Victor I class submarine (1965)

The Soviet Project 671 Yorsh, Project 671RT Syomga and Project 671RTM/RTMK Shchuka, are better known under their NATO reporting names Victor I, Victor II and Victor III, respectively. These represented forty eight, 2nd generation nuclear-powered attack submarines built in the Soviet Union and operated by the Soviet Navy until the end of the cold war and even beyond. Starting in 1960 the last two are still officially in service with the Russian Navy today. The Victor-class had a brand new teardrop shape for higher speed, had noise reduction, better sonar and automation than any previous type. They drew largely from the innovations brought by the Alfa class, apart for their standard PW reactor. They were primarily designed to protect Soviet surface groups and attack US ballistic missile submarines of the “41” for freedom. NATO considered them as the first really potent Soviet SSNs and they caused some concerns for ASW forces, albeit their noise level was still much higher to the contemporary Los Angeles class.

The world’s first fastest SSNs

Project 671 development

Project 671 started in 1958 when the November class SSN. The first were launched a year prior and albeit fast, they would have many issues, and the naval staff planned already to have a replacement as soon as possible. In 1959 the design task was assigned to SKB-143, one of the predecessors of the Malakhit Marine Engineering Bureau.
On November 3 the same year, technical specifications (TTZ) for these new nuclear attack submarine based on a 2,000 tons dsiplacement and diving depth of at least 300 m, were approved.

The specifications stipulated dimensions for their new sonar and hydroacoustic suite, pretty large, which defined their beam from thje start as it was planned to have them equipped to detect US submarines at far better range and with better precision than previously planned. Chief designer for the project development was G. N. Chernyshev, a graduate of the Nikolaev Shipbuilding Institute (promotion 1942). The new design was based on a single-shaft nuclear power plant (much safer 2nd generation PWR) for higher efficiency, rafting, outer hull coasting and a new hooked blades propeller to reduce noise ( initial estimations 4x compared to the November class).

The hull shape was to be brand new, a true revolution in design. Project 627 kit (November) already had a rounded nose, but the hull ended with a classic two-shaft tail and the hull was constant in beam. This was not a teardrop hull by any stretch of the imagination. However the same hydrodynamic studies (and news of the Albacore) in 1958 generated a renewed interest for the teardrop shape. The Victor class would be the first SSNs, alongside the Alfa class, even purer due to their lighter, smaller hull, to adopt this new shape. The Charlie class SSGN were a variation of this shape.

The sonar bulk forward defined this shape. The hull had an increased diameter, inclusing the pressure hull with a single compartment housing the steam turbine plant (STP) and its autonomous turbogenerators. There was also the combination of a torpedo and living compartment into one compartment forward.
The naval staff had great hopes for tnis new standard SSN which had the task to replace the zoo of early cold war diesel electric subs still in service (The Whiskey, Zulu, Quebec among others). This led to a serie of improvements planned early on, and later creating three separate class modifications:

Modification 671V: Vyuga missile-torpedo system in addition to traditional torpedoes.
Modification 671K: Missile system with long-range cruise missiles S-10 Granat (SS-N-21).
Modification 671M: TEST-70 remote-controlled torpedoes.
Modification 671RT Semga: Replacement of two 533 mm torpedo tubes for 650 mm, new diesel generator, noise reduction and new armaments.
Modification 671RTM “Shchuka”: Electronic suite modifications, extra noise reduction measures (new 4-bladed low-rev prop), addition of a cylindrical insert to accommodate new equipment and weapons.
Modification 671RTMK: Installation of SOKS (Wake Detection System), improved Granat cruise missiles 3,000 km.
The latter two are of the course NATO’s VICTOR III, which still are not considered SSGNs as the 610 mm are still torpedo tubes, not missile silos.

Genesis

Development and Origins

If the first generation of domestic nuclear-powered torpedo submarines (projects 627, 627A and 645 were created as SSN specialized against surface ships, the second half of the 1950s it became obvious that the Soviet Union also needed nuclear submarines capable of anti-submarine capabilities, not only as hunter killers of US or NATO SSNs but also a growing number of SSBNs as well as protecting the deployment of Soviet SSBNs as well. But also protecting ships and transports from enemy submarines. Until then, the task of attacking US carrier combat groups but also gathering intel, mine laying, and others, remained. The new SSNs needed to be thus a far more versatile model.

The development of Project 671 (codename “Yorsh”) at SKB-143 and after 1974 at Malakhit, was preceded by the study of early experience with other project, 627 kit (November) and its lead boat, Leninsky Komsomol and the ambitious Project 645 SSN powered by a liquid metal cooled reactor (Alfa class) or Project 627A modified to operate long-range cruise missile as well as the Project 639 ballistic missiles subs (Golf class). A team of like-minded people was formed while working on them, and generated a specific design school.

In 1958, SKB-143 partnered with TsKB-18 and TsKB-112, to take part in a competition announced by the State Shipbuilding Committee, for four new nuclear submarine projects: Proyekt 667, 669, 670 and 671. Based on the competition’s selection, SKB-143 was awarded 1st place, winning in all areas. Thes projects received high marks and a corresponding cash prize. A large group of young specialists took part in the new project development, such A.B. Petrov for Project 670, L.A. Samarkin for Project 671, V.I. Turenko for project 669 and G.N. Chernyshev for project 667. The bureau came out with indeed a promising “universal design”, which fused all these in a single specification:
– One shaft
– A new Architecture for greater underwater speed and agility
– Better buoyancy ratio
– A number of reactors to be determined by the required size and capabilities
– A power grid using three-phase alternating current.
In December 1958, a government decree was issued which approved the design and construction of new nuclear submarines FY1959-1965 or as part of a new seven-year plan. It defined the conditions for the design and construction of nuclear submarines for various purposes, taking in account possible uses into the new tactical and technical elements of the new boats, and define the use of new weapons types, improvement of architecture, habitability, and above all else, acoustic stealth. The TTZ defined a new set of measures to reduce the powerplant noises and improve reliability in general (a good decision restrsospectvely given the issues encountered with the Golf and November).

The decree prescribed the creation of a medium anti-submarine submarine, with torpedo armament, and a developed hydroacoustic suite under project 671. The design was entrusted to SKB-143 for the finalization with a construction already planned at the Admiralty Yard in Leningrad. Tight design deadlines were set with an operational TTZ on the 4th quarter of 1959, a draft design completedon the 1st quarter of 1960 and a technical project with detailed plan to be ready by the 4th quarter of 1960.

The design of Project 671 was based on a 1958 competitive study, carried out by several designers headed by L. A. Samarkin, a 1955 graduate from the Flight Research Institute. The State Committee however did not trusted this young specialist and G.N. Chernyshev instead was recommended. He was a 1943 graduate of the Nikolaev Shipbuilding Institute, which previously worked on Project 617, a variant with a single engine and shaft of Project 627 and 639. He was appointed chief designer and Samarkin became his first deputy, A.I. Kolosov, V.D. Levashov, A.V. Korolev part of the close team.

Engineer Captain 2nd Rank V.I. Novikov was appointed as chief observer for the Naval staff. This project embodied the new ideas of this new generation of specialists and make the new Victor class a versatile swiss knife equally efficient in all theaters and all types of missions, with a focus on the Arctic Ocean. During the early design stage, developers encountered issues related to displacement limitations. She was going to be built at the Admiralty Shipyard and then transported to the North on a floating drydock to be completed in a facility, after transiting the narrow White Sea-Baltic Canal.
About 20 design variants were discussed notably about the layout, type of nuclear power plants, number
of propellers, type of current and buoyancy with specific technical specifications with two options for a 16% minimal buoyancy reserve.

The TTZ included the following specifications:
-Single-shaft nuclear power plant, new propeller and reduction of the noise level
-New teardrop hull shape for optimized underwater navigation
-Wider pressure hull and separation of the turbine with autonomous turbogenerators
-Combination of two traditional compartments (torpedo and living) with the addition of the sonar suite.

At the initial design stage, the key point was choosing a nuclear steam generating unit for greater speed and agility in order to perform as a hunter-killer, 30 knots if possible but like for the Alfa class, not possible below a 3,000 tons design. Chief designer and specialists settled on a two-reactor installation, VM-4 type with a twin reactor arrangement on a four steam generators system as proposed by chief reactor designer I. I. Afrikantov, OKBM. The large diameter of the pressure hull made it possible to accommodate two reactors in a transverse arrangement. It had a rated output of 31,000 hp) thanks to two OK-300 steam-generating units, including a VM-4 water-cooled reactor with a thermal power of 72 MW and four PG-4T steam generators in their compartments on each side. The reactor core was scheduled for an eight-year cycle reload.

The specialists of the bureau, under the leadership of the chief designer of electrical equipment V.P. Goryachev, took an active part in all stages of design and acceptance of the units on the submarine. The draft design provided for maximum automation of the submarine’s technical equipment and weapons control processes, including:
– Centralized control, regulation and protection system for the nuclear power plant, nuclear power plant;
– Integrated submarine spatial maneuvering control system (“Shpat”), which provided automatic stabilization of the ship’s course, the submarine’s diving depth while underway and without a move, in Possibility of remote control of the course and diving depth;
– Automatic control system for emergency trim and depth failure prevention systems (“Tourmaline”);
– Centralized automated control system for general ship systems (GSS) and individual mechanisms.

For the first time, a unique centralized control system was created for a large number of mechanisms, devices, fittings (about 220) and information sources (more than 500), located throughout the ship. The bureau’s designers developed control algorithms, defined the range of information sources and
remotely controlled equipment, proposed a layout for control panel panels, developed proposals for the use of the element base, and considered individual circuit units on semiconductor devices and magnetic amplifiers.

At the initial stage, the development of the OKS control system was carried out on a competitive basis jointly with TsNII-45 (head of department V.G. Pavlov) and OKB-781 (chief engineer Yu.S. Putyato, head of department L.M. Fishman). In the nuclear submarine of project 671, a version of the OKS control system (code “Wolfram”) developed by OKB-781 was implemented. The most difficult task was to place a powerful hydroacoustic system in the bow of the ship in combination with bow torpedo tubes (TA).

Conway’s take on the Victor I

Naming: Nuclear attack submarines oginally were in the K-series. They were renamed in the B series from 29 August 1991 onwards. All were built at Admiralty Yard in Leningrad, two per year, from 1968 to 75. Most served with the Pacific fleet. The first was once named “Yonah” other names, possibly unofficial, were Del’fin, Sazan, Treska, Ugor but officially K-37 in the Pacific Fleet. She was discarded after severe damage while being recored on 10 August 1985. Most were discarded rather than being recored (nuclear core change), from 1991 on, only one or two were left as of 1995.

Origin:
Project 671 emerged from a larger programme of follow-ons to the ‘November’ class. The Malakhit KB (SKB-143), which had designed ‘November’, conducted numerous studies of possible future nuclear submarines during 1956 59. In May 1958 the new Bureau Chief, VI Dubovichenko, decided to offer one of the sketch designs to the State Committee on Shipbuilding. It was a US-style single-hull submarine (with a cylindrical, rather than a curved, pressure hull) with a single reactor, a single turbine, and a single propeller, ballast tanks only at the ends, and a boxlike superstructure. Unlike US nuclear submarines, the design carried some ballast between internal transverse bulkheads.

The double bulkheads also accommodated escape hatches leading into escape capsules in the superstructure. Unlike earlier Soviet submarines, this one would not be designed to the usual three-compartment standard, ie, to survive surface collisions. The designers argued that surface considerations were irrelevant to a submarine designed to spend most of its time submerged.
The State Committee showed no interest in the proposal, but it did announce a competition for four next-generation submarines: Project 667, an SSBN; Project 669, a large torpedo submarine (a direct successor to ‘November’); Project 670, a small torpedo submarine for mass production; and Project 671, an ASW submarine. Three design bureaus competed: SKB-143, TsKB-18 (Rubin), and TsKB-112(Malakhit). SKB-143 would be assigned Project 671; Malakhit would get Project 670, and Rubin would get Project 667. Project 669 was amalgamated with Project 671.

Project 671 seems to have been inspired by the contemporary US Tulibee class. The competition requirement called for a powerful new sonar, four torpedo tubes (eight torpedoes), a speed of about 30kKts, and a test depth of 300m, all within a normal displacement of about 2000t. By this time SKB-143 had designed three nuclear submarines: Project 627 (‘November’), Project 645 (the liquid-metal version of “November’), and the abortive Project 639 (an SSBN). The latter had introduced AC rather than DC electric power, and a larger-diameter pressure hull. Project 645 introduced self-contained turbogenerators (in Project 627 and its contemporaries, they were driven directly by the main turbines).

SKB-143 proposed a derivative of its proposed SSN, with a single shaft. At about the same time, the main naval staff developed standards for new SSNs. It assumed that the usual surface survivability standard would be maintained, and it asked for two shafts and two reactors, for reliability. SKB-143 argued instead that underwater performance should be paramount. Presumably its designers had reached much the same conclusions as their US counterparts (after a series of model tests, culminating in the construction of the Albacore). They pressed for a single-screw design with a body-of-revolution hull, for minimum ballast tankage (to minimise wetted surface) and for choosing the number of reactors only on the basis of required power. The State Committee agreed, but the naval staff and its own technical experts resisted.

Meanwhile Project 669 was dropped; clearly Project 671 would have to be a dual-purpose submanine. To provide it with sufficient speed and armament, the TTI Z was revised: maximum displacement could rise to the limit set by the capacity of the White Sea Baltic Canal. The SKB won its argument fora single shaft, on the basis that it would minimise noise and overall displacement while providing the greatest possible speed on the avaiable power.

Admiral Gorshkov personally approved the single shaft as a one time exception, but in fact the same principle was applied to the parallel Project 670. In retrospect, the designers were particularly proud that they had been able to choose dimensions based on hydrodynamics, rather than adopting the usual practice of adding up the lengths of compartments. For example, to minimise length they placed the reactors side by side, a practice repeated in later Soviet SSNs. As in

contemporary US SSNs, the new hull form drastically reduced wetted surface compared to displacement: Project 671 displaced about 30 per cent morc than ‘November’, but had about the same wetted surface. Test depth 1 270m (collapse depth is 350m).

The bow presented a particular problem. Standard practice, as in other navies, was to run the torpedo tubes in two vertical rows. That would have left little space for the big sonar array required. The solution adopted for Project 671 was to turn the two rows horizontally (two above four), with the sonar in the chin position. Coincidentally, this was much the solution adopted in the US Skipjack class a few years earlier.

The Russians went further, adopting power loading from a moving tray (as in later US designs). Soviet practice apparently differed from US practice in that four of the torpedo tubes were accommodated in an inner hull tube extending towards the bow; two more (the lower outer pair) were apparently non-reloadable tubes outside the extended inner hull. In later versions of the design, the reloadable quartet of tubes was increased in diameter and length to accommodate 65cm weapons.

As for power, all of the second-generation submarines had a new reactor which had nearly the same output as the two reactors of the ‘November’ class, The SKB-143 designers estimated that one such reactor would give good speed, but they chose two in order to provide a margin for future growth. Slightly earlier the US submarine designers had made the opposite choice in the Skipjack and Thresher classes. They would regret it in the 1960s, as the submarines had to grow to accommodate new equipment, and lost too much speed in the process. The main propeller of a ‘Victor I’ has five blades, and there are two auxiliary propellers for maneuvering. The technical design was approved on 3 November 1959.

Apparently this submarine, already in production, was hurriedly adapted to take the SS-N-15 ASW missile (equivalent to the US SUBROC, the design of which had been compromised); the modified design was Project 671R (R for rocket). K-314, K-454, and K-469 were Project 671V. There was also a modified Project 671K version.

‘Victor I’ is externally distinguishable from ‘Victor II’ by the boxy hump in the casing of the latter, between bow and sail. Given the very careful attention to hydrodynamics in the Project 671 design, it seems reasonable to guess that the hump was needed to accommodate additional equipment. ‘Victor II’ has also been lengthened, probably to accommodate 65cm weapons. An unofficial Russian drawing which appears to be of a ‘Victor I’ shows 4 short flank array in addition to the big bow array (which occupies the lower two-thirds of the bow), plus sound-transparent windows on the forward and after parts of the sail.

Design of the class

Hull and general design

The VICTOR I and II had similar hull for the essentials. Displacement was 4,300 tons normal surfaced, 5,100 tons submerged. Length was 95m (305 ft 1 in) for a beam of 10 m (32 ft 10 in) and a draft of 7 m (23 ft). The final hull design was teardropped, but this was mostly visible from above. The profile was constant for 2/3 of the lenght with a bulky rounded nose and short transition to the max width, but also a bulge was visible aft of the nose cone. The sail was also tear-dropped, with a much refined shape for speed, reminiscent of the Alfa class.

Power Unit

Compared to the 1st-generation reactors the new layout of this second-generation PWR significantly changed. Still a loop-type, the new spatial distribution and volumes of the first circuit were significantly reduced making for a compact and dense reactor compartment. The piping scheme was simplified and made more compact with the first circuit pumps “hung” on the steam generators. The number of large-diameter piping system connecting main elements was reduced overall, and almost all first circuit pipings were placed and in uninhabited areas, closed for biological protection.

Control and measuring instruments called for intensive automation systems of the nuclear power plant have changed significantly. The number of remotely controlled valves increased as well. The steam turbine unit comprised main turbo-gear unit GTZA-615 and two autonomous turbogenerators OK-2 (the latter provided the generation of alternating current 380 V, 50 Hz and included a turbine and a generator with a capacity of 2000 kW).

Two PG-137 DC electric motors (2 x 275 hp) were used as a backup, each of which drove its own small-diameter two-bladed propeller. There were two storage batteries (112 elements each with a capacity of 8000 A/hour), as well as two diesel generators (200 kW, 400 V, 50 Hz). All the main mechanisms and devices had automated and remote control.

The designer of the main turbo-gear unit (GTZA) was determined to be the SKB of the Kirov Plant (chief designer M.A. Kazak), the designer of the ATG – the SKB of the Kaluga Turbine Plant (chief designer V.I. Kiryukhin). The layout made in the competitive project of 1958 was taken as a basis. This development subsequently showed its durability (including during the transition to a block aggregated installation). The NPP was controlled by two operators from the central control panel of the installation, located in a special enclosure of the turbine compartment. The layout of two AC ATGs with steam discharge in the main condenser section turned out to be very successful. The work on creating an NPP for the Project 671 submarine with control systems in the bureau was headed by P.D. Degtyarev, the chief designer for power engineering.

Much attention was paid to the selection of reserve propulsion means. Preference was given to an installation with two auxiliary two-bladed propellers and
shafting passing through horizontal stabilizers. Two PG-137 DC electric motors (2 x 375 (275?) hp) were used as a backup means of propulsion, each of which drove its own small-diameter two-bladed propeller. All main mechanisms and devices had automated and remote control.

Options for using wing and water-jet propellers as auxiliary means were worked out. However, the complexity of the design, high noise levels and lower efficiency did not allow this idea to be put into practice at that time. The shape of the aft end, as it was subsequently implemented, is a great merit of the team of hull designers and mechanics. It is especially necessary to emphasize the contribution of the head of the dynamics sector L.V. Kalacheva.

On the submarine of the project 671 for the first time three-phase alternating current with a voltage of 380 V, a frequency of 50 Hz was adopted as the main one, which has a number of advantages over direct current. The main sources of electricity in the electric power system (EPS) were two generators with a voltage of 400 V type TMV-2-2 with a capacity of 2000 kW each, a diesel generator MSK 103-4 with a capacity of 200 kW and two groups of storage batteries type 426-11. The conversion of alternating current into direct current was carried out by two reversible converters of the PR-501 type (from the Electrosila plant) with a capacity of 500 kW each. The operation of the power sources and the GEM was controlled centrally from the EPS control panel using the Baikal control system.

Internal Arrangements

The project again returned to installing seacocks in the main ballast tank (MBT). Time has shown how correct this decision was. (But this was in the 60s, and there had been no tragedies with the nuclear submarines K-8 (project 627A) and K-278 (Komsomolets, project 685),
one of the reasons for which was the lack of kingstones in the central gas station). The kingstone system was developed anew and according to a different scheme. The project significantly reduced the volume of manual operations due to remote centralized control of the main mechanisms and valves. It was necessary to develop new water drainage and drainage pumps. For the first time, pipelines made of titanium alloys were used. Compared to the first generation nuclear submarines, the hydraulic system has changed significantly. In order to improve air purification, a whole range of new filters were installed on the submarine.

Much attention was paid to ensuring radiation safety. At the initiative of the bureau’s designers, an electrochemical air regeneration system (ECR) was first introduced on the submarine, for which its developers were awarded the Lenin Prize. Later it was used on submarines of other bureaus (Project 670, Project 667, etc.).

The submarine diving depth was determined by the technical specifications at 400 m (on the Project 627 submarine — 300 m). Steel grade AK-29, developed by
TsNII-48, now TsNII KM “Prometey” (Director – Academician I.V. Gorynin), was chosen for the hull. Its development began for the Project 639 submarine with the manufacture of the experimental 4DM compartment. In parallel, the possibility of
manufacturing the hull from high-strength titanium alloys (project 661) was investigated, however, given the lack of experience in their implementation at that time, preference was given to AK-29 steel.

The pressure hull consisted of cylindrical sections and truncated cones of circular cross-section. The frames, except for the aft end, were located on the outside. The plating of the light hull had a longitudinal framing system. The flat bulkheads of the pressure hull were designed for a pressure of 10 kgf/cm. The ship’s hull was divided into seven watertight compartments:
– 2nd central post, provisions and auxiliary mechanisms;
– 3rd reactor;
– 4th turbine (in it autonomous turbo units are also located);
– 5th electrical and auxiliary mechanisms (there was also a sanitary block in it);
– 6th residential and diesel generator;
– 7th helmsman (propeller electric motors and galley are also located here).

The wheelhouse enclosure and superstructure were made of AMg-61 alloy. The sad experience of using aluminum alloy on the submarine of the 629 project was not confirmed in this case. The material has stood the test of time thanks to effective protective protection and painting. Much credit for the creation of the hull structures belongs to chief engineer B.K. Razletov and chief hull designers V.G. Tikhomirov and V.V. Krylov.
The draft design of the submarine was completed, as envisaged by the government decree, in the first quarter of 1960. With six bow TA of 533 mm caliber, a total number of torpedoes of 18 units, a diving depth of 400 m, a GTZA power of 31,000 hp, two ATGs with a capacity of 2,000 kW each, two propulsion engines with a capacity of 350 hp each. The submarine’s displacement was 3,300 m3.
The conclusion of the State Committee for Shipbuilding (SSC) noted the depth of the project’s development, which was completed at a high technical level. By a joint decision of the Navy and the State Defense Committee on July 29, 1960, the draft design of the anti-submarine submarine of project 671 was approved.
The following were installed on the boat:

-Hook-mounted complex “Rubin”;
-Ladoga-2 torpedo firing control post (TUTS);
-Navigation complex “Sigma”;
-Nuclear submarine heading and depth control system «Shpat-671»;
-Submarine emergency mode control system «Turmalin-671»;
-Centralized control system of the OKS, including control of the diving and surfacing system, high-pressure water supply, water drainage, ventilation, air conditioning, hydraulics and others, «Volfram-671»;
-Control system for the rapid loading device of torpedoes and preparation of the Kiparis TA;
-The EHRV system, etc.
-The ship received an air conditioning and air purification system, fluorescent lighting, as well as a more convenient (compared to the first generation nuclear submarines) layout of cabins and quarters, modern sanitary and household equipment.
The architecture of the submarine and the principles of its layout, adopted in the draft design, were preserved at the stage of the technical design. At this stage, much attention was paid to reducing the underwater noise of the ship and interference with the operation of its own sonar system, since the success of the anti-submarine submarine’s operations largely depends on these characteristics. Unfortunately, the development of “floating hulls” in the area of ​​the noisiest mechanisms turned out to be unacceptable due to the increase in displacement. In the technical project, it was 3570 m3. The technical project was completed in December 1960, approved by the decision of the Navy and the State Defense Committee on March 4, 1961, and approved by a government decree. In September, the main performance characteristics of the submarine of this project were also approved.

Armament

The squeezing of the sonar suite into the bow was a challenge to overcome. Several options were proposed, notably one applied by the US already, with the torpedo tubes relocated on the sides, aft of the sonar dome, at an angle into the pressure hull. However the speed was calculated to decrease when using these due to the ejection recoil. The decision was to keep a classic option bow tubes arrangement, but with a special hatch for loading these, cut into the bulkhead. The torpedo room occupied the upper third of the first compartment, in two horizontal rows. On the nose centerline above this first row was installed an horizontal torpedo-loading hatch. The sonar was located below, occupying 2/3 of the nose space.

At the bow end in front of the hatch there was a horizontal tray covered with shields, into which a torpedo was lowered by a crane, loaded into the submarine. This design made it possible to radically reduce and simplify the process of loading ammunition, without requiring special physical efforts from the team, complex and dangerous operations. Everything was done remotely: Torpedoes were pulled into the compartment, moved along it, loaded into cradles and lowered onto the racks using hydraulic drives. This automatic loading was used for the first time in USSR. Later it was repeated on all subsequent SSNs.

The ship’s armament consisted of six 533-mm torpedo tubes, providing firing at depths of up to 250 m. The ammunition load included 18 torpedoes or up to 36 mines of which 12 were tube-launched. Minelaying could be performed at 6 knots.

533 mm SET65 and 400 mm SET40 torpedoes side by side, Kaliningrad.

The Victor class, unlike the Alfa class did not stick with two caliber torpedoes (533 and 400 mm) but one, all forward. Most importantly, the whole loading operation was entirely automated with just two operators to watch over the operations from control center displays, between the selection, loading, setting up and readiness, and just pushing the launch button while the other monitored the torpedo course to target, especially for wire-guided models.

The armament was not constrained by size unlike the Alfas and instead of just four 21-inches (533 mm) bow torpedo tubes they had six, in two rows, and 18 total versus 12 on the Alfas. The baseline armament were the SET-65 and SET 53-61 torpedoes which could be fired under 100 m, helped by the “Ladoga” hull sonar. Later the deeper SAET-60M was also adopted as standard. Other armaments were added later.

SAET-60M

For discreet sub-killing in the on-board panoply was also the SAET-60 (1961) and SAET-60M (1969) passive acoustical homing. Weight: 4,409 lbs. (2,000 kg) for 307 in (7.800 m) in lenght, 533 mm, carrying a powerful 661 lbs. (300 kg) warhead. Powered by a silver-zinc battery, the difference between the two models are their settings. The first was capable of 42 knots up to 14,200 yards (13,000 m), the second is slower at 40 knots but for 16,400 yards (15,000 m).

SET-65 “Yenot-2”

Introduced in 1965, these were Guided Electrical Torpedoes. They counted on active acoustic guidance, its own range was about 880 yards (800 m)
Weight: 3,836 lbs. (1,740 kg), 307 in (7.800 m) long, with an explosive charge of 452 lbs. (205 kg). It was Powered by a silver-zinc battery for a Range of 17,500 yards (16,000 m) at 40 knots, single setting. Yes, it was slower again than the Alfa’s top speed.

SET 53-61 “Alligator”

The first of these Acoustic wake models, derived from a long lineage going back to captured 1945 German G7 variants was introduced in 1961 and another version was already worked on. Weight and lenght unknown, but larger than the previous SET-53/53M (3,263 lbs./1,480 kg, lenght 307 in/7.800 m) plus larger payload of 672 lbs. (305 kg). Very fast, powered by a Kerosene-Hydrogen Peroxide Turbine up to 16,400 yards (15,000 m) at 55 knots with a second setting for longer range at 24,000 yards (22,000 m) at 35 knots. The next SET 53-61M (1969) replaced it, with an improved homing system.

SET 53-61M

In limited service from 1969, it just had an improved homing system.

SET 53-65M

Contemporary of the Victor class, introduced in 1969, these were improved versions of the 53-65, 53-65K Acoustic wake following homing torpedoes. Weight was 4,630 lbs. (2,100 kg), lenght 283 in (7.200 m), with a 661 lbs. (300 kg) warhead. Setting was 24,000 yards (22,000 m) at 44 knots thanks to a Kerosene-Oxygen Turbine. The previous 53-65K had instead a Kerosene-Hydrogen Peroxide Turbine for 20,800 yards (19,000 m) at 45 knots.

TEST 68

First Russian wire-guided torpedo, was on the SET-53M, with active/passive acoustic homing. The homing system range was 880 yards (800 m) and it could be fired under 650 feet (200 m). Most important hunter killer weapon on board for the class, introduced in 1969, it weighted 3,307 lbs. (1,500 kg) for an overall length of 311 in (7.900 m), carrying a warhead of 220 lbs. (100 kg) to 15,300 yards (14,000 m), at 29 knots thanks to its silver-zinc battery.

TEST 71

Improved model of the above, adopted from 1971. ASW wire-guided torpedo with active/passive acoustic homing, 880 yards (800 m) homing range and fired deeper, down to 1,300 feet (400 m). 3,858 lbs. (1,750 kg), 311 in (7.900 m) for a much larger warhead of 452 lbs. (205 kg) either up to 16,400 yards (15,000 m) at 40 knots or
27,300 yards (25,000 m) at 35 knots.

VA-111 Shkval

In replacement for its torpedoes an Afla class can also carry twenty of these supercavitation torpedoes. They were introduced later in their service. Entered service in 1977, deployed in the 1980s, the “squall” was the Soviet “secret weapon” of the deep. This was eessentially a rocket-propelled torpedo, last ditch weapon generating a gas-cavity for 200 kts speed but no homing at all. Due to this, in 1998 appeared a new version slowing to search for a target. This model was 5,952 lbs. (2,700 kg) for an overall lenght of 323 in (8.200 m) and carrying an explosive warhead of 1,543 lbs. (700 kg) and a solid-fuel Rocket for a range of 12,000 to 16,400 yards (11,000 – 15,000 m) at 200 knots, initially of 7,700 yards (7,000 m). The sheer speed (370 kph or 230 mph) creates a superheated bubble around making it very noisy and relatively easy to dodge, at least for the first model. The later, 1998 one searched, and then went straight to the target without correction for its last leg. It still could be dodgedat the last minute as it was a straight course run.

RPK-2 Vyuga

These 81R anti-submarine guided missiles were introduced in 1969. Studies started in 1963. Essentially a Soviet version of SUBROC. It is a missile launched by torpedo, which had a double advantage of speed, range and to carry an optional nuclear wrhead. The ultimate weapon against a surfaced ASW ship at a safe distance.
The RPK-2 uses a 82R torpedo or 90R nuclear depth charge. Shared also by the Akula, Oscar, Typhoon, Delta, Kilo, and Borei classes. The missile had a short burn, using solid fuel rocket for 35–45 km (22–28 mi) at Mach 0.9 with inertial guidance but carries a 2445 kg warhead, eitehr a 400 mm Type 40 torpedo (see above) or a 5 kt thermonuclear warhead. Its use is not certain for the Alfa class but appears in a few sources.

MG-84 Korund-705

Not a weapon per se, but a 400 mm torpedo decoy. This self-propelled multipurpose hydroacoustic countermeasure device was developed by the Central Research Institute “Gidropribor” and accepted into service in 1974. Produced by Dvigatel in Leningrad is similar to a standard 400 mm electric torpedo.
However its role is EW warfare to incoming torpedoes and decoy role. It could emit powerful hydroacoustic interference or alternatively simulate the running noise and echo signals of the carrier submarine with a precise setup. It could even maneuver like it. More

PMR-1/PMR-2 mines

Optionally the Alfa class were planned to carry out “minelaying” missions, laying up to 36 of these 533 mm mines. It’s not ever certain this feature was ever used. They were guided by the PMR-1, with a two-channel system to detect and classify targets. It was just laid down in the deep, waiting, and launched from an airtight container if a target was identified, delivering a 400 mm ASW electric torpedo from down to 600 meters. It was accepted into service in 1972.

Fire Control

One of the challenges for the class was to create a new torpedo firing system. Increasing the firing depth by 2.5 times required designers to perform full-scale
testing. This was done by specialists from a dedicated Design Bureau at TsKB-18 under the leadership of Chief Designer I.M. Ioffe (and then L.A. Podvyaznikov). For the first time on a Soviet submarine, the control system “Kiparis” prepared the firing sequence, created by TsKB-18 A.Z. leader Matveyev. The Polyus Central Design Bureau (chief designer A.I. Burtov) also designed and installed the new fire control system Ladoga.
Later, the Vyuga missile system received a prelaunch preparation equipment APGI and the Neva data management system was also created for Project 671 under chief designer L.V. Lyulyev from OKB-8. The chief designer of the Neva system was E.V. Kublanov from Polyus Central Design Bureau. A new high-pressure air system with EK-ZOA compressors also increased general survivability.

Victor I class Sensors

According to initial technical specifications, the submarine would be equipped with a hydroacoustic system “Kerch” developed by NII-3. However, the chief designer decided insteal to have the new Rubin sonar installed, a work done by chief designers N.N. Sviridov, then V.I. Aladyshkin. This sonar was initially created for the Pr.661 Anchar prototype submarine (Papa class SSGN). This new hydroacoustic centerpiece was considered greatly superior to the Kerch in terms of tactical and technical data. The Rubin sonar had a maximum target detection range of about 50-60 km and included a low-frequency bow sonar emitter, as well as high-frequency MG-509 Radian mine-detection sonar antenna, one the forward part of the retractable conning tower systems, alongside an underwater communication station, and a hydroacoustic proximity alarm system among others.

The Rubin suite provided an all-round acoustic awareness of the submarine, long range, with independent and automatic tracking and providing target course angles as well as echolocation ranging, detection of enemy active sonars as well. However the Rubin sonar was bulky to say the least, and weighted 20-ton. It needed to fit in a volume of 68-70 m3 at the bow, a difficult task. For this an optimize hull shape was eventually chosen. After the 1976 modernization, the Rubin sonar system was replaced by the more advanced Rubicon system, complete with infrasound emitter (claimed range over 200 km). The MG-509 was also replaced with the more modern MG-519.

For navigation, the submarine was equipped with the Sigma all-latitude navigation system. There was also the MT-70 TV on the CT for monitoring general surroundings and ice conditions also usable underwater down to 50 m, but retracted below. The VICTOR class also had a retractable PZNS-10 periscope, MRP-10 radio identification antenna with transponder, Albatross radar complex, VAN-M or Anis and Iva radio communication antennas, Zavesa direction finder with extra sockets for specialized retractable antennas. The main navigation system provided heading indication and dead reckoning.

Construction

<<<<<<<<
1 – main antenna of the Skat-KS sonar;
2 – 533 mm TA;
3 – 650 mm TA;
4 – torpedo loading hatch;
5 – bow (torpedo) compartment;
6 – bow emergency buoy;
7 – bow hatch;
8 – enclosure for spare torpedoes and quick-loading device;
9 – spare 533 mm torpedo;
10 – spare 650 mm torpedo;
11 – tank for bubble-less torpedo firing;
12 – bow trim tank;
13 – equipment enclosure for control devices for the Ladoga 1V-671RT missile-torpedo and torpedo firing and the Skat-KS sonar;
14 – AB;
15 – Central GBC;
16 – the second (living) compartment;
17 – the third (central post) compartment;
18 – Skat-B sonar antennas;
19 – navigation bridge;
20 – gyrocompass repeater;
21 – MT-70-10 complex periscope;
22 – Sintez PMU (space navigation system);
23 – Zaliv-P SORS antenna PMU;
24 – Albatross radar antenna PMU;
25 – Zavesa radio direction finder antenna PMU;
26 – Anis antenna PMU;
27 – strong wheelhouse;
28 – central post;
29 – electronic weapons and acoustics enclosures;
30 – partitions of auxiliary equipment and general ship systems (bilge pumps, general ship hydraulic system pumps, converters and air conditioners);
31 – fourth (reactor) compartment;
32 – reactor with steam generators, circulation pumps and biological protection tanks;
33 – VVABT “Paravan” and its winch;
34 – fifth (turbine) compartment;
35 – steam turbine;
36 – planetary gearbox;
37 – main thrust bearing;
38 – condenser;
39 – high-pressure high-pressure system cylinders;
40 – sixth (electromechanical and auxiliary equipment) compartment;
41 – stern hatch;
42 – stern emergency buoy;
43 – seventh (living) compartment;
44 – eighth (powerplant and steering gear) compartment;
45 – aft trim tank;
46 – horizontal rudder drives;
47 – vertical stabilizers;
48 – gondola UPV “Ruza-P” GPBA GAK “Skat-KS”;
49 – ATG;
50 – aft horizontal rudder drives;
51 – VFT (auxiliary propulsion units)

In July 1961, wooden full-scale models of all seven compartments of the submarine were made at the Admiralty Plant based on the bureau’s working drawings. The compartments were used to clarify the conditions for the arrangement of equipment, the laying of pipelines and electrical cables when issuing working drawings. (It should be noted that out of 480 technical conditions for the supply of equipment, 60 had not been approved by this period, including such mechanisms as GTZA, ATG, refrigeration machines, converters, etc.). The owners of the premises N.V. Danilin, A.A. Bogdanova, K.P. Lagoshny, A.F. Dmitriev, V.P. Pashkevich, A.T. Alekseev, T.N. played a major role in the creation of the models, and later in the arrangement of equipment in the submarine compartments. Kuznetsov.

At the beginning of the submarine’s construction, the bureau’s group of designers at the plant numbered 15-20 people (head of the operational and technical assistance group A.I. Ryzhov), by the end of the installation work and the beginning of mooring tests in 1965-1966, from 80 to 100 of the most qualified designers were at the plant daily. Along with G.N. Chernyshev, his deputies L.A. Samarkin and A.I. Kolosov, head of the technical assistance group A.I. Ryzhov, chief engineer B.K. Razletov, a great contribution to the construction of the first AL pr.671 (plant No. 600) was made by P.D. Degtyarev, A.N. Gubanov, M.V. Sidorenko, A.K. Kryzhanovsky, S.V. Boldakov, V.A. Shavkunov, D.K. Vrachev, V.P. Pashkevich, I.S. Sorokin, K.A. Nikitina, A.P. Alekseev, Yu.I. Farafontov, A.A. Tyurikov and many others.

Mooring trials began in July 1966. They continued for a long time due to a number of emergency situations, including pressure testing of steam generators and the release of filter sorbents into the condensate feed system. Only in July 1967, after completing mooring trials in a special transport dock, the submarine was transferred to the acceptance base in Severodvinsk. In late August, she began factory trials, which lasted 16 days. State trials lasted 25 sea days.

The first ship of this type entered service without any anti-sonar coatings. On the other ships of the series, the light hull was covered with a non-resonant anti-sonar coating. Based on a joint decision of the Navy and the Ministry of Shipbuilding Industry (MSI), deep-sea tests were conducted on the second serial submarine (plant No. 602). G. N. Chernyshev and V. G. Tikhomirov participated in the tests from the bureau. Before the tests, rescue chambers and a buoy-reel with hoses for feeding high-pressure water into the submarine were installed on the submarine. (E. K. Kondratenko participated in the installation of the container and the buoy-reel). Deep-sea tests have shown that the pressure hull and all systems reliably ensure the submarine’s navigation at a maximum depth of 400 m.

It is necessary to note the enormous role in the creation of the submarine of project 671 of the directors of the Admiralty Plant B.E. Klopotov, later V.N.
Dubrovsky, chief engineers N.I. Pirogov, later I.S. Belousov and N.M. Luzhin, chief builders K.F. Terletsky – the oldest shipbuilder of domestic submarines, I.L. Kamenetsky, O.S. Pokrovsky, senior builders in individual specializations and responsible delivery persons I.V. Kotenev, M.I. Ostrovsky, B.A. Nemchenko, G.M. Baranov, A.M. Sharap, I.V. Uskov, Yu.F. Sokolov. The work was carried out under the watchful eye of military acceptance representatives under the leadership of Captain 1st Rank G.L. Nebesov. A major role in the creation of the submarine belongs to the chief designer of the plant A.A. Gaisenok, his deputy M.K. Glozman, designers Yu.A. Shalaev, Z.M. Bobrovskaya, V.I. Shishigin, technologist V.I. Vodyanov and many others. A significant contribution to the construction of the submarine belongs to the electrical installation enterprise “ERA” (chief M.S. Sizov, site manager S.L. Gleikhengauz).

Series

Project 671: K-38 (renamed 50 Ler SSSR in 1970; begun Jan 1965, launched Oct 1965, delivered 5.11.67), K-69 (renamed B-369), K-147, K-53, K-306, K-323, K-370, K-438, K-367, K-314, K-398, K-454, K-462, K-469, K-48]. (Total 15 units)
Project 671Vm mod: K-314, K-454, K-469

During construction, work continued to improve the Project, increase equipment reliability, eliminate shortcomings identified during construction and operation. About 110 decisions were made regarding replacement of outdated equipment. Focus over time was to further reduce generated noise. On the latest in class, the noise level was reduced by 1.5-3 times, with interference levels of the main sonar reduced by 1.5 times compared to the first in class. The armament was also significantly strengthened, with the Delfin remote-controlled torpedo and Vyuga missile-torpedo.

Project 671V

Three ships (K-314, K-454 and K-469), intended for the Pacific Fleet, were completed according to the modified project 671V, as they were all equipped, in addition to traditional torpedoes, with the Vyuga missile-torpedo complex accepted into service on August 4, 1969. This new asset similar to the USN’s SUBROC system allowed to strike surface ships or submarines at much longer ranges. The missile could be used as well to strike coastal targets up to 40 km. It was tube launched (standard 533-mm) from a depth down to 50-60 m. The Rubin sonar system was not modernized but in the early 1980s, K-147 and K-438 were equipped with an experimental SOX and the conning tower and retractable masts enclosure were redesigned as on the Project 971 SSNs (Akula class).

External appearance, longitudinal section and plan of the upper deck of the submarine of the project 671 (“Yorsh”)

Project 671M and 671K

In the mid-1970s, K-398 was retrofitted to fire the TEST-70 wire-guided torpedoes and other ships modernized as well following this. According to some crew members, 671M was only applied to K-481.
K-323 was the first to be equipped with the long-range tube-launched cruise missiles RK-55 “Granat” (SS-N-21), as Project 671K.

Upgrades

During overhauls and modernization the Kaskad radar was replaced with the Albatross radar. In 1978, K-69 and by 1979, K-38 saxw the removal of their MG-509 Radian-1 sonar, replaced by the MG-519 Arfa sonar. In 1980 K-147 and the next year K-438 saw the addition of the MNK-100 Kolos wake detector. In 1984 K-53 had its Rubin sonar ruplaced by the MGK-400 Rubikon and in 1986, K-323 (50 Let SSSR, Project 671K) saw the removal of its MGK-300 Rubin and MG-509 Radian-1 sonars for the MGK-400 Rubikon and MG-519 Arfa radars plus the capability of firing the 3M10 Granat CruM from its torpedo tubes.

profile by Mike1979Russia.

⚙ Victor I specifications
Displacement	4,950 tons light surfaced, 6,990 tons normal, 7,250 tons submerged
Dimensions	93–102 x 10 x 7 m (305 ft 1 in– 334 ft 8 in x 32 ft 10 in x 23 ft)
Propulsion	VM-4P PWR 2×75 MW, 2x sets OK-300 steam turbines, 1×2 props 31,000 shp (23,000 kW)*
Speed	32 knots (59 km/h; 37 mph)
Range	Unlimited but 80 days crew
Armament	2x 650 mm (26 in), 4x 533 mm (21 in) TTs, 18 weapons, see notes
Sensors	MRK-50 Albatros, MGK-503 Skat-KS suite, see notes
Test depth	Below 350m
Crew	About 100 (27 officers, 34 warrant officers, 35 enlisted)

General Observations

For the Project 671 being considered a stunning success by the Politburo, Chief designer G.N. Chernyshev was awarded the title Hero of Socialist Labor. Deputy chief designer L.A. Samarkin, A.N. Gubanov and M.V. Sidorenko, chief observer of the Navy V.I. Novikov, and Yard director V.N. Dubrovsky as well as the director of the Central Research Institute “Aurora” V.N. Shamenkov were all awarded the title of Lenin Prize. About 40 employees of SKV-143 were awarded orders and medals. The commander of the K-38, E.D. Chernov was later awarded the title Hero of the Soviet Union for his management of the lead boat of the class.

The Victor class were considered elegant and very photogenic and earned a had a bright and eventful biography. They were deployed with confidence on all the seas and oceans where the Soviet fleet needed to be present for the remainder of the cold war, from 1971 to 1991. They were a prestigious assignment, demonstrating fairly high search and combat capabilities. They were the first Soviet SSNs to be taken seriously. Sure, the speed record setup by the Novembers were a feat, but with better sonars, they could be detected easily and the many accidents they suffered did not inspired confidence.

NATO however was weary about the Victor class -at first. They were indeed faster than the Skipjacks and more difficult to detect while being still agile, coming up with a new range of sonars and weapons that really changed the game. However they were the noisest SSN ever built, especially at high speed, after the Chinese Han class. The 34+ knots record was by pushing the reactors hard on trials, but it was not recommended. And made them easy to hear at very long range. Constant noise-reduction measures were taken during their career and their service records improved. Each of them at some point or another managed to shadow US or NATO subs, and notably one managed to trail a Lafayette class SSBN (Simon Bolivar) for several days. One also came close enough to a US carrier battle group in 1973 to launch torpedoes and photographed the carrier at persicope depht as proof before being chased off by ASW aicraft and helicopters. It was during the 1973 6-day war. Their increasing presence also meant ASW needed to be improved in all areas of the globe.

They were discreet enough still, to generate collisions and incidents. On 21 March 1984 for example, K-314 collided with USS Kitty Hawk in the Sea of Japan. K-53 collided with the Soviet cargo ship Bratstvo at the exit from the Gibraltar Strait, in Alboran Sea on 18 September 1984. Damage was severe. There were also many incidents, at least for those reported. One engine fire cost a live, another made many casualties, there were radiation leaks as well, still. They saw overall long careers but short service, barely making a single sortie every year on average and with overly long overhaul times.

But time caught up with them. On March 14, 1989, the first to go was K-314 of the Pacific Fleet, decommissioned. In 1993-1996, so a short time after the collapse of the USSR, the remaining VICTOR Is were decommissioned, but this disposal dragged on instead they, and the VICTOR II/III more so, were kept in storage, waiting for their fate for years. By 2010 however all had been disposed of, B-314 moored in Pavlovsky Bay (Primorye) was kept however as part of the FAKEL research project, a testbed for new methods for the disposal of a nuclear submarine though a three-compartment unit without unloading spent fuel assemblies from its reactors, allowing it to be disposed of in the future. This was applied to the VICTOR II-III.

Succession

Project 671RT Syomga (VICTOR II)

Soviet designation Project 671RT Syomga (atlantic salmon). This new class entered service in 1972 whereas the last boats of the VICTOR I were not yet delivered. Seven were built in the 1970s, at Krasnoe Sormovo, Gorkiy for five of them, and three at Admiralty Yard. Originally designated “Uniform” by NATO. Similar armament to the Victor I class (as most caracteristics) but they were the first Soviet submarines to introduce raft mounting to make the power unit much quieter. Production was truncated however as the new improved Victor III class seemed more prominsing. They were longer at 101.8 m (334 ft) long and were all disposed of in the 1990s.

Project 671RTM/RTMK Shchuka (VICTOR III)

profile by Mike1979Russia.
Soviet designation Project 671RTM/RTMK Shchuka (pike) were a completely redesigned SSN, called by NATO VICTOR III and entering service from 1979 onwards. In fact the previous 671RT production was cancelled and 25 of the new type order and produced until 1991, sobasically until the end of the cold war. They existed alongside the new Sierra and Akula, were cheaper, while still beiing considered Quieter than previous Soviet submarines. They also came out with four standard tubes for launching SS-N-21 or SS-N-15 missiles and two large tubes for launching SS-N-16 missiles or the super-heavyweight Type 65 torpedoes. Total capacity was 24 tube-launched weapons or 36 mines. They also introduced a distinctive pod on their vertical stern-plane which caused a lot of speculation as it was suspected to mount a new and exotic silent propulsion system such as a magnetohydrodynamic drive unit (inspiring Tom Clancy for his book).

Another theory proposed this was a weapon system until identified as a housing for a reelable towed passive sonar array, tested there before being incorporated in the Sierra and Akula-class. In October 1983, the towed array of K-324 became entangled in the propellers of the Frigate USS McCloy west of Bermuda. K-324 was forced to surface and this led to NATO personal to abundantly film and photograph the deployed pod. Continuousl improvements during construction always drove towards better and better acoustic performance. These were longest and largest of the class at 106 m (348 ft) long and all but two were disposed of recently. They were not old and still very potent, but the Russian 1990s budget did not authorize to keep them all in service.

Victor I class boats and career

К-38 was laid down at New Admiralty, Leningrad under the hull number 600 on 12.4.1963, she was launched on 28.7.1966 and completed on 5.11.1967.
Stricken un June 1991, stayed a basic Project 671 of her career. Her story started by May 3 1963, when she was ordered to the Shipyard No. 196 “Sudomekh” in Leningrad and between 1963 and 1964 her crew underwent training at the Navy Training Center in Obninsk. The crew later ws moved to the 39th Squadron of the Leningrad Naval Base. By August 1966 the newly launched submarine was transferred to the Northern Fleet via the inland waterway system to Severodvinsk and Zvezdochka Shipyard, for her acceptance trials. On July 1967 during mooring trials, pressure testing of steam generators and the filter sorbents being toasted into the condensate-feed system caused issues. She managed 34.5 knots, a world record at that time (The alfa class lead boat still was not ready yeat). During trials in the White Sea, she set three records at once, one for underwater speed, one for diving depth, and one for weapon depht launch, but also a bow trim beyond 50° degrees, fortunately not ending in tragedy. On November 5 she was officially Commissioned and on the 27th accepted in the northern fleet, 3rd Submarine Division, 1st Submarine Fleet based at Lopatkina Bay in Zapadnaya Litsa.

In the Autumn 1968 she had completed her first patrol under commander 1st group. Chernov E.D. in the Norwegian Sea. She won the CiC Prize for torpedo training and “best ship in the division”. In 1969 she completed a dual crew training (289 on board) and by the spring of 1970 she took part in the exercises “Ocean” winning again the CiC Prize for torpedo training, best ship in division. By late 1971 she performed an Arctic cruise with K-147 and the crew of K-323 on board. On 21 October she had a “minor radiation accident”. In 1972 the 343rd crew cam on board to practice the L-1 course being awarded by the division headquarters “good” grade. She had her core reloaded, alongside overhaul and modernization from 30 November 1973 to Augyst 1979 at Zvezdochka Shipyard at first and from 1975 at the Leningrad Aviation Plant dock, notably seeing the Rubicon sonar installed.

Her core was replaced again in 1977 and in 1979 she was transferred to Severodvinsk with yard mooring and state sea trials. From February 15 to August 1979 she performed a 6-month patrol in the Arabian Sea and Persian Gulf with the 91st crew (commander 2nd rank Petrov O.A.) and performed a crew swap with K-481 (captain Shportko) for the return trip. The replacement crew came on the supply vessel “Berezina” for operations in the Gulf of Aden.
In 1980-1981 she was used as set for the Russian TV serie “The Third Dimension” by Leonid Borich by Odessa Film Studio.

September 25 1981 saw her transferred to the 3rd Submarine Division, 11th Sub Fleet and until late 1982 in overhaul and transferred at her new base of Gremikha Bay. By late 1982 she had perfprmed one cruise under captain (1st group) Balashov V.I. in the Mediterranean Sea and in 1983 she was versed to the 17th Submarine Division, 11th Submarine Fleet. She also performed another cruise with the 173rd crew on board under captain Zuyenko I.S.) then swapped woth the 1st group under Balashov V.I.
On 20 March 1985 while training tasks, a fire broke out in the turbine compartment, causedby a short circuit. he lost all power and was towed to Olenya Bay for emergency repairs with a sailor dying in the accident, intoxicated. In 1986 she performed a cruise with a 91-man crew under captain 1st r. Krivetchenko A.A. in the Mediterranean and in November with the 343rd crew, alongside preventive maintenance, dry dock inspection at SRZ-10 in Polyarny.
February 1987 saw a new patrol with the 343rd crew (captain 2nd rank Kryukov A.N. and senior captain 2nd rank Pakhomov I.I.) after a move from Polyarny to Gremikha in difficult ice conditions. This was especially difficult at Novaya Zemlya and towards the Kola Peninsula. She was escorted by the icebreaker “Dobrynya Nikitich” and was often stopped by ice clogging behind the icebreaker. She had to maneuver to create her own passage through clear water, in snow blizzard and strong north wind. By June 24 1991 she was discharged, placed on disposal list, laid up in Gremikha Bay for long-term storage. In all she had completed only 7 patrols. In 1992 as B-38 she was later transferred to the 285th submarine squadron, 11th submarine fleet, Northern Fleet, then 14th submarine squadron, decommissioned at Yokanga base. In February-March 2004 her crew was disbanded and she started to be stripped of at Zvezdochka shipyard, Severodvinsk, the reactor compartment was later sent for storage at Sayda Bay. By 2014 it was placed in long term storage. The hull was broken up before that.

К-69 was renamed fro July 1977 К-369. She was laid down under hull number 601 at New Admiralty in Leningrad on 24 January 1964, launched on 28 Dec. 1967 and commissioned on 6 November 1968. She remained in service until stricken in June 1991. No detailed logs, but the following: In August 1968 in sea trials a wrench left in a DC circuit breaker cabinet caused a short circuit and major fire with 19 sailors being severely intoxicated by the fumes.
In July 1969 while escorted a Delta class SSBN she wollided with SSN-615 USS Gato (Permit) which was shadowing her. The captain believed this was a whale until returning to port to inspect damage. She had a 8-m dent ion the nose.
On March 1970 she collided with possibly USS Sturgeon (only one in the vicinity) while under 150ft. She had her sail, periscopes, antenna badly damaged and port side decks shifted. Long repairs. In 1980-81 she made a 6 month deployment in the Indian Ocean and middle east, but was damaged when manoeuvering in port, with her retractable propeller hitting an obstacle. She was withdrawn in 1995.

К-147 was renamed from June 1992- B-147. She was laid down as hull 602 at New Admiralty in Leningrad on 16 September 1964, launched on 17 June 1968 and commissioned on 21 Dec. 1968. She was stricken in September 1997.
She was built at the Shipyard No. 196 “Sudomekh” in Leningrad and enlisted on 1965, January 27 while the crew underwent training at the Center in Obninsk ad within the 3rd Submarine Division at Zaozerny before joining the 39th Separate Squadron at the Leningrad Naval Base. From June 30 to September 21 1968, the nw submarine completed her mooring trials program and from September 21 to October 8 she was transferred to Severodvinsk for completion at the Zvezdochka shipyard as the main outfitting base, Novo-Admiralteysky Shipyard and starts acceptance trials.
The flag raising ceremony was on October 29. Her Acceptance certificate was signed for some sources on 25 Dec. 1968. On 24-29 December she moves to her operating base at Lopatkina Bay with the 3rd Submarine Division, 1st Submarine Fleet, Northern Fleet. On 6-7 October 1969 she made her first deep-sea dive to 410 meters.
From 30 October to 30 December she made a 60 days, 12k miles patrol in the North Atlantic and on December 12 was awarded the CIC Prize for torpedo firing and “first place in the Navy championship competition for tracking a foreign SSBN”.
By June 9, 1970 until August 9 she made her first Mediterranean cruise, 13,000 miles including 12,950 submerged and 50 miles surfaced.
In 1970 her crew is transferred to the 166th group to prepare K-323 for her first cruise.
On December 9 her crew takes 1st place in the Navy championship competition, notably for tactical and fire training and from December 19 to February 24 1971 she made another patrol under captain 1st class Sidelnikov V.A. (senior) and rear admiral Mikhailovsky in the Mediterranean, 68 days, 16,500 miles (16,410 miles underwate), notably tracking for 30 hours a US SSBN. From September 18 to October 25 she made a atrol wit the K-323 crew on board (commander Anokhin V.V. and rear admiral Mikhailovsky), sailing under arctic ice over 10,000 miles, 33 days. On 11.10 she hit when surfacing large ice floe which dented her sail. She cruise with K-38. In 1971 her crew won the 1st place in the Northern Fleet for reconnaissance missions, best ship in Division.
Until late 1972 she was in overhaul. A leakage of the reactor cover was discovered. She amde a single shakedown sortie for 8 days, 485 miles.
She started 1973 with the 289th crew on board, made a 65 days sortie and won 1st place in the Northern Fleet for mine laying. She also accepted the 289th crew and in 1974 sortied under Captain Reshetov V.K. in the North-East Atlantic, then practiced minelaying on May 15 (8 RM-2G mines) taking 1st place again.
She made a 11,258 miles sortie and in June 1974 entered the reserve for maintenance and overhaul from March 1976 at Nerpa shipyard until the summer of 1978, recored, and receiving the new Rubicon sonar and Wake Detection System.
In 1980 she is at Zapadnaya Litsa while her crew is at the Naval Training Center in Obninsk and betwen May and August 1981 she patrolled the Mediterranean under 2nd captain Kharlashkin V.V. In September she is relocated to Gremikha Bay and had dock repairs at SRZ-10, Pala Bay, Polyarny by the 343rd crew.
Until June 1982 she made a sortie with the 426th crew (Mazovka E.K.) in the Indian Ocean with port calls in Luanda and Aden while trailing several NATO subs.
She ghathered intel off US-held base at Diego Garcia and trailed USS America CBG. In March, she had a crew swap at the Dahlak Archipelago, Red Sea and trained with K-438 (Rusakov Yu.K.).
In 1982 under captain 2nd rank Kharlashkin V.V. she trained with K-438 and performed long-term surveillance missions of NATO subs. She is overhauled later at Gremikha under the 17th Submarine Division, 11th Submarine Fleet and from January 4 to March 16 she is in overhaul at SRZ-10 Pala Bay. Until January 21, 1984 she is back in the Mediterranean Sea, earning an “excellent” rating and from May 29 to August 7 1985, under captain Kharlashkin V.V. and senior Nikitin V.V. she made another cruise to Sargasso Sea and took part in Operation “Aport” with five subs trackings, notably SSBN 641 Simon Bolivar.
By November 24 1986 she is back in Gulf of Pala for an overhaul which lasts until 1994.
By June 1992 she becomes B-147 but in 1993 her crew is disbanded, and in 1994 she passed mooring and sea trials (overhaul completed).
She had a short commission of 14 months, making 21 sorties, 60 days at sea and by December 24-26 she is reassigned to the 3rd submarine Sqn. at Yokanga, Northern Fleet. By September 1995 however her unit is disbanded and she passed under the 24th division, 3rd fleet. In 1995-1997 she used to provided electricity to Ostrovnoy. In September 8, 1997 she is decommissioned, setup for dismantling and disposal, laid up in Gremikha Bay, then moved to Yokangsky and then “SRZ-10” for full disposal. Her core was transported for long term sotrage by August 2006 on the vessel “Transshelf”.

К-53 from June 1992 was renamed B-53. She was laid down as hull number 603 at New Admiralty, Leningrad on 16.12.1964, launched on 17.3.1969 and completed on 30.9.1969. In 1970 there was a fire, quickly mastered, which left a sailor intoxicated. In 1980-84 she had a long docking overhaul with recore, and Rubicon sonar installed. In August 1984 when transiting the strait of Gibraltar her captain was “lost”, could not figring out bearings, land based navogation aids, so she stayed at persicopic depht to recalibrate by star navigtion until colliding with a Soviet cargo, with massive damage to her outer hull and sail. In September 1987 she made an intel sortie, shadowin NATO’s Ocean Safari exercises. She was stricken in June after being transferred into the reserve by 1993.

К-306 was laid down under hull number 604 at New Admiralty, Leningrad on 20 april 1968, launched on 7 june 1969 and commissioned on 5 December 1969. She was stricken in June 1991. In November 1974 she was tracking USS James Madison (class namesake) when colliding with her, leaving extensive damage. Both sides keep publicly quiet about it as it happened in UK home waters. Repairs were long as she was only back in service by 1977. In 1984 she made a long Mediterranean deployment and was discarded in October 1995.

К-323 was renamed Let SSSR. She was also renamed on 6.1992 B-323. Hull number 605, she was laid down at New Admiralty in Leningrad on 5.7.1968, launched on 14.3.1970 and commissioned on 23.9.1970. In February 1971 in her first sortie she tracked an undidentified SSBN for 30 hours. In july 1975 she made a rough surfacing through ice, bending a periscope and damaging the sail. In July 1981 microcracks were observed in the 6th compartment and she was barred from diving below 300 ft (92 meters). From February 1984 to 1986 she was repaired and modernized and she was stricken in June 1993.

К-370 (renamed from June 1992 B-370) was laid down under hull number 606 at New Admiralty in Leningrad on 19.4.1969, launched on 26.6.1970, commissioned on 5.12.1970. In August 1971 she made her first sortie in the North Atlantic. In september 1975 she observed a NATO exercise and in the late 1980s lacked logs on her activities. Officially in 1981 she was reassigned to the 3rd Submarine Division, 11th Submarine Fleet at Gremikha Bay (Ostrovnoy) base. From March to November 1984 she was overhauled at Nerpa shipyard and in 1987 made a first sortie under captain Avalsimov V.G. and another in 1988. She was stricken in June 1993.

К-438 (renamed B-438 in June 1992) was laid down as hull 608 at New Admiralty on 13.6.1969, launched on 23.3.1971 and commissioned on 15.9.1971.
By October 10-29 1972 she escorted SSBN K-245 to the North Pole (captain of the 1st group V.N. Shuvalov, Rear Admiral F.S. Volovik) and stayed in Greenland Sea, testing the MGK-300 sonar under-ice. In January – March 1973 she made a Mediterranean deployment (captain Pirozhkov) and from December to February 1974 she was on the Mediterranean with the second crew (Capt. Sokolov V.E.). From August to November 1974 she made another Med Tod with Capt. Korzhev A.N., and senior commander Sokolov V.E., tracked an unknown US sub until reaching Italian territorial waters, a 87 days missions with Food supplies replenished. She was in exercises with the 5th but developed a microleak in the first circuit of the main powerplant, successfully dealt with. In 1977 she took part in “Akvatoria-77” exercises and earned a prize for the “Razbeg-79” exercises. She was overhauled on 1979-1980 at Nerpa shipyard, recored, SOC installed. In the summer 1980 under Belousov V.G. she was in the Mediterranean. In 1981 she was reassigned to the 3rd Submarine Division, 11th Submarine Fleet in Gremikha Bay. In 1982 she trained with K-147 in the Indian Ocean and shadowed US subs. In April 1982 she took part in the movie “Incident in Square 36-80” (Mosfilm, director M. Tumanishvili) as a U.S. Navy submarine… Summer 1982 saw another Mediterranean deployment, and temporary sent to the 17th submarine division, 11th submarine fleet. In 1983 under captains Pakhomov and Polivoda she stayed in the North-East Atlantic for 99 days, using extensively SOKS and interactiing with Navvy bombers Tu-142Ms. In 1984 she took the first prize for survivability. In February 1986 up to May 1989 she was overhauled at Nerpa, made a single mission in 1989 and from 1991 February-March she had a short maintenance OVL at Nerpa. From May to July she made an arctic cruise under Portnov and Gusev, last sortie for Victor Is of the 3rd Division. She was stricken in August 1995.

К-367 (June 1992 B-367) was laid down as hull number 609 at New Admiralty on 14.4.1970, launched on 2.7.1971 and completed on 5.12.1971. In 1973 she made a 3-month deployment in the Med and in 1975 observed NATO exercises in the North Atlantic. In 1985 she had a reactor control system incident. No records. She was stricken in July 1994.

К-398 (June 1992, B-398) was laid down as hull 01611 at Admiralty on 22.4.1971, launched on 2.8.1972 and completed on 15.12.1972. Early in her career she was involved in the most major incident since the 1962 Cuban crisis, yet an event seldom explored or talked about. From September 3 to November 22 she was deployed by a planned Mediterranean deployment under captain Gashkevich when received by radio news of the start of the 6-day Arab-Israeli war and given the presenct in force of the US fleet, allied to the Israeli, orders were given she was placed on battle readiness No. 1 state. When surfacing to periscope depth for communication back to HQ she was spotted by an aircraft from CBG USS Independence, which deployed its ASW escorts and aircraft and helicopters in search, dropping large amount of buoys to keep track. K-398 submerged and was able to break away but at 18.10, she was prepared for combat actions until it abated. On the 50th day she surfaced in Egyptian waters near Alexandria to be reloaded with food and other supplies and returned to base after a while.

In late 1975 under captain Nikitin and Gashkevich she observed NATO exercises “Ocean Safari-75”, Norwegian and Greenland Seas. She notably got close to the carrie battle group of HMS Hermes and USS Independence CBG.
In 1979 she provided assistance to an MTB whch lost power, drifting off Rybachy Peninsula. She took her tow back to port.
In 1980 while on patrol under captain Kiselev she had a minor collision with a an unknown submarine. Later that year under captain Pakhurov she was depoloyed in the North-East Atlantic and Mediterranean Sea, Med again in 1981 and by September she was transferred to the 3rd SubmDiv, 11th Sub Fleet via the 33rd SubDiv/1st Fleet. In 1982 she returned with the 33rd Submarine Division; 1st Submarine Fleet in the Mediterranean and by October 1983 she was sent for a major overhaul at Nerpa shipyard until 1986 (recored) and sent to Gremikha Bay. In 1988, Mediterranean Sea, same in 1989 and 1990, 1991 White Sea to test the Olkha hydroacoustic system. In total until 1995 she made 12 major deployment. She was stricken in August 1995.

К-462 (B-462 from June 1992) was laid down as hull number 01613 at Admiralty on 3.7.1972, launched on 1.9.1973 and commissioned on 30.12.1973. In June 1974 while testing noise levels, she had a steam generator blowdown at sea, and captain Evdokimenko was dismissed. In 1978 while patrolling the norwegian sea she had an outboard oil pimp seal rupture in the 5th compartment, causing flooding and fire. This was well mastered by the crew so she continued her patrol and the captain was complimented. In 1985 she had a more severe incident, when one of her primary reactor electrical circuit failing. Both reactors were shut down but the crew prevented a serious accident. One reactor was later revived so she could resume her mission. In 1986 she shadowed the USS Iowa battle group and HMS Ark Royal Battle group for 30 days and documenting all NATO exercises as well as US and British subs manoeuvers. She was stricken in June 1993.

К-481 (June 1992 B-481) was laid down at yard 01615, Admiralty, on 27.9.1973, launched on 9.9.1974 and commissioned on 27.12.1974. In 1986 she observed NATO exrcises in the North Atlantic for 30 days and USS Iowa battle group as well as US subs tactics. She made in total just ten deployments in her career. She was stricken in July 1992.

К-314 was laid down as hull 01610 at Admiralty NyD in Leningrad on 5.9.1970, launched on 28.3.1972, commissioned on 6.11.1972. In April 1980 while patrolling off Kamchatka she detected and trailed a US sub for 11 hours at 30 kts (being in her wake, her noise was nullified). In March 1982 she collided with USS Kitty Hawl of fthe Korean coast and had to be towed to port. Heavy damage. In June 1985 she made extensive at sea testings, in the south China sea. She lost many of her newly installed acoustic tiles while running full speed for measurements. In December 1985 she hd a major leak in her primary coolant piping. The unit back in port was simply cleaned and reconnected. New leak, remained undetected until a reactor depressurization and fuel partially exposed. No casualty but radiation detected, she had to come back to port quickly. She entered repairs, never completed partly due to irradiation. She was stricken first in April 1989, sole Project 671V of her class to be so retired.

К-454 (Form June 1992 B-454) was laid down as hull 01612 at Admiralty NyD on 24.7.1971, launched on 5.5.1973 and commissioned on 30.10.1973. She was stricken in july 1994, second of Project 671V. In Nov. 1974 she made the first soviet transarctic trip over 1876 miles. In 1975 she trai;ed US subs for 72 during exercises of the Pacific fleet. She performed 8 patrols in her career, and was transferred for disposal in July 1994.

К-469 (June 1992 B-469) was laid down as hull 01614 at Admiralty NyD on 5.9.1973, launched on 10.6.1974 and commissioned on 30.9.1974. In March 1976 she made a record transoceanic submerged trip from the Northern fleet to Kamchatka underwater over 21754 miles and 80 days. The Captain was awarded the title of hero of the Soviet Union. In July 1976 while on patroll off the Philippines she hit an uncharted coral reef but damage was light and she was repaired back to port. In 1979 in the Pacific she shadowedn the USS Ranger CBG. She made four more deployments in the 1980s. She was stricken in June 1993, third and last of Project 671V.

Read More/Src

Books

Pavlov, A. S. (1997). Warships of the USSR and Russia 1945–1995. NIP
Polmar, Norman & Moore, Kenneth J. (2004). Cold War Submarines: The Design and Construction of U.S. and Soviet Submarines. Potomac Books
Polmar, Norman & Noot, Jurrien (1991). Submarines of the Russian and Soviet Navies, 1718–1990. NIP
V. P. Kuzin, V. I. Nikolsky “USSR Navy 1945—1991” IMO St. Petersburg 1996
V. E. Ilyin, A. I. Kolesnikov “Submarines of Russia: An Illustrated Directory” Astrel Publishing House LLC 2002
“History of domestic shipbuilding” vol. 5 St. Petersburg Shipbuilding 1996
A. N. Gusev “Submarines with cruise missiles” St. Petersburg “Galeya Print” 2000.
Submarines of Russia Volume 4, part 1. Central Design Bureau MT “Rubin” St. Petersburg. 1996.
Reference information from S. S. Berezhnaya “Nuclear submarines of the USSR and Russian Navy” MIA No. 7 2001.
V.P. Kuzin, V.I. Nikolsky “USSR Navy 1945-1991” IMO St. Petersburg 1996
Apalkov Yu. V. Submarines of the Soviet Union. 1945-1991. Vol. III. – M.: Morkniga, 2012.
I. P. Bogachenko. Nuclear Titanium, 6th Submarine Division, Northern Fleet. St. Petersburg, 2013.
Dronov B. F. Design Studies for the Project 705 Nuclear Submarine of A. B. Petrov’s Group. 2003.

Links

en.wikipedia.org Victor-class_submarine
on navypedia.org


on pelt.narod.ru/
on ru.wikipedia.org
on deepstorm.ru/
deepstorm.ru/ K-38.htm
ship.bsu.by
ship.bsu.by/
ship.bsu.by/
on nationalgeographic.com
deepstorm.ru/ K-138.htm
deepstorm.ru/ K-448.htm
thebarentsobserver.com/ mod. nerpa-shipyard
on armstrade.org
on nytimes.com collision
on chinapost.com.tw/
on bellona.org

Videos

Model Kits

On scalemates.com