U-Boots -------> US Subs???

From the Washington Naval Treaty to the end of the Second World War.
User avatar
miro777
Member
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 2:13 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany

U-Boots -------> US Subs???

Post by miro777 »

hey
i was wondering, IF and HOW those last U-boots in WW2, were related to the new USN subs?
i heard that the USN and the RN took the 'Walter Boote' and searched them and then used the technolgies on their own buildings...
there is also the myth that that even the subs today still 'descend' from the U-boots in 1945.

is that all true or wat are the real connections???


adios
miro
Die See ruft....
User avatar
marcelo_malara
Senior Member
Posts: 1847
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 11:14 pm
Location: buenos aires

Post by marcelo_malara »

Well, as far as I know the Walter closed cycle engine was studied in England, but discarded to put operationally.
As for the hull form, the Albacore is considered the "father" of the modern submarine´s hull form, don´t believe has much connection with the Type XXIII.
User avatar
Dave Saxton
Supporter
Posts: 3148
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Rocky Mountains USA

Post by Dave Saxton »

According to Friedman the latter model U-boats were very influential on post war USN submarine design, such as the Nautilus. One of the specific contributions were the hull form and hydrodynamics research. The research in submarine technology being done in Germany was cutting edge and very useful.
User avatar
miro777
Member
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 2:13 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Post by miro777 »

hey
so the Walter boats don't really have to do anything with the new subs.
so the Walter engine never actually got put into service????

well then
adios miro
Die See ruft....
Bgile
Senior Member
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Post by Bgile »

The first class of postwar US diesel submarines definitely incorporated some of the better characteristics of late war U-boats. There was a visual similiarity even. The powerplant remained diesel-electric as before, though. The Nautilus hull design was an evolution of this.

With the Albacore, things changed a lot. The 3 (diesel) submarines of the Barbel class utilized that type of hull, as did every nuclear submarine to follow, right up to the present day. If you see a US submarine in drydock, it looks very much like a torpedo with a vertical fin on top. When preparing to submerge, even the cleats for mooring are folded under to make the hull as smooth as possible.
User avatar
marcelo_malara
Senior Member
Posts: 1847
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 11:14 pm
Location: buenos aires

Post by marcelo_malara »

so the Walter engine never actually got put into service????
The closed cycle Walter engine used the highly unstable and explosive hydrogen peroxyde (H2O2). I don´t believe it was used operationally in Germany, but it wasn´t used in the US Navy and in the Royal Navy in other tasks than research. The Type XXIII sub taken by the Royal Navy was renamed HMS Explorer, but it was known among her crew as HMS Exploder.
User avatar
miro777
Member
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Feb 06, 2006 2:13 pm
Location: Hamburg, Germany

Post by miro777 »

hey
thanx for the info
yeah i read all about those highly explosive thing Walter used.
But if they'd work the underwater speed would have been HUGE!!!
i forgot the details.

adios
miro

(btw just a note isn't it U-Boots, rather than U-boats)
Die See ruft....
User avatar
marcelo_malara
Senior Member
Posts: 1847
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 11:14 pm
Location: buenos aires

Post by marcelo_malara »

Well, in fact the hydrogen peroxide is used in torpedo propulsion and in space ship´s manouvering rockets.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: U-Boots -------> US Subs???

Post by RF »

I presume that the German ideas on propulsion were superceded by the development of nuclear power, both more stable and more efficient.
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
Bgile
Senior Member
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Re: U-Boots -------> US Subs???

Post by Bgile »

Didn't the use of a similar fuel (only in torpedoes) result in the loss of Kursk with all hands?
User avatar
marcelo_malara
Senior Member
Posts: 1847
Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 11:14 pm
Location: buenos aires

Re: U-Boots -------> US Subs???

Post by marcelo_malara »

I think it is one of the theories Bgile.
Bgile
Senior Member
Posts: 3658
Joined: Wed Mar 09, 2005 7:33 pm
Location: Portland, OR, USA

Re: U-Boots -------> US Subs???

Post by Bgile »

marcelo_malara wrote:I think it is one of the theories Bgile.
I know it was the result of an explosion in the torpedo room at the time they were preparing a test shoot. I am not positive ... my memory isn't as good as it used to be, but I think a recent documentary stated that the Russians had recovered the bow section of the submarine (it had been cut off prior to recovering the rest of it) and their investigation had determined that was the cause.
dunmunro
Senior Member
Posts: 4394
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 1:25 am
Location: Langley BC Canada

Re: U-Boots -------> US Subs???

Post by dunmunro »

All immediate post war subs were heavily influenced by the KM Type 21 hull form. However, it was the RN WW1 R class that was the prototype of today's streamlined "albacore" style subs.
User avatar
RF
Senior Member
Posts: 7760
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 1:15 pm
Location: Wolverhampton, ENGLAND

Re: U-Boots -------> US Subs???

Post by RF »

My impression from the Russian investigation into the cause of the loss of Kursk was that it was one of the torpedoes that exploded, am I right in this?
''Give me a Ping and one Ping only'' - Sean Connery.
iankw
Member
Posts: 196
Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2004 11:41 pm
Location: Rotherham, England

Re: U-Boots -------> US Subs???

Post by iankw »

This is stretching my memory a bit but, from what I remember, the theory is that a hydrogen peroxide explosion and fire caused the explosion of one, or more, torpedoes. Originally the Russians tried to pin the disaster on to a collision between a US sub and the Kursk. However, seismic readings from some place in Scotland (I think), saw two similar events on a seismometer chart, separated by a certain time (can't remember how long). This lead to the theory that there were two explosions, a smaller one followed by a larger, catastrophic one. From this the idea of the peroxide explosion came about. Apparently we, the British, stopped using peroxide after a similar experience in a dockyard prior to WW2.

Hope this helps.
Post Reply