not personal bias but look at the two

the alfa is more hydrodynamicaly efficent than the seawolf

the alfa is smaller lighter and more blended than the seawolf the squat sail is hydrodynamic unlike the seawolf sail that cuts rather than displaces water.

if the alfa has a reactor that was more efficent ie more powerful then she could handle faster speeds.

the seawolfs sail is big bulky and not realy efficent in the way it cuts through and displaces the waves, its like a toilette roll tube with a brick on top not incredibly hydrodynamic is it.

the seawolf cuts the water rather than splay it over a vast area and will then slow it down.

the alfa wieghs a mere 3000 tonnes tops the seawolf is what 10,000 tonnes the seawolf is also bigger wider longer and this will also slow it down.

its like a WW1 biplane with jet engines is the seawolf may be great to look at but in reality although it works its not very efficent

the alfa when tested ina wind tunnel could effectivly reach speeds in excess of 45 knots if it had a bigger more powerful reactor the seawolf creates eddies of water on top and near the sail which creates noise and slows the sub down

the seawolf is a good design married to a belief of what i call hydrosimplicity the alfa is technosimplicity and hydrocomplexity go figure :up:

None of us really know what's under the hood, so to speak, of a 21. None of us have access to the hydrodynamic test results of the 21. No comparison can be made.

an educated guess that the reactor produces around 20,000shp standard from brit french and older american boats

and you can replicate the hydrodynamic tests with a 144 revel plastic model

I bet if we built the 'Skipjack' class with today's gear it would beat the Alfa's speed records. :yep: A former Skipjack sailor best discribed the class when he said this:

Kaptain, I don't think you're a bad guy, but your wild speculation drives me crazy. As a professional researcher, I can tell you that one cannot make comparisons without having access to the appropriate data. Yes, I know that this is what the boards here are about, but it still makes me nutty. Still, speculate away. Everyone else seems to enjoy it.

im not realy speculating its more my opinion the way i do see it, based on what i think helped by a shot in the dark at what the officals say.

im not saying that the seawolf isnt capible of high speeds im saying its unlikely because of its shape and its not hydrodynamicaly efficent, but the alfa is

it is plausible the seawolf could hit 50 knots but the sub @10,000tonnes and wide not to metion long and the sail thats like a brick kinda says maybe not.

its not a personal bias just the way i see this

you can recreate a wind tunnel test for both these submarines all you need is wol a fan and 2 plastic models

Well, none of us (err, maybe few of us :)) knows the Truth about that speeds, depths etc. My opinion is that smart Commander driving old boat will beat mediocre commander driving new boat ;)
We can endlessly speculate about "Akula vs SW", but I hope that we'll never get a chance to test it in a real battle :cool:
2 Kapitain
Alfa was a really good one. But her reactor, which gave her that incredible possibilities, was too expencive and too difficult to operate. There were enen some accidents because of it. In addition, on that high speeds Alfa was VERY noisy.
The more important thing is that Alfa was kinda the first soviet attemp to create a SmartBoat - everything aboard was highly automated, and even there were no mates in crew - only officers and midshipmen.

Hmmm but Kapitain what you have described what you do is speculation.

Also working out flow patterns takes a lot more then a fan and a couple of models considering that water flow and airflow over a sub are two different things even if the same formulae are used.

Sure if you know the physics you can work it out but that is tough physics.

Not to mention the Soviet Navy tried that whole sodium cooling system in such boats as the alpha and that turned out to be a blunder. I do happen to know some specifics (obviously can't discuss them) but the main thing is that the Seawolf was a good design in theory and on paper but was built a bit late in the game for what she was designed for. They did however take the lessons learned from Seawolf design and construction and applied them when they built Virginia...I think over the next few years you will see that she is a good class as well. :up:

Isn't this by it's very nature speculation? I don't have a problem with it. It makes for interesting reading what peoples hunches are with regards to these topics.

i do say take it with a pinch of salt but as so many have said the seawolf is a good design and i do agree with then reasons:

the sail stops the submarine from turtle if it does a fast sharp turn

the sails ram like shape allows equal displacement of water on each side reducing noise

the seawolf is 2 generations ahead of the alfa you could only ever compair speeds and other such data technology well the obvious its gotta be american.

in terms of metalurgy the russians were ahead and in AIP propulsion too at one stage but germany over took them and russia is only now re visiting this technology.

i speculate because of what history has told us ie bricks dont fly to well nor do they swim well either id consider the seawolf an oddly shaped brick hence why i say what ive said.

:yep:

maybe old, but she is my baby :arrgh!: