U-Boots -------> US Subs???
U-Boots -------> US Subs???
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
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....
- marcelo_malara
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1847
- Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 11:14 pm
- Location: buenos aires
- Dave Saxton
- Supporter
- Posts: 3148
- Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 9:02 pm
- Location: Rocky Mountains USA
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.
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.
- marcelo_malara
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1847
- Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 11:14 pm
- Location: buenos aires
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.so the Walter engine never actually got put into service????
- marcelo_malara
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1847
- Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 11:14 pm
- Location: buenos aires
Re: U-Boots -------> US Subs???
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.
Re: U-Boots -------> US Subs???
Didn't the use of a similar fuel (only in torpedoes) result in the loss of Kursk with all hands?
- marcelo_malara
- Senior Member
- Posts: 1847
- Joined: Sun Oct 02, 2005 11:14 pm
- Location: buenos aires
Re: U-Boots -------> US Subs???
I think it is one of the theories Bgile.
Re: U-Boots -------> US Subs???
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.marcelo_malara wrote:I think it is one of the theories Bgile.
Re: U-Boots -------> US Subs???
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.
Re: U-Boots -------> US Subs???
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.
Re: U-Boots -------> US Subs???
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.
Hope this helps.