Inside Russian Submarine - Typhoon Class (Akula) 

Yeah me too. Truly a remarkable old girl.

How much it cost imagine renovating this and making it a underwater Retreat center

You have to multiply everything by 2 as its essentially 2 independent submarine hulls side by side with some smaller compartments in the middle (like the control room and torpedo room) wrapped in one giant exterior streamlined hull.

0

As long as they sort out heads that is! It would be very very cool if they kept one though.

There’s supposedly talks about turning Dmitriy Donskoy into a museum

She is a beautiful fat girl! Isn't She? They sould keep one as a Museum.

@Wade Pilkington 😳😲😲😲😲 cool

НАШУ ДЕРЖАВУ Ларион

From MEGADEATH with love!

There is only one left in service as far as I know, and she (he ismyou are Russian I suppose), is a test platform for ballistic missiles, so not operational in the strictest sense. At least one has been dismantled.

@@vxrdrummer nah, not russian, im from serbia. But yeah the one they have now is a test platform, though in a war it would be used of course. Its a very deadly sub

I think the alpha class was titanium.

vu

Yes, it is.

Akula is how the russians call the TYPHOON, and AKULA is how NATO calls the Shchuka. NATO callsigns are entirely capitalized.

The name Typhoon is how NATO named the Beast of under Sea. In reality, is a variation of a AKULA (SHARK) class submarine. They built the first one in 1981, and then five more. As far as I know, three of them are already been cut to pieces and disarmed. The reuse the special steel, and Titanium on new projects. The remaining three Monster, they will go retired in 2025/2026. She is a beautiful fat girl!!!

+Stan Kaplan Those are old subs.

Me too

Me too

can you show me pool and sauna in any us sub? :) us will never understand world mentality. build it to work and do its task with as less resources is possible. in us, its first part same, but wit tons of resources and to cost 3-5 times more than counterpart. as you can see, time and technology overrun this type of submarine, so why waste extra resources to make it beautiful when you will throw it away in 2-3 decades?

Every russian sub had us ghost 24/7 behind it during cold war era so... They were pointless anyway.

There were always going ghost buster sub together. 24/7 . Typhoon never was alone. Only with escort.

This boat so rusty cause its not in service from 1990-es. Akula class would be replaced by borey-class submarines.

@@zoki.to974 too bad Russia can't afford the maintenance required to keep these operable.

Nope, the Russians called it akula, but NATO called it the typhoon class

stainless is week and expensive not so obvious choice,certainly not genius

Yes, they have swimming pool, and sauna among other things to make life a little easier for them

iiwk zapadnyalitsa.

Shchuka-B (the Victor III was the original Shchuka)

Akula ( shark ) is what the Russians called it. NATO called it the typhoon

Тем кто обложил Россию и военными базами и санкциями, конечно они не нужны. Очень не нужны. Ведь когда две из них постоянно находились подо льдами Арктики как то неуютно было третировать Россию.

@@user-mv9cb9hg9n Огромных Акул из 6-и штук в строю не осталось ни одной. А более лёгкие лодки пр. 667 (Б, БД, БДР, БДРМ) как рабочие лошадки тянут службу до сих пор. И новые лодки не имеют таких огромных размеров. Из этого я делаю вывод, что Акула - не удачный проект.

@@user-fc3sp7lb9h а вы не делаете никаких выводов , из того что уничтожение этих лодок было первоочередной целью альянса. И как только предоставилась возможность они были утилизированы. На их деньги к стати. И не все. Одна в составе нашего Северного флота.

@@user-mv9cb9hg9n Одна Акула - как опытовый корабль, на дежурство она не ходит. Деньги (Запад) выделял на утилизацию уже списанных лодок. Решение о выводе из боевого состава Акул (относительно новых кораблей) - это чисто наше решение. Западники тут не при чём. Акула сложна и дорога в эксплуатации, а боевые качества такие же как и у других, более простых лодок. Кроме число ракет 20-16 штук. Потому и списали.

@@user-fc3sp7lb9h на счет решений о списании вопрос очень спорный, на том уровне все прогнило. Все решения лаббируются. Настоящие специалисты и патриоты своей страны не были допущены к принятию тех или иных решений. Руководствуюсь мнением БОЕВЫХ!!! офицеров Северного флота, коих знаю лично! К стати, что скажите о АПЛ класса Огайо? Которые США эксплуатировать не сложно и не дорого? Не все измеряется деньгами. И тем более нефтедолларами, за которые и продали наш флот. Если владее ситуацией должны знать что происходит и находится в Сайда губе.

These submarines were built in the 1980s and with the dissolution of the USSR slashed naval budgets meant that the new Russian fleet fell into disrepair and never received any upgrades (most Typhoons were retired in the 1990s and early 2000s).

The Typhoon subs are rather old and were built in the 70's and 80's . They were pretty high tech for their time. However after the USSR was dissolved the naval budget was slashed and there wasn't enough money for major upgrades that the US subs were getting. If you look at the Borei and Yasen classes they are much more modern and advanced.

fantom as 1980 37 years bro

Дурак ты))) Тебе показали фотографии лодки идущей на утиль, а ты уже и слюни распустил, что Русские плавают на ржавых кораблях)))) Бойтесь разозлить Русских, ибо атома хватит на всех....

fantom as Ok... Stay with yor own thought😁

This submarine was built in the 1980s and wasn't properly maintained for years when these photos were taken since the Russian Federation simply could no longer afford it. The safety record of Soviet submarines was only a bit worse than US ones and was largely due to the Soviet Navy's policy of operating old early generation submarines alongside their newer ones to maintain a large fleet.