General Discussions
This is the place to discuss general issues related to the U-boat war or the war at sea in WWII.
RE: Who builds the best diesel/electric boats?
Posted by:
Kris
()
Date: May 23, 2001 05:09PM
<HTML>Hi Yuri
Thanks for your reply. Although, i appreciate your response, I was wondering if a comparison is worthwhile between these seemingly formidable boats. Oscar II is pretty menacing in terms of its size and firepower and that its original intentions were to destroy American carriers. I did read somewhere and i am not sure that it houses pretty sophisticated electronics packages and carries the fast torpedoes (300mi/hr speed). Apparently it is also designed to live underwater (1800 meters or better) for about a year or some ridiculous period of time (I suppose the Russians have experimented vastly in extended periods of stay in non-oxygenous atmospheres - Space, Deep sea). I am not sure with the economic collapse of Russia, how much the menace of Oscar II really counts. With the whole state in disarray, is this submarine platform really operational to the maximum effeciency. It could be if some other nation such as China tried acquiring it(as they have not broken down both politically and economically). The reason i say this is because a weapons platform is effective if along with all the smart devices on board, its crew is equivalently effective in using it. America certainly has the money to train their resources to stay effective whereas Russia does not. But if each sides\' submersible nuclear platforms are out in the waters in a Mexican standoff, who is likely to come out the better. What really matters here? Is it - The waters, the men, the missiles, the electronics, double pressure hull, silent motors, geographic location (which will be the waters) etc. I am inclined to think it will be a combination of all. If you take the Los Angeles class sub, its combined firepower is probably capable of being that much of all the gunpowder expended so far in all the wars fought by man. Its presence in coastal waters in any ocean around the world should be enough to stave off belligerent poses by nations thinking of war.
Kris</HTML>
Thanks for your reply. Although, i appreciate your response, I was wondering if a comparison is worthwhile between these seemingly formidable boats. Oscar II is pretty menacing in terms of its size and firepower and that its original intentions were to destroy American carriers. I did read somewhere and i am not sure that it houses pretty sophisticated electronics packages and carries the fast torpedoes (300mi/hr speed). Apparently it is also designed to live underwater (1800 meters or better) for about a year or some ridiculous period of time (I suppose the Russians have experimented vastly in extended periods of stay in non-oxygenous atmospheres - Space, Deep sea). I am not sure with the economic collapse of Russia, how much the menace of Oscar II really counts. With the whole state in disarray, is this submarine platform really operational to the maximum effeciency. It could be if some other nation such as China tried acquiring it(as they have not broken down both politically and economically). The reason i say this is because a weapons platform is effective if along with all the smart devices on board, its crew is equivalently effective in using it. America certainly has the money to train their resources to stay effective whereas Russia does not. But if each sides\' submersible nuclear platforms are out in the waters in a Mexican standoff, who is likely to come out the better. What really matters here? Is it - The waters, the men, the missiles, the electronics, double pressure hull, silent motors, geographic location (which will be the waters) etc. I am inclined to think it will be a combination of all. If you take the Los Angeles class sub, its combined firepower is probably capable of being that much of all the gunpowder expended so far in all the wars fought by man. Its presence in coastal waters in any ocean around the world should be enough to stave off belligerent poses by nations thinking of war.
Kris</HTML>
