538 
Curiously, there has never been any mention in the Soviet literature — 
about a Soviet naval submersible program. Indeed, with the exception 
of the Soviet Navy diver lockout submarine discussed earlier, there 
is no published evidence of a single operational naval submersible. 
The only reference to a military submersible is contained in an article 
about the OSA-6-300 discussed earlier. In that article, it is men- 
tioned that an engineer, V. P. Shmatok, chief designer of the OSA 
and head of the Moscow branch of the Giprorybflot Institute, con- 
ceived of the idea of a stabilized vehicle such as OSA about 15 
years ago during his service in the Soviet submarine fleet. At that 
time (presumably around 1965), the Soviet Navy’s first underwater 
vehicle was designed and constructed under Shmatok’s supervision. 
The present status of that vehicle is not known. Either the Soviet 
Navy does not support a significant submersible program, or if it 
does, that program is a closely guarded secret. 
In general, Soviet plans for submersible development have been 
far more grandiose than the record of actual submersible development 
to date. Although manned vehicles with depth capabilities down to 
11,000 meters have been planned since the mid-1960’s, the greatest 
depth capability of any Soviet manned submersible to date is 2,000 
meters (Sever-II). At the same time, the maximum depth capability 
of an American submersible (Trieste) is about 6,000 meters, and 
that work was achieved in 1960. 
Notwithstanding the above, ambitious plans for sophisticated 
manned and unmanned underwater vehicles continue to appear in 
the Soviet literature. Individuals prominent in Soviet undersea research 
circles continue to predict the development of elaborate nuclear 
powered, manned vehicles and large, self-propelled habitats. At the 
same time, the Institute of Oceanology is continuing the development 
of more sophisticated remote-control undersea “‘robots” to carry out 
a variety of undersea research tasks. These platforms will apparently 
evolve from the already discussed Krab and Manta series of platforms 
already in service.*!’*? Soviet scientists are also working on designs 
of future underwater bulldozers, graders, excavators, and ore carriers 
for offshore mining operations and undersea harvesters for seaweed 
farms.** 
There apparently has been considerable discussion in higher Soviet 
planning circles as to the status of and priority thus far accorded 
to undersea technology. One prominent Russian engineer and planner, 
A. Dmitriev, chief engineer for technical means of underwater 
research, State Planning Institute of the Fishing Fleet (Giproryblfot), 
argues that the Soviet fisheries industry has pioneered the development 
of undersea vehicles virtually single-handedly, while other Soviet un- 
dersea concerns have been using ‘handicraft’ methods to produce 
expensive and relatively useless vehicles. He adds that these vehicles 
are of mediocre design and are unsafe to use. Examples of poor 
design cited are the submersibles Gvidon (table 1.), Krab (table 2.), 
4° Panyukhno, Ye. OSA departs for the deep. Op. cit. 
41 Snegov, S. Underwater relative of lunokhod. Sovetskaya Vilnyus (U.S.S.R.). Sept. 4, 1975, p. 4 
(JPRS 361 of Dec. 3, 1975). 
42 Yastrebov, V.S. Underwater robots in oceanic research. IN: Reports on the Theory, Principles of 
Construction, and Use of Robots and Manipulators. Leningrad, 1974, pp. 28-32. 
43 Bakke, D.R. Russia determined to lead in oceans. Offshore. Vol. 33, No. 4, 1973, 68-70. 
