Which torpedo is better: 53-65K or 53-65M?

[Gorshkov]

I have found that there are two 53-65 torpedo versions in DW/LWAMI and SCXII games. As it is probably well known they slightly differ in propulsion which means various oxidizers are used: pure oxygen (K) and hydrogen peroxide (M).

So what version should have better range/speed performance and why?

I can only guess it is 53-65M because hydrogen peroxide's oxidation potential is 1.8 in contrary to oxygen's 1.23.

[TLAM Strike]

from Navweaps:

533 mm (21") 53-65, 53-65K and 53-65M.
Ship Class Used On Submarines
Date Of Design N/A
Date In Service
53-65: 1965
53-65K: 1969
53-65M: 1969
Weight 4,563 to 4,630 lbs. (2,070 to 2,100 kg)
Overall Length 283 in (7.200 m)
Explosive Charge 661 lbs. (300 kg)
Range / Speed
53-65: 19,700 yards (18,000 m) / 45 knots
53-65K: 20,800 yards (19,000 m) / 45 knots
53-65M: 24,000 yards (22,000 m) / 44 knots
Power
53-65 and 53-65M: Kerosene-Hydrogen Peroxide Turbine
53-65K: Kerosene-Oxygen TurbineNote: Acoustic wake following homing torpedo. Based upon 53-61 torpedo.
Engines for 53-65K were also used on self-moving sea mine SMDM.

[Gorshkov]

I know these data but they are not quite clear to me. If 53-65M version had had only 3 km longer range at practically identical speed what would have been purpose to introduce both 53-65 versions simultaneously? Moreover there are also data about 70 kts top speed for 53-65M. On the other hand 53-65M fuel mixture is very dangerous in handling on subs.

So there had to be some important reason to introduce both torpedoes! Maybe better performance for less safety and vice-versa...

[TLAM Strike]

Redundancy. It was common in the Russian/Soviet navy to have a backup program incase one didn't perform as the designers said it would. Thats why the Russians have so many diffrent classes of ship.

For example the Slava class cruisers were a backup incase the Kirov didn't prove practical. The Slava was a conventional (for the Russians) design while the Kirov was more cutting edge. Or the Sierra and Akula, the Akula was a consertive backup when it became obvous that the Seirra was going to cost way too much.

BTW I've seen a 67 knot max speed for the 53-65K.

[Kapitan]

As TLAM said redundancy is everything if you notice in the submarines you have oth the echo and julliette class the julliette is the backup of the top of the range echo its a fail safe methord.

You will find this in everything the russians have, torpedos planes submarines ship ect, but depending on the type of combat you are in the situation your in then chose the weapon most practicle.

[Gorshkov]

No guys! You have made too much mess here:

1. Slava was not any Kirov's back-up but simply less expensive cruiser type. It should be obvious for two times smaller warship. Both types were to be produced in the same time as new well balanced cruiser fleet.

2. Very interesting situation also emerged with new Soviet destroyers in those days. Soviets introduced two pararell designs: Sovremenny and Udaloy not due to "redundancy" but because there was not possible to meet all requirements in one unversal hull under 10000 tons displacement. Therefore 956 is primarly anti-ship platform and 1155 is first and foremost ASW one.

3. SSG Julliet can't be treated as SSGN Echo-II back-up. Note Julliet was a diesel sub and thus it was no match for nuclear Echo-II in any respect. Echo-IIs were to hunt US carriers on open ocean and Julliet was in fact coastal defense platform.

4. As for too many submarine types I advice you to take into account one basic fact that in the Soviet Union four construction bureaus and shipyards built nuclear subs for Red Navy simultaneously as opposed to one or two in US. Partially that is why more models were designed all the time.

5. If your data about 65K model top speed are correct I can't see any reason to use 65M torp because both versions would share identical performance but 65M is far less safe design.


Overally plenty of similar weapons and warship types in USSR was caused by many factors. Not only mythical "redundancy". :know:

[GrayOwl]

Simultaneously, in a Soviet NAVY on arms consist 32 such as various types torpedos. It in the period 80-90 years.

It is the official data.

The development of new arms was encouraged with the premiums of government.
The new type weapon made as "hot-dogs" and received for it the big money premiums and awards.

Gold Time!

But now situation such:
America has the military budget of 594 billion dollars
Russia - has the military budget of 34 billions.
Have felt a difference? :p

[Gorshkov]

Simultaneously, in a Soviet NAVY on arms consist 32 such as various types torpedos. It in the period 80-90 years.

It is the official data.
As for almost century long period it is not so many models especially providing for torpedo types introduced before and during World War II.


The development of new arms was encouraged with the premiums of government.
The new type weapon made as "hot-dogs" and received for it the big money premiums and awards.

Gold Time!
Do not forget Soviet economy was controlled one. Thus no battles for premiums and awards were possible as not compliant with Five Years Armament Plans and prosecuted by KGB/NKVD. In fact under Stalin many talented Soviet constuctors like Tupolev created their projects doing bird. So he wasn't in position to wage battles with NKVD for awards maybe except a little better slop. :p
No confidence tricks around Supreme Soviet or Politburo made by various arms concerns like those around US Congress, buddy!
What really occurred was derailing one design bureau's project by another. For example Tupolev and Raduga DBs lobby monopolized air-launched anti-ship missiles development and finally AS-4 missile remained the sole vital ALCM for 30 years. :know:


But now situation such:
America has the military budget of 594 billion dollars
Russia - has the military budget of 34 billions.
Have felt a difference? :p
Note Russia is not USSR. I did not talk about present Russia which is now in process of complete disarmament by the way... ;)

[GrayOwl]

Really only Ukraine and Belorussia was in the Soviet union the manufacturer of the weapon.
Other republics (Mid Asia and Pribaltika) had no and also now have no any technologies for manufacture of the weapon.
Besides the military budget was formed in Moscow, he was common, instead of in union republics.
Concerning the premiums - is wrong buddy!
Existed Lenin's the premium, Stalin's premium, and State premium.

At first scietist put in prison, then let out and gave development of the weapon.
Then - or again put in prison or gave the premium!
( Besides - all this was till 1953 yet has died Stalin. After that nobody put in prison.

For example - Igor Kurchatov. Has made first soviet a nuclear bomb and has received the premium. Or Mikchail Lisichko - main designer of torpedos such as "APR" types.

About these premiums never wrote in the newspapers are there were confidential rewardings.
And the names of these scientists were too confidential - nobody knew of their surnames.

[GrayOwl]

32 types of torpedos were on arms in the period between 1980-1990years! But not during one century as you speak.

Then when the Soviet union had a serious opposition with the block NATO and the weapon made in huge quantities.
To your item of information - the torpedos, removed from battle service , are not destroyed.
Torpedo 65-76 - you think what them simply have cut on metal? Be mistaken.
They the storage in a warehouse still is years 10-15. If there will be a necessity them always it is possible to return on a service.
Also business is and with nuclear warheads - Russia now destroys these charges.
( On the American money. On Ukraine, bombers TU- 22 also, were cut for the American money.)

[Gorshkov]

32 types of torpedos were on arms in the period between 1980-1990 years! But not during one century as you speak.

It in the period 80-90 years.



Learn more English and come back! :know:

[Dr.Sid]

It's true some people seem to use google translate for writing posts here.

Fools .. they should know altavista's Babel fish is much better ! :rotfl:

[Gorshkov]

It's true some people seem to use google translate for writing posts here.

Fools .. they should know altavista's Babel fish is much better ! :rotfl:
Yet English knowlegde is the best! :rotfl:

PS. Now I see why I cannot understand some written in "English" posts here. Thanks Dr. Sid!

[GrayOwl]

It's true some people seem to use google translate for writing posts here.

Fools .. they should know altavista's Babel fish is much better ! :rotfl:
Yet English knowlegde is the best! :rotfl:

PS. Now I see why I cannot understand some written in "English" posts here. Thanks Dr. Sid!

can necessary knowledge that 32 torpedo types, there were on a service 10 years between 1980-1990?
You have not understood language this post? However have challenged this remark:

As for almost century long period it is not so many models especially providing for torpedo types introduced before and during World War II.

:doh:

[Gorshkov]

Sorry buddy but I don't have enough time to decipher correct meaning of "You & Mr. Google Team" so called "English posts production"! :down:

[Dr.Sid]

I nominate last Grayowl's post as the worst English ever on this forum :up:
I guess it would actually be better with google now.

PS: not that my English is perfect :cool:

PPS: Gorshkov .. congratulations to new avatar, this one is one of my favorites !

[GrayOwl]

Sorry buddy but I don't have enough time to decipher correct meaning of "You & Mr. Google Team" so called "English posts production"! :down:

Then it is not necessary to make comments about what you have no representation.

You now understand me?

Можно разговариваить и на русском - вы ведь немного говорите на нем (или хотя бы понимаете немного ) мистер Горшков?

[Frame57]

I think that Russia is removing many warheads from service, but along with cost to maintain them, it is far more cost effective to produce new ones. warheads do have a shelf life. As far as the future of Russia, I would bet their military budget will increase. They are more in the world market than before. My Uncle who raises Cattle owns a Russian made tractor that makes John Deere look like a Tonka Toy. They are exporting weapons platforms at an ever increasing rate. A local Disc Jockey in N. Cal. goes to Moscow and loves it. He has seen ahuge difference in the economy over the past decade and it has improved and will continue. The Bear will be back with a vengence. Keeping up with NATO and Reagan's 600 ship Navy was a chore to keep up with. Now they need to do what we do. Have fewer, but better weaponry.

[GrayOwl]

I nominate last Grayowl's post as the worst English ever on this forum :up:
I guess it would actually be better with google now.

PS: not that my English is perfect :cool:

The Dr.Sid - why when we debugged the editor of a sound, you understood me very well.
Now has appeared what I cannot be understood ????

Incredible Methamorphose...:p :p :p

[Gorshkov]

You now understand me?

Nope! Go in peace, buddy! :lol:

So I will help a little you and this community:

Можно разговариваить и на русском - вы ведь немного говорите на нем (или хотя бы понимаете немного ) мистер Горшков?
- "We can also speak Russian - you probably speak Russian a little (or at least understand it) Mr. Gorshkov?" - asked GrayOwl

- "Yes, I do. You are right." - replied Mr. Gorshkov

PS. For future conversation please hire some professional human interpreter. I am not free on-line translator.:rotfl:

[Dr.Sid]

Grayowl .. I think you can do it .. but you must try a bit harder and reread the post. Those last ones were really poor and the meaning was not clear at the best.

As for Russian, it's fine with me, in fact I'd love to practice it a bit. Anyway it's against regulations, this is English speaking forum.