Project 664 Transport / Minelayer Submarine
In the 1950s several diesel-electric submarines were designed in the USSR as an underwater mine layer with (Projects 632 and 648). In addition to putting mine these boats were used to supply in the sea AREA of other types of ammunition (particularly cruise missiles), and the life. Other assignments of these vessels was to be maintained in a sea of heavy on hydroplanes and the response to disembark.
Building on established project start in the late 1950s, the fleet at the beginning of the 60 's. commissioned a boat of similar purpose and equipped with a nuclear power plant. Marine propulsion project you used 664 TSKB-16 led by Chief Designer A. Kisileva. It took a long while composing TTZ harmonization of all "stakeholders": ground forces would significantly increase the transported troops. Hold your interest "to the project and THE AIR FORCE, in the ship to resupply on hydroplanes. However, THE NAVY has tried to avoid the unnecessary complexity of the project.
Chief designer of the nuclear submarine of Project 664 was appointed NA Kiselev, under whose leadership was developing the project documentation SSK 648. After a lengthy approval TTZ, as touched upon the interests of various branches of the armed forces, including Army and Air Force, March 1, 1960 it was approved by the Minister of Defence. The army would significantly increase the composition of the transported troops, but representatives of the Navy did not go to considerable complication of the project. In September 1960, four versions of draft design large nuclear transport and landing of the submarine - the mine layer were presented to the customer.
Variants differed mainly architecture of the pressure hull and the composition of the power plant. If the first three options rugged vessel had a traditional cylindrical shape, the fourth was made in the form of so-called "double eights" - in the form of three horizontal, intersecting each other cylinders. This form of greatly reduced the length of the ship, but increases its width, while there are two lines of loading and unloading of cargoes, which aggravates the ship, but reduced the time for loading and reloading operations.
Decision of SMEs and the Navy on April 19, 1962 the technical project has been approved, but the basic characteristics were approved by the Government at the end of December 1962. The resolution defined the terms and procedure for the construction of the ship. Until the end of next year, the Bureau was supposed to provide drawings of the body portion and until June 1964 to transfer a full set of working drawings.
The boat was flows automatically, so the schema. In the forward end of the hull was housed large sonar antenna. There was a torpedo armament, which included six bow THE caliber of 533 mm cannon with 18 torpedoes. Ship could tear boarded up to 162 m type RM-1, APM, "Lira", "Serpej, UDM CASE or to 112 m MSL-1, RM-2 or PM-2. As the ship supply APPLE could convey and communicate to other boats 20 cruise missiles type p-p-5 or 6, as well as to 80 533 mm torpedo caliber.
Greater complexity of the project due to its triple-purpose, lagging counterparts in developing a set of equipment, chronic delays experienced with working off the fact do not allow the Bureau to complete production of working drawings in a stipulated period. Only at the end of 1964 at the SRH-35 Navy were retrofit diesel-powered submarines (allowing for the submarine project 664), selected for experimental testing of fuel transfer to the transport of nuclear submarines in shock when towing a diesel-electric submarines surfaced and submerged. Testing in harsh weather conditions of winter in the Barents Sea, during which DES B-82 (Project 611) produced taking in tow, towing, fuel transfer hose, a joint dive with C-346 diesel-electric submarines (project 613), were successful, and the commission affirmed the full performance of the system and recommended it to be installed on submarine project 664.
In 1964 construction of the ship on the NSR was launched in the North 664 machine-building plant. The technological preparation of production completed, and the metal for a durable and lightweight housing and basic equipment was ordered. Early next year, durable and lightweight metal processing and welding sections was initiated. Suddenly, plant manager sbmitted to Minsudprom a proposal to transfer the construction of nuclear submarines, mine layer at the Leningrad plant, promising to build (as it was during the construction of SSK Project 648!) two SSBNs. And although by the time the plant has processed and carried out welding work on the formation of 600 tonnes of hull structures and handled an additional 400 tons of metal, it was decided to cease construction of the ship. The need for construction of the first nuclear submarines, which received the highest priority, led to the final cessation of work.
Despite the decision to cease the construction of nuclear submarine project 664, due to the urgency of maintaining a nuclear missile parity at sea, naval experts and the Chief of Staff of the Soviet Army did not leave the idea of creation of transport-assault submarine, capable of covertly deliver marines to remote areas of the oceans. Therefore the program of shipbuilding in the next five years (1965 - 1970 gg.) included the drafting of amphibious submarine.
| LOA | 140.9 m
|
| Beam | 14.2 m
|
| Displacement normal | 10150 M3
|
| Diving depth | 300 m
|
| Autonomy | 80 d
|
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
