MovieChat Forums > The Bedford Incident (1965) Discussion > Submarine class of 'Big Red'?

Submarine class of 'Big Red'?

posted 15 years ago by saginaw1
14 replies | jump to latest

'The Bedford Incident' is one of my favorite Cold War-era films, but there's always been one question about it that I've often wondered; just what class of submarine was "Big Red"?

In the movie, at the time the USS Bedford is shadowing the Soviet trawler Novosibirsk, Commodore Schrepke audibly analyzes the parent ship and the sub it tenders, "Big Red". A portion of the description is somewhat difficult to make out, but I did pick up the underwater cruising speed of the sub as being "25 knots". In referring to some books I have in my collection, there were two attack sub classes in commission at that time that closely fit that description. They were the Echo I-class (@ 20 knots) and the November-class (@ 25 knots), both of which were nuclear-powered and could attain such speeds.

I invite others here to discuss and analyze what class "Big Red" was. Thank you.

[–] mwb_8 15 years ago

I don't think the writers or producers were too interested in identifying what class it was back in 1965. It wasn't til much later that those details became popular in movies.

However, I think the Hotel class might fit the bill here, they were first launched into service in 1960. In the movie they made specific reference to Big Red "snorkeling", but that isn't much of a clue since most early ballistic subs used a snorkel to replenish air. There were also a couple diesel electric classes that were converted to carry missiles, they could be the culprit too...Ummm, India and Victor???

[–] saginaw1 15 years ago

It wouldn't be the Victors, since the first one was commissioned in late 1967 (then again, maybe "Big Red" could've been a Victor prototype?). The Indias were a couple of rescue submarines that carried two Deep Submergence Rescue Vehicles (DSRVs) each, and weren't available until the early 1970s. I like your idea of the sub possibly being a Hotel-class, though.

Thank you very much for your input!

[–] CmdrCody 15 years ago

saginaw1: Very interesting thread. What type was she ? Very good question.

We do have some facts. The snorkel clearly indicates that "Big Red" is a diesel sub, not a nuke. Nuke subs make their own breathable air from sea water and do not normally use a snorkel (even if they were equipped with one.) The Russian use of the snorkel is a key part to the plot of the film, which sets the stage for the final showdown with USS Bedford. Would a Soviet nuke sub skipper hazard his boat to use a snorkel when he didn't have to ? I think not. Big Red is a diesel submarine.

Also, I don't think "Big Red" is a missile boat or "boomer." While Captain Finlander speculated that Big Red was mapping suitable missile firing positions on the Greenland coast, I doubt such a job would be assigned by the Soviets to one of their few missile boats. They didn't have many deployed back then and wouldn't have risked them on reconnaissance/intelligence. In addition, I'm not aware of any diesel missile boats in the historic Soviet inventory...or were there ?

On the other hand, the Soviet Navy during the 60's had hundreds of diesel attack boats and were using them for underwater espionage, just like the Western navies. Also, a diesel boat on long patrol would have benefited from a "mother ship" like Novosibirsk: to refuel and re-supply with foodstuffs. However, ships like Novosibirsk were constantly shadowed by NATO patrol planes, so these re-supply efforts would have to been at night under darkened-ship procedures. Even still, the Russians probably gave up this mid-ocean submarine resupply effort in the later years of the Cold War, simply beacause the Russian sub alongside her supply ship in the open sea gave away its biggest advantage...secrecy.

I like how the cat-and-mouse movie plot is enhanced by the exclusive use of tell-tale signs of Big Red's presence. We never see the sub, the crew or it's captain. We only see "tracks'...the potato peelings and bits of cabbage ("...that's right, Captain. Finest Russian naval cuisine !"), the mother-ship, the weather balloon, the return-echo on Bedford's sonar and then....at last...the snorkel !

Very cool build-up to..."the incident." The Bedford Incident.

CmdrCody

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] CmdrCody 15 years ago

squeeth: Ahoy matey ! Very good point.

[–] graham-167 14 years ago

Agreed, the Russian sub clearly isn't a nuke - everything about the way it behaves rules it out. A nuke could just sit on the bottom indefinitely - at least until the food ran out, which could be months.

Given the 1965 timeframe, the best bet would be a Foxtrot or a Romeo, both of which came into service in the late 50s. Neither could make close to 25 knotts underwater, or even on top of it. My bet would be on a Foxtrot.

I've actually been on a Russian Foxtrot class submarine. Cramped does not even come close to describing it.

[–] CGSailor 10 years ago

I agree with the overall intent of your post.

Just a minor point of correction....

A nuke could just sit on the bottom indefinitely...

Unless they were on the Continental shelf in relatively shallow waters, even a Nuke boat, even a MODERN Nuke boat would not be able to sit on the bottom.

Average ocean depth is FAR BEYOND the crush depth of even the most modern subs to date.

I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

[–] Wakanohana 13 years ago

CmdrCody wrote: "I don't think "Big Red" is a missile boat or "boomer." While Captain Finlander speculated that Big Red was mapping suitable missile firing positions on the Greenland coast, I doubt such a job would be assigned by the Soviets to one of their few missile boats. They didn't have many deployed back then and wouldn't have risked them on reconnaissance/intelligence. In addition, I'm not aware of any diesel missile boats in the historic Soviet inventory...or were there ? "

A review of the literature suggests that the sub was possibly a Hotel II-class diesel-powered sub. They had the nuclear propulsion system of the November-class SSN, the first-generation Soviet nuclear-powered submarine, combined with the missile compartment of the Golf-class diesel-powered ballistic missile sub. They also had the submerged speed of the sub mentioned in the film.

But for mapping or reconnaisance, you are correct in assuming they would not use a "boomer" -- so possibly a November?

The Hotel-class subs which were operational in the early 1960s carried three SS-N-4 or SS-N-5 missiles, each with a single megaton warhead. The missiles had a range up to 1400-1650 kilometers.

So... there is no possibility that a missile launched from the waters off the east coast of Greenland could hit any targets in either the US or Canada -- unless perhaps the target was a fishing village in Labrador.

Any Soviet subs in the Greenland-Iceland Gap would have been transiting to a patrol area within a few hundred miles of the east coast of the US. The Gap has an irregular sea bottom and would be a tempting route for a sub commander headed to a patrol zone.

I do not know whether the Naval Air Station at Keflavik, Iceland, was operational for ASW aircraft during the early 1960s. My guess is that it was. The helicopter that delivered the reporter and ship's doctor in the film probably brought them from Keflavik.

[–] zaphod1957 13 years ago

The sub is definately not a nuke and Finlander says at one point "He's not a nuke, so he can't go under the icepack..."

I also seeme to also remember a version of the movie where Finlander says something like "well if we can't track these Soviet desiel subs what will happen if when they start using nukes?" I didn't see that scene the last time I watched the movie, so maybe I'm remember it from the book (which I also read).

[–] josborn828 12 years ago

First let's clarify this is fiction because the submarine's class is fictional as well. The "description hard to make out" the O.P. referred to occurs while looking at the disguised equipment on Big Red's mother ship the Novo Sibursk. Commodore Schrepke tells finlander the submarine probably belongs to "the old Chernikoff class with a maximum submerged speed of 25 knots and a duration of 24 hours without snorkeling." Okay a WWII or early cold war boat that could do all that isn't really fiction, it's science ficton/fantasy!

[–] CGSailor 10 years ago

Commodore Schrepke tells finlander the submarine probably belongs to "the old Chernikoff class with a maximum submerged speed of 25 knots and a duration of 24 hours without snorkeling." Okay a WWII or early cold war boat that could do all that isn't really fiction, it's science ficton/fantasy!

Early Cold war boats could do 25 knots submerged. Hell, the German Type XXI at the end of WW2 could make about 17 kts.

And even WW2 boats could stay down 24 hours without snorkeling.

Now granted, they could not do BOTH at the same time. Staying under that long meant minimal use of the batteries, whereas the speed would drain those batteries flat within the hour.

But he was not stating the sub would stay under 24 hours while AT 25 knots.
He was just reading dry characteristics.

I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

[–] scott-gotwols 11 years ago

Running on snorkel would also have permitted the use of the diesel engines. That would account for a higher underwater speed -- though probably not 25 knots.

[–] Butteoid 8 years ago

It's probably based on what was known in the West of the Foxtrot class of diesel-electrics, one of which almost fired a nuclear torpedo at American forces during the Cuban Missile Crisis that concluded a few years before the film was made.
Google "Vasili Arkhipov" for details.

[–] Winfield_Browne 7 years ago

In 1965 at the time of this film's release it would have been possible to fidget with the Big Red capability and even assign it to being a captured German U Boat that was never reported by the soviets.

I'm also of the belief they were operating off the western coast of Greenland so, flying Munceford and the doctor from Iceland is out of the question, yes ?? they probably came from a snow base operated by the US NAvy in Greenland and were flown in there by Orions or Neptunes known to be operating ASW at the time.

Anyways, I enjoyed the film and when I watched it once with my dad (ASW Neptunes) he scoffed that we would ever dare operate a destroyer alone ... ever. He used to scoff at The Enemy Below for the same reasons as all of our killer groups at that time used baby carriers as well as destroyers operating in task force groups.

You old salts know what I mean so don't trash me, I'm just an old Yardbird that loved listening to stories told in the CPO club.

Everyone you meet is fighting a battle you know nothing about.
be kind, rewind...