SUBSIM Radio Room Forums



SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997

Go Back   SUBSIM Radio Room Forums > Current crop of subsims & naval games > COLD WATERS
Forget password? Reset here

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-12-17, 04:14 PM   #46
denis_469
Seasoned Skipper
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Russia
Posts: 699
Downloads: 134
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FPSchazly View Post
I'm not sure that's a valid assumption if the Seawolf can dive deeper than the Virginia, though.
Yes, SSN-21 have this depth:
"Depth: 800+ feet (operational)
approx. 1600 feet (safe depth)
approx. 2250 feet (crash depth)"
And building with HY-100 steel, like 2 LA class submarines. But this steel (HY-100) have many cracks and boats rarely seen in sea. Except SSN-23.
denis_469 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-17, 04:16 PM   #47
The Bandit
Sonar Guy
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 395
Downloads: 39
Uploads: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kapitan View Post
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?
Yep, as far as San Francisco goes, again I think that some of the other factors at play were the reactor. She had just been refueled (plus they had USS Honolulu to get parts from), I'd be willing to guess if she was due for a refueling she'd have most certainly been retired. That's also what I read written on USS Miami, more than likely she would have been repaired if they had a retired sub that they could have sourced some of the parts from, but as the only other 688s to be retired are all older (pre-688I) this was impossible. The other thing I think I remember getting from this is that it certainly wouldn't have been impossible to repair Miami but it was just too expensive, especially if you're paying for it with money that's coming out of your construction budget and setting back one of your new Virginia boats.

On the HY100 front, it depends on what you consider cost but its not really down to the expense of manufacturing the steel (which probably isn't cheap or easy, but as far as I know I haven't heard of any massive quality issues), its the difficulty to work with it when you are talking about welds and what not. I'm not going to claim to know all about the science around it but even HY80 has not been easy to work with and has had lots of issues over the years.

I think it was Greyback or Growler, one of those Regulus boats and it had all kinds of problems. Even before this, one of the Skates (Seadragon?) which used the same type of HTS / HY42 that the later war-built boats used, had all kinds of improper welds in the 50s. This has happened on quite a few occasions, even with some of the 688Is (I think it was Charlotte or Hampton, one of the ones that was involved in a collision and had damage to the sail, when it was inspected it was found that quite a bit of the welds were incorrect/ out of spec and had to be re-done).

The reason I bring all this up is because the Seawolf, while under construction around 1993 or so suffered from massive issues with the welding of HY100, to the point that almost all of what had already been done had to be re-worked, adding probably almost a year to construction time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shipkiller1 View Post
HY-80 has not been used in a long time.. 774 class does not use HY-80.
Best I know, the last 688Is were still HY-80, so mid 90s but a few of the later ones had some sections made of HY100 just as a feasibility / practicality test.
__________________

Last edited by The Bandit; 07-12-17 at 04:32 PM.
The Bandit is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-17, 04:30 PM   #48
FPSchazly
Good Hunting!
 
FPSchazly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Maryland
Posts: 771
Downloads: 15
Uploads: 1


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kapitan View Post
As for the HY ratings i understand the pressure ratings but in terms of thickness relation to strength thats where i get lost, given the state of technology today i would assume that HY 120 steel is some what cheaper today than back in the 70's and 80's when the 688's were coming online, i do know the hull cost for seawolf was extremely expensive again that was a cost forecast taken from 1997 so again thats taken from the time.
So in terms of pressure vessels, which submarines are, there are two factors at play: geometry and material properties. Thickness is a property of the geometry and Strength is a property of the material. Beam of the submarine and thickness of the hull play into the stress the pressure hull experiences from a geometrical standpoint (in addition to bulkheads). It's different analyzing internal pressure vessels (like spray paint cans or beer cans) versus external pressure vessels (like submarines), but for internal pressure vessels, a larger beam results in more stress and a thicker wall results in less stress in the design.

So now that you know the stress the submarine will experience, you have to pick a material with a sufficient Strength to handle that stress, but stress in a design doesn't depend on the material. In terms of material properties, a stronger material can take more stress. For HY120 vs HY80, it's fair to say that HY120 is 50% stronger than HY80.

So, HY120 has a strength of 120,000 psi. Say, for example, that a submarine at a certain depth is experiencing 60,000 psi in its hull. The HY120 has sufficient strength to not fail because of that stress level.
__________________
Your friendly neighborhood modern submarine YouTuber.

My videos:
**Exclusive Look at Modern Naval Warfare!**
Dangerous Waters Liu Doctrine (LwAmi
Learn to play Dangerous Waters
FPSchazly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-17, 05:27 PM   #49
ollie1983
Sailor man
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 45
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0
Default

This Russian fanboy stance doesn't wash.

The Alfa class were very noisy. The fact they could dive deep and had a high top speed, yeah and? You don't think NATO could build a submarine out of titanium if they wanted to?

OTH radar- has serious limitations. Go and research about it. It's resolution is rather poor to say the least. Of use only for early warning, the Americans had them too.

Don't get wrapped around the axle with what steel or materials subs are made of. Silence is the key driver.

The USSR was broke. Defence spending was what made the Cold war so prolonged. And don't start down the nuclear war line because it's an irrelevance. Both sides had the throw weight to smash each other and still do.
ollie1983 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-17, 07:38 PM   #50
shipkiller1
Electrician's Mate
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 136
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kapitan View Post
I did see pictures of the San Francisco its bow was eventually cut off and replaced with an older laid up 688 that's what i heard not sure on the truth of it, but yes the damage was immense to say the least only pictures i've ever seen with that much damage came from the Kursk in 2000.
It is a fallacy that the bow was cut off and replaced. Sections were removed and replaced. The pressure hull had MAJOR damage. It was a miracle that we did not lose the boat.

I was standing on the pier in Guam when they limped back in....
shipkiller1 is online   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-17, 07:45 PM   #51
shipkiller1
Electrician's Mate
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 136
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0


Default

It is sterile conjuncture on the properties of HY-80 vs. HY-100 or any other material.

Using Titanium as the hull material has some serious drawbacks.. The US experimented with this material and decided to stay with steel. Plus, the USSR had/has a much greater supply of the raw ore than the US did...

Every country that designs and builds submarines has their own philosophies on the design and construction. All boats have their strengths and weakness's.
shipkiller1 is online   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-17, 07:56 PM   #52
shipkiller1
Electrician's Mate
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 136
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0


Default

The US Navy experimented with putting a 5-bladed screw on a 688. Fast as an Alpha, and as noisy... Pulled the dam thing off rather quickly.

Fast forward 20 years and now you have Seawolf (SSN-21 class). As quiet at 20 knots as a 688i is at 5 knots... and faster than a 688. How much, I will not say.

I know it makes your patriotic bones rattle (no matter what country you are from) to say you have the fastest or deepest diving etc.. but in all practicalities it is just bravado... having the deepest diving has very little tactical value (there is an exception to that). Speed does, but if you are noisy as ox cart, it really does not matter anyway either...
shipkiller1 is online   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-17, 09:50 PM   #53
caine007
A-ganger
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 72
Downloads: 26
Uploads: 0
Default

I work with a lot of Russians. They have some weird ways of solving problems that make you scratch your head but in the end they're very effective. As a whole is their tech better? No of course not, their budgets don't even come close but I would write them off at your peril.
caine007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-12-17, 10:01 PM   #54
Shadriss
A-ganger
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Hooper, UT
Posts: 80
Downloads: 89
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kapitan View Post
I did see pictures of the San Francisco its bow was eventually cut off and replaced with an older laid up 688 that's what i heard not sure on the truth of it, but yes the damage was immense to say the least only pictures i've ever seen with that much damage came from the Kursk in 2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Bandit View Post
Yep, as far as San Francisco goes, again I think that some of the other factors at play were the reactor. She had just been refueled (plus they had USS Honolulu to get parts from), I'd be willing to guess if she was due for a refueling she'd have most certainly been retired. That's also what I read written on USS Miami, more than likely she would have been repaired if they had a retired sub that they could have sourced some of the parts from, but as the only other 688s to be retired are all older (pre-688I) this was impossible.
WRT the SAN FRANCISCO, her entire forward compartment WAS removed and replaced by the forward compartment of the USS HONOLULU (In the fleet, she is often referred to as either the HONOFRISCO or the SANALULU). Shipkiller may have been on the pier in Guam when she got back, but I was in Bremerton when they did the work - it was a rather big deal for the area, to say the least.

WRT the MIAMI, she was originally going to be repaired. However, as the initial clearing of damage revealed even more damage, and cost estimates continued to spiral upward, the decision was made that it wasn't cost effective - it got to the point where a new sub was going to be cheaper. MIAMI was already in Portsmoth Naval Shipyard up in Maine, and they don't keep mothballed ships up there, so that MAY have factored in as well, but that wasn't the read the sub fleet had at the time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ollie1983 View Post
The Alfa class were very noisy. The fact they could dive deep and had a high top speed, yeah and? You don't think NATO could build a submarine out of titanium if they wanted to?
ALFAs were loud... comparable to the NAUTILUS when she launched in the 50's. Her prop was only part of it - her reactor was the bigger problem. Go take a look at that thing... it was amazing, I'll admit that, but the problems in how it was designed and implemented made it less than stellar for submarine use. And, of course, there is the problem of her nuclear shielding. What nuclear shielding, you ask? Exactly...

Quote:
Originally Posted by shipkiller1 View Post
It is a fallacy that the bow was cut off and replaced. Sections were removed and replaced. The pressure hull had MAJOR damage. It was a miracle that we did not lose the boat.

I was standing on the pier in Guam when they limped back in....
Sorry, Senior. Not a fallacy. I was in Kittery at PNSY when the collision happened, but I went to IMFPACNORWEST shortly afterward, and that project was a big one. I never was involved in it directly, but I talked to a lot of people who were.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shipkiller1 View Post
The US Navy experimented with putting a 5-bladed screw on a 688. Fast as an Alpha, and as noisy... Pulled the damn thing off rather quickly.

Fast forward 20 years and now you have Seawolf (SSN-21 class). As quiet at 20 knots as a 688i is at 5 knots... and faster than a 688. How much, I will not say.
To amplify this, and augment a few other comments, the Russians were very diverse in their submarines, yes... and for good reason. As I pointed out way back, they knew that their ability to tactically engage the US in ASW was not good. They knew we were quieter and had better sensors, but until ol' Johnny Walker came along, they didn't know why... so they experimented. There is a reason that the VICTOR II class had 4-, 5-, 6-, and eventually tandem 4-bladed props. If they could think of a thing, they tried it, jus to see if it would work. Sometimes it did, other times, not so much. That said, hats off to them for trying... even if it did take a traitor to show them the way to do business.
__________________
STS1(SS) USN (Ret) : 1997 - 2017
USS MICHIGAN (SSBN-727 BLUE)
USS MONTPELIER (SSN-765)
IMF PACNORWEST
USS ALASKA (SSBN-732 GOLD)
USS ALABAMA (SSBN-731 GOLD)
NAVAL OCEAN PROCESSING FACILITY, WHIDBEY ISLAND
USS TENNESSEE (SSBN-734 GOLD)
Shadriss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-17, 02:30 AM   #55
denis_469
Seasoned Skipper
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Russia
Posts: 699
Downloads: 134
Uploads: 0
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ollie1983 View Post
This Russian fanboy stance doesn't wash.

The Alfa class were very noisy. The fact they could dive deep and had a high top speed, yeah and? You don't think NATO could build a submarine out of titanium if they wanted to?

OTH radar- has serious limitations. Go and research about it. It's resolution is rather poor to say the least. Of use only for early warning, the Americans had them too.

Don't get wrapped around the axle with what steel or materials subs are made of. Silence is the key driver.

The USSR was broke. Defence spending was what made the Cold war so prolonged. And don't start down the nuclear war line because it's an irrelevance. Both sides had the throw weight to smash each other and still do.
Noisy.... 1991 year: "After the reconnaissance of the SF data, the commander of the diesel boat, Captain 3rd Rank AP Ushakov, 4 Squadrons, Pl Plv SF, told me that he had discovered a foreign boat with a long-range contact with the terminal complex from a distance of as much as 60 miles. And I watched her for more than 3 days."
Detection range 60 miles against US submarine LA class. Ushakov submarine was "B-471". Detection was made during transfer from Black sea to Northern sea.
denis_469 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-17, 02:44 AM   #56
denis_469
Seasoned Skipper
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Russia
Posts: 699
Downloads: 134
Uploads: 0
Default

And more about noisy:
"We left for the Barents Sea. They worked with a nuclear-powered ship and a diesel submarine. According to the nuclear-powered vessel, the detection distance was 315 cable, along the diesel boat - 147, which was five times the standard.
And then a complete triumph! And quite unexpected. When Mogilnikov gave the order to float up to recharge the battery, Ritsa suddenly gave the bearing to ... an American nuclear submarine that was following our nuclear submarine.
About how it was, I learned from the first mouth - from the very Yuri Mogilnikov. We have known him for about thirty years - since the first meeting in the service in Egyptian Alexandria. A straightforward and uncompromising man, Mogilnikov never shook his heart, as he did not curl, telling about this episode:
- I took it from a distance of almost 400 cable!"
Las Angeles submarine detection range 400 cables (40 miles), our nuclear submarine was 667A (Yankee NATO) - detection range is 315 cables (31,5 miles), diesel submarine was 641 (Foxtrot NATO) - detection range was 147 cables (14,7 miles).
It was "K-517" 671RT (Victor II NATO). December 1985 year.
denis_469 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-17, 02:53 AM   #57
JhonSilver
Watch
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Posts: 27
Downloads: 19
Uploads: 0
Default

I would like to hear an opinion on the group activities of russian submarines.
This seems rather unrealistic since it makes it difficult to classify a target under conditions of unstable contact and can be fatal.

Whether there were similarities of wolfpacks in reality?
JhonSilver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-17, 05:21 PM   #58
Kapitan
Sub Test Pilot
 
Kapitan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK + Canada
Posts: 7,083
Downloads: 65
Uploads: 7


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ollie1983 View Post
This Russian fanboy stance doesn't wash.

The Alfa class were very noisy. The fact they could dive deep and had a high top speed, yeah and? You don't think NATO could build a submarine out of titanium if they wanted to?

OTH radar- has serious limitations. Go and research about it. It's resolution is rather poor to say the least. Of use only for early warning, the Americans had them too.

Don't get wrapped around the axle with what steel or materials subs are made of. Silence is the key driver.

The USSR was broke. Defence spending was what made the Cold war so prolonged. And don't start down the nuclear war line because it's an irrelevance. Both sides had the throw weight to smash each other and still do.

I wouldnt call myself a "fanboy" however i have been in and around most of the Russian fleet for the last 20 years and in my time i have met with big names in the Russian fleets including Admiral Chernavin and Igor Kurdin

The USSR went broke for many reason unsustainable defence spending was one big problem something that was being addressed but too late plus Gorbachev also made his own political mistakes which Yeltsin made his gains.

i'm well aware of the limitations of OTH radars especially the Duga 1 it could detect launches from the USA but not much else but that's all it really needed to do anyway, the technology developed so fast that by the time the thing was built better systems existed and trace the linear history phased array is a development of this, as i said RAF Flying dales in Yorkshire is a phased array OTH radar system it is almost identical to what the Americans use at home.

as for the material a submarine is made from or how fast it goes yes i agree its not always something that matters however it mattered enough that both the USN and RN spent billions to counter the perceived threat with the development of the MK48 ADCAP and Spearfish torpedoes i think that speaks volumes on the threat they perceived, and founded correctly.

If the Mike class went into serial production and was (and yes it was tested) to have the ability to fire a weapon below 850m at a western vessel dont you think you too would want a weapon to counter that threat? the torpedoes of the day couldn't.

The MK48 ADCAP is one of if not the best anti ship/submarine torpedo to date it far exceeds anything the Russians have including VA-111 Skhval, i know for certain i would rather choose the 48 than any other weapon other than spearfish or the now defunct tigerfish.
in 20 years i have probably spent around 7 in Russia and at least 3 of those in the far north.

As for the west building a submarine out of titanium that was deemed by the governments as too costly and unworkable the Russians did have and still do have better gas welding techniques, so much so a lot of titanium parts for a lot of items comes made from Russia, the west is very good with steel however Russia has always been better than us with titanium.

When it comes down to it Russia excels at heavy industry where as the west excels at the service industry and manufacturing.

There's a saying " the west make everything like Swiss watches where as the Russians go at it with a hacksaw and a hand file"
Which i find true to be honest we in the west like fancy things the Russian's just want it to be practical if you look at the F86 its like a sleek sports car compared to the Mig 15 which looks like a tractor.

Russia lags behind in a lot of areas it wasn't until the late 90's waterfall displays started being put into submarines the west had them back in the 70's although i will say a lot of the Russian stuff does use windows (dont think its XP though)
__________________
DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond



Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/

Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/

Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/
Kapitan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-17, 05:26 PM   #59
Kapitan
Sub Test Pilot
 
Kapitan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: UK + Canada
Posts: 7,083
Downloads: 65
Uploads: 7


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JhonSilver View Post
I would like to hear an opinion on the group activities of russian submarines.
This seems rather unrealistic since it makes it difficult to classify a target under conditions of unstable contact and can be fatal.

Whether there were similarities of wolfpacks in reality?
Okean 61 and 77 and later on in 84 operation atrina saw the use of "wolf packs"

the western boats could classify each individual boat and also separate them out too so wasn't a massive issue the diesels especially Foxtrot Romeo Whiskey were noisy for SSK standards as they were multi screwed vessels
__________________
DONT FORGET if you like a post to nominate it by using the blue diamond



Find out about Museum Ships here: https://www.museumships.us/

Flickr for all my pictures: https://www.flickr.com/photos/131313936@N03/

Navy general board articles: https://www.navygeneralboard.com/author/aegis/
Kapitan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-13-17, 05:39 PM   #60
shipkiller1
Electrician's Mate
 
Join Date: Jun 2017
Posts: 136
Downloads: 5
Uploads: 0


Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kapitan View Post
I wouldnt call myself a "fanboy" however i have been in and around most of the Russian fleet for the last 20 years and in my time i have met with big names in the Russian fleets including Admiral Chernavin and Igor Kurdin

The USSR went broke for many reason unsustainable defence spending was one big problem something that was being addressed but too late plus Gorbachev also made his own political mistakes which Yeltsin made his gains.

i'm well aware of the limitations of OTH radars especially the Duga 1 it could detect launches from the USA but not much else but that's all it really needed to do anyway, the technology developed so fast that by the time the thing was built better systems existed and trace the linear history phased array is a development of this, as i said RAF Flying dales in Yorkshire is a phased array OTH radar system it is almost identical to what the Americans use at home.

as for the material a submarine is made from or how fast it goes yes i agree its not always something that matters however it mattered enough that both the USN and RN spent billions to counter the perceived threat with the development of the MK48 ADCAP and Spearfish torpedoes i think that speaks volumes on the threat they perceived, and founded correctly.

If the Mike class went into serial production and was (and yes it was tested) to have the ability to fire a weapon below 850m at a western vessel dont you think you too would want a weapon to counter that threat? the torpedoes of the day couldn't.

The MK48 ADCAP is one of if not the best anti ship/submarine torpedo to date it far exceeds anything the Russians have including VA-111 Skhval, i know for certain i would rather choose the 48 than any other weapon other than spearfish or the now defunct tigerfish.
in 20 years i have probably spent around 7 in Russia and at least 3 of those in the far north.

As for the west building a submarine out of titanium that was deemed by the governments as too costly and unworkable the Russians did have and still do have better gas welding techniques, so much so a lot of titanium parts for a lot of items comes made from Russia, the west is very good with steel however Russia has always been better than us with titanium.

When it comes down to it Russia excels at heavy industry where as the west excels at the service industry and manufacturing.

There's a saying " the west make everything like Swiss watches where as the Russians go at it with a hacksaw and a hand file"
Which i find true to be honest we in the west like fancy things the Russian's just want it to be practical if you look at the F86 its like a sleek sports car compared to the Mig 15 which looks like a tractor.

Russia lags behind in a lot of areas it wasn't until the late 90's waterfall displays started being put into submarines the west had them back in the 70's although i will say a lot of the Russian stuff does use windows (dont think its XP though)
This is not a bad synopsis..

Back in the late 80's and early 90's, as a semi-senior sailor, sometimes we would get new guys who thought the Soviets were stupid and we were going to wipe the floor with them... I had to dispel that notion quickly.

I would tell them that "if you think they are stupid, you are going to die....
Yes, some of their hardware was crap, but some was awesome... Same as in the US and NATO.. "

Militaries are by design conservative organizations. All the fancy new stuff needs to be proven before it is fielded.

If I met a Russian submarine sailor in a bar, I would not start a fight, but by him a beer...
shipkiller1 is online   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2024 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.