is probably what they will need... once they are sorted they should be able to start producing them in numbers... that is the point of standardisation and modular design... claiming they are shit because they are not mass producing them now is naive... you have to check the product is good before putting it into mass production because like the F-35 after you made 1,000 planes you might realise that there is a fundamental problem that creates a range of issues if it is not changed, so those first 1,000 planes distributed out to users who find all these faults now have to return those planes to get major changes and repairs made... which might take a while and be very expensive and result in a plane that does what it was supposed to in the first place... so you get a plane that is too expensive and doesn't work and make it much more expensive to get it to work properly... when you know its primary feature of stealth already does not work when radars in Russia are tracking them operating on the Iran Iraq border.
They could have been using F-16s for that job... would have been faster, much cheaper, longer ranged, better payload.... and not stealthy either...
Isos, lancelot and Rasisuki Nebia like this post
owais.usmani- Posts : 1825
Points : 1821
Join date : 2019-03-27
Age : 38
https://twitter.com/EmbersOfStirn/status/1369158161173725186
franco, George1, dino00, Big_Gazza, walle83, LMFS, Hole and lancelot like this post
mnztr- Posts : 2893
Points : 2931
Join date : 2018-01-21
Silly question: what is the snorkel for on a nuclear sub? Just for fresh air?
Dima- Posts : 1222
Points : 1233
Join date : 2012-03-22
Yes. For Diesel/DGmnztr wrote:Silly question: what is the snorkel for on a nuclear sub? Just for fresh air?
LMFS and owais.usmani like this post