The Ship Model Forum

I found it on e-bay for 35$ plus 17$ for shipping.

There is a picture of the upper hull posted by the vendor which seems to suggest that it is divided in two also in the length...

Hth

_________________
Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence

Britmodeller thread with photos of the MikroMir kit (pic of lower hull further down): http://www.britmodeller.com/forums/inde ... -mikromir/

_________________
De quoi s'agit-il?

Well now I have a Mikro-Mir Typhoon inbound as well. Also, I made an imgur album for r/WarshipPorn on reddit (which you guys should totally check out) a few months back that has some photos that might be helpful in modeling the Typhoon.

http://imgur.com/a/xi3P3

_________________
Under Construction:
1/350 Typhoon
1/350 Skate
1/350 USS Nautilus
1/350 Tang
1/350 November
1/350 Hotel II
1/350 Alfa
1/350 George Washington
1/72 Type VIIC

Well Vepr...

I am quite speechless of your album!



I think you took me as close to an Akula (yes, I prefer the Russian designation) than I will ever get!

Thank you.

Thank you also for having commented most of the pictures, and I especially loved the interior ones and those of the details on the outer hull.

Ultimately, I come to agree with what is written about their cost and that they can be (part) of the reason the economic system in the USSR collapsed. To it I would add another great example: the Buran Space Shuttle. When I was in Baikonur a few years ago for work, our tour guide of the museum told us that the cost of manufacturing a SINGLE thermal insulation tile was equivalent to the YEARLY pay of a senior officer, e.g. a Colonel or Lt. Colonel, and there were tens of thousands of tiles on each of the Buran. Furthermore, from indipendent readings, it is clear that the Soviet space agency did not have any clear purpose for the craft and ultimately the main reason for it being built was: the Yankees have one, they claim it is not a weapon, we do not know for sure, so we better have one!
I also agree (partially because I do not have all the elements) with your statement about Russian submarines beeing ahead of the west, but I am surprised you did not mention "unconventional detection/tracking sensors", like SOKS or similar. Or supercavitating weapons like the Skvall (well, mainly the technology behind it, as they were really "last resort").
In a way this is again also true for the space program: quoting the Buran again, it was capable of a fully autonomous landing, but then there are other great examples like the Venera landers, the MIR, and finally the Soyuz rocket and the Soyuz capsule (with the automatic randezvous and docking pioneered in the early eighties).

I just hope that in these days of the oligarchy and super-tycoons of natural resources, the country is indeed stil investing in (applied) science like it did successfuly for so many years in the past.

_________________
Truly great madness cannot be achieved without significant intelligence

Viper, I'm glad you liked it. I also made albums for the Akula and Alfa SSNs (though I'm not as happy with them as the Typhoon one).

http://imgur.com/a/pZCb0
http://imgur.com/a/WyJ20

The Soviets developed advanced technologies in non-acoustic ASW. There was the Snegir' and SOKS systems used on SSNs that could track a submarine by its turbulent wake and a satellite system that could detect surface features on the ocean caused by the passage of a submerged submarine. These developments were likely a response to the superiority of American passive sonar on their SSNs and SOSUS. Norman Polmar is coming out with a book next year about ASW, and it has a lot about Soviet strategic ASW. Norman sent me some of the chapters to read and they are absolutely fantastic.

_________________
Under Construction:
1/350 Typhoon
1/350 Skate
1/350 USS Nautilus
1/350 Tang
1/350 November
1/350 Hotel II
1/350 Alfa
1/350 George Washington
1/72 Type VIIC

Yup. Got mine off of ebay too. From the pictures I saw it seems to be the most accurate. I wanted to get the polar bear one but no word from Boris in awhile...

Vepr

The picture of the Alfa sailing on rough seas is beautiful!
The detail pictures of the escape pod and the rest of the pictures and plans are great reference material.
Thank you!

Saludos

P

_________________
Done:
Victor III 1/350

In the yard:
USS Gudgeon 1/350
Alfa 1/350
Queue:
Guppy II 1/350
Leonardo Da Vinci 1/350
Type 212 1/350
ARA Santiago del Estero 1/144
USS Nautilus 1/350
ARA San Juan 1/350
ARA Chiriguano 1/350
Severodvinsk 1/350

Vepr,

Incredible images....thks for sharing!.

I'm into a scratch build of a Static diving Akula scale 1/144 . I had some images with the SOCKS pole flanked by metal post (see attachments). I was thinking to configure my sub that way as this was not common (not knowing witch sub it was).

But when I went trough all your material I realized that the only Akula that was configured like this was the K480 and that the lower hull SOCKS are not in place on that Sub, do I understood this correctly?

I have also a image of an Akula were the SOCKS pole seems to be on the PS instead of on the SB is this possible? Furthermore I have a picture with the SOCKS retracted but I don't know if this was from an akula or not, it is important to me to know if it was also applied on akula subs, because I have to scribe all the outlines of hatches and doors into the hull.

I also attached some pics of my build.

Can you (ore anybody else) please help me out here?

Thks & Brgds,
Bart

_________________
Practical wisdom is only to be learned in the school of experience.
"Samuel Smiles"

Bwi,

I'll try to give you enough information on SOKS so you can build all members of the class. The following submarines did not have SOKS (the album I posted needs a few corrections): K-284 Akula, K-263 Delfin/Barnaul, K-322 Kashalot, K-461 Volk, K-328 Leopard and K-152 Nerpa/INS Chakra. K-480 Bars is the only Akula with the MNK-200 version of SOKS, while the rest have MNK-200-2 (the only visual difference are the protective spikes and fins). The original configuration for all Akulas that had SOKS is as follows: the ten spikes on the sail, fin with three spikes on the starboard casing (I think the photo of the fin on the port side might be mirrored), three pods on the port casing, fins with three spikes on either side of the lower hull, and three pods on the starboard lower hull. Nowadays, many of the Akulas have their SOKS partially or fully removed, but they are probably going to be refitted or improved during the massive refit that all Akulas are going through right now. I don't believe that the version of SOKS used on the Akulas is retractable. I think what you are seeing is one of the pod sensors "embedded" in the hull (if memory serves, that photo is from a Sierra II). Severodvinsk, for example, only uses those type of SOKS which are more flush to the hull than the Akula version.

http://i.imgur.com/7b0cJrd.png
http://i.imgur.com/0g0gEtX.png

I've attached two diagrams of Ak Bars to illustrate what I've been talking about. Good luck on your model! It looks great so far.

Vepr

_________________
Under Construction:
1/350 Typhoon
1/350 Skate
1/350 USS Nautilus
1/350 Tang
1/350 November
1/350 Hotel II
1/350 Alfa
1/350 George Washington
1/72 Type VIIC

"Normal" Akulas also have the three pods on portside lower hull. Apart from being logical (it works on bearings and triangulation), I've also seen pictures of it. I think I posted a picture of the Samara here before where you can see the pods pretty close-up on both starboard and lower hull. They are configured slightly different than on starboard though.

I assume on Ak Bars they would also be there, although I haven't seen any photographic evidence of that.

The picture with the fin on portside is certainly mirrored. It happens a lot, in some books you see famous carriers with islands on portside of the flight deck by the same mistake. On normal ships, which are mostly symmetric, it's sometimes difficult to see.

The retracted pod is indeed a Sierra II pod, it's located starboard and port just forward of the conning tower on main deck, safe to assume there a couple more on the lower hull (some drawings suggest a third one on the main deck more in the centre as well, but I haven't seen that one yet) I assume they made it retractable because it created noise when submerged at some speed.
I've also noticed now that Sierra II actually has vertical end plates (to enhance efficiency, same is done on vertical rudders of some subs) on its aft diving planes, something Sierra I doesn't have.

_________________
The merchant shipyard

Netpune,

SOKS doesn't work on triangulation and bearing because it's not an acoustic sensor. It is a set of optical sensors that can detect when the submarine is in the wake of another submarine by using conductivity, temperature, salinity, radioactivity and other parameters. SOKS can only tell if the submarine is in the wake or out of it, so it's a little more difficult than using sonar.

Vepr

_________________
Under Construction:
1/350 Typhoon
1/350 Skate
1/350 USS Nautilus
1/350 Tang
1/350 November
1/350 Hotel II
1/350 Alfa
1/350 George Washington
1/72 Type VIIC

In a way you are correct, but I wasn't talking about absolute triangulation. Each sensor does not give you a seperate bearing, but the combination of sensors does. That's why you need them around the hull, to figure out in which direction the "target" is. If you'd have only sensors on starboard lower hull and top of hull, the only thing you'd be able to detect was whether the target was on Starboard or port of you, not up or down. By using three sets you get a much better view as to where it is, all you have to do is move in the opposite direction of the blinded sensor until it "lights up". I assume by the strength of the signal on each of the seperate sensors they will also have a better clue as to where exactly the target is located. I also assume the different position/lay-out of portside lower hull compared to starboard lower hull has to do with the portside position of the upper hull ones.
Never really seen a picture of a Sierra II with extended sensors. Neither did I find a clear picture of the lower ones. The fin on the lower hull is visible, but these retractable ones are not really visible.

Anyway comment to bwi's hull. The aft part, near the main deck looks a little off. In reality I think the hull is more round-ish on top. The real flatness is sort of a perception by the rails running on both sides, sort of demarking the flat top deck area. The hull around it I think is more round towards it. The way the model depicts it, makes me think more about a Victor style hull.

_________________
The merchant shipyard

The wake of a submerged submarine spreads out quite a bit (which is good, otherwise you would have no chance of finding it in the vast ocean) so the sensors are only able to tell if they're in or out of a wake. Because the wake is so large in extent, all SOKS sensors will have the same readings (i.e. the wake isn't so small that you can have differential readings, unless the submarine is right in front of you). The reason for multiple sensors at various places on the hull is to confirm that the wake is actually there and it's not just one sensor getting a bad reading. I read this on a Russian website (and part of a translated book) some years back, so I'm not just saying this.

_________________
Under Construction:
1/350 Typhoon
1/350 Skate
1/350 USS Nautilus
1/350 Tang
1/350 November
1/350 Hotel II
1/350 Alfa
1/350 George Washington
1/72 Type VIIC

I’m not intervening in this discussion gents

@ Vepr,
Thks a lot for this clarification, I really appreciate it.
Now I'm certainly I go for the K-480 Bars.

@ Neptune
Your remark concerning the flatness is correct in that perspective that the flatness runs until the doors of the communications buoy. My flat deck runs further to the stern. Maybe the edges also are softer in reality, maybe yes maybe no maybe rain or maybe snow .

I’m the last person to tell you that my build is flawless….and believe me, I know where they are as I spent almost 1,5 years looking @ it in different stages of completion .

Please note that I’m not offended by your comment, I can accept that, but there is one thing that we have to keep in mind:

that everybody who is involved in building models is doing their utmost to build the perfect model in their point of view and put their heart and soul into it with the means available for them. Each of them is accomplished by overcoming problems by finding solutions for them, by developing tools to get things done, by learning to apply new techniques with fail and error, by making compromises. For me, and I strongly believe for many with me, this gives more satisfaction than to actually build a “perfect” model in someone else’s point of view.

I started mine with 6 pc of rectangular meranti window frame and a chisel…..and now 1,5 years later I have a hull out of glass fiber that puts a smile on my face every time I see it.

Grtz,
Bart

_________________
Practical wisdom is only to be learned in the school of experience.
"Samuel Smiles"

This was posted over at military photos <dot> net

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/sh ... ular-basis)/page3786

_________________
On the workbench:
Gecko 1/16 Panzer II Ausf. F

Recently completed:
Panda 1/16 Pz.38(t)
Takom 1/16 Panzer I Ausf. B
Trumpeter 1/350 Severomrsk (Udaloy)
Trumpeter 1/350 Project 956E Sovremenny
Hobbyboss 1/350 Voltaire

What is the brown part on the sail?

The hole, the lifted part you see on the left in the crane hook, fits into. Looks like an escape chamber of a slightly different design/shape as what they were using before. But principle appears to be the same.

_________________
The merchant shipyard

nice!! I didnt even notice the part on the crane.....

Hi, I´ve found more images of the escape pod here:

http://englishrussia.com/2014/11/10/russian-nuclear-submarine-emergency-module/











Enjoy

P.

_________________
Done:
Victor III 1/350

In the yard:
USS Gudgeon 1/350
Alfa 1/350
Queue:
Guppy II 1/350
Leonardo Da Vinci 1/350
Type 212 1/350
ARA Santiago del Estero 1/144
USS Nautilus 1/350
ARA San Juan 1/350
ARA Chiriguano 1/350
Severodvinsk 1/350

Here's the news video that goes with the escape pod exercise:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCC3rP1goD4

_________________
On the workbench:
Gecko 1/16 Panzer II Ausf. F

Recently completed:
Panda 1/16 Pz.38(t)
Takom 1/16 Panzer I Ausf. B
Trumpeter 1/350 Severomrsk (Udaloy)
Trumpeter 1/350 Project 956E Sovremenny
Hobbyboss 1/350 Voltaire