Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sailor Steve
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cmdrk
Drawing from my previous readings, which hasn't been recent, it is my understanding that the Type VII's pressure hull was exposed more to direct contact with the ocean. The ballast tanks were saddled onto the pressure hull's exterior.
While the US boat's pressure hull had ballast tanks wrapped around it with an outer hull encasing the whole. The pressure hull's steel was thinner and maybe less strong than German hulls. But, the outer hull and ballast tanks should have provided some outer protection - kind of like surface ships torpedo blisters.
|
I'm pretty sure the outer hull is for hydrodynamic purposes only, and has a lot of vent holes in it. The 'pressure' hull is just that; it takes the pressure directly.
As to the debate whether the depth reduces the effective radius of the charge or makes the hull more susceptible to damage, the only answer I can think of is "Yes". Sorry, doesn't help much, but both seem to me to be true. |
I understand the pressure hull is in no way sheltered from sea pressure. The ballast tanks would have equalized pressure inside and out and thus the pressure hull would have to resist that pressure.
What I was thinking about was, what protective effect would the US boat design have against a depth charge? Wouldn't the explosive force be disipated by the outer hull and water in the ballast tanks?
My understanding of physics is limited but I thought torpedo blisters were suppose to spread the force some so the force per sq. in would be lower. And, yes it would cause detonation away from the main hull. (shrugs)