This started when I was watching the premier of “The Americans” on Fox. I’m pretty sure it was the pilot anyhow. It could have been the second episode. And, before I get to the point, if you haven’t watched that show, you really should.
Anyhow, I’m watching the show, and there are two dudes having a conversation about the Soviet “Akula” class submarine. My bullshit meter exploded. It was 1980. The “Akula” fast attack submarine was still three years away from being laid down, not to mention the time to build, outfit and put into service. I ranted at Lacey for a while before I had a flashbulb go off.
Shit. They’re talking about the Typhoon. In January of 1980, it was likely that the first of the Typhoon class ballistic missile subs was undergoing sea trials. The confusion comes in because the Soviets referred to her as “Akula,” while NATO called her “Typhoon.” Not a big deal until years later when some big-brain in NATO decided to slap “Akula” on the newest Soviet Attack Submarine. And now we have the “Akula Paradox.”
Basically, when writing about these submarines you have to make a choice: Do you use the correct designations, which most of your readers aren’t going to know, and will then tear you apart in the reviews? Or do mis-name them? You could even try to refer to them by what the speaker would call them. How confusing would that be?
NATO FFG Commander: Fire the ASROC at the Akula!
Soviet Sub Sonar Operator: I’ve got a torpedo in the water! It’s tracking the Pike to our north!
There simply no way to get this one correct. And it hurts my soul.