Quote:
Originally Posted by FPSchazly
To be fair, the Sierra took its damage in the sail, which is outside the pressure hull. Sails are also reinforced for ice penetration. Also, titanium has about the same strength as steel; its advantage is its lower density, so for the same weight you can get twice the thickness of hull, for example.
I thought the Virginia was made of HY80 as well, but I've seen that the Seawolves are made of HY100 and the Virginias of HY120 (for any who don't know, this means yield strength of 120,000 psi).
http://www.aticourses.com/blog/index...-shark-at-sea/
In all this discussion of American vs Russian submarines, it seems like the Russian submarines were much more of science projects. As in, the Americans found a design they liked and kept making subs like that while the Russians kept experimenting. Whether this is because they couldn't make up their minds on a sub design or wanted to keep improving/exploring is something I can't comment on. |
In fairness yes the Kastroma took a light hit but if you look at the damage to the San fransisco it makes you wonder just how much damage did baton rouge suffer?
I am aware of the HY ratings i did read the Virginia is built along similar lines to the Astute in terms of steel used and pre fabrication methods following on from the Seawolf.
I gathered from many sources that the reason for seawolfs expense wasn't all down to the kit inside it was the hull and many sources pointed to HY130 being used but HY100 is still expensive, as for the Virginias using HY120 this could mean a deeper diving submarine?