|
|
|
New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subject:
RE:Large discrepancy in the published size of Russian submarine
Adamantine
1/26/2005 1:38:43 AM
|
"That does sound strange. You would think if there was agreement on its dimensions then there would be agreement on its displacement."
An agreement in the dimension and the rough shape of a submarine DOES NOT imply that the submerged tonnage has to be exactly. This is because it may not be possible to know the shape of the submarine with 100% accuracy. Furthermore there is also a small discrepancy in the dimension of submarine. BUT the discrepancy should noy be that large. The discrepancy of the publsihed size of Russian submarine can differ by between 30% to 84% !!
If there is a broad agreement in the rough dimension and size of Russian submarine, the discrepancy in size should not be more than 10% with 15% being the limit of inaccuracy.
Once a submarine is completely submerged, its submerged displacement is fixed--it is the volume of water displace by the completely submerged submarine.
The volume is a fixed function of the shape and dimension of the submarine.
You dun need rocket science to computate the tonnage.
The only possibility for such a big discrepancy of toonage can only be attributed to a REAL and SERIOUS disagreement in the shape, length, beam, draft of submarine. Alternately, it can be due to the fact that the intelligent agency refuse to publish what they think to be the most accurate estimates. If this is the case, many private organisation or experts will come up with their own figures and this will greatly complicate matter and you will soon get many different figures with large discrepancy.
Typhoon has twice the beam of Ohio and the cross section of its hull has a cross sectional area of more than 100% bigger than Typhoon (if the general drawing of the shape of the hull is accurate).
If , however the generally published length and the draft and beam of Typhoon are accurate, I would say that Typhoon should weight the 48,000 ton as mentioned by some Russian source.
Yet Janes Defense ONLY credit Typhoon with a SUBMERGED toonage of between 26000 to 29000 ton. Seem to be quite low. If Janes figure is accurate, it will imply that the beam and length of Typhoon is shorter and less wide than generally thought so.
"Maybe the differences are due to submerged versus surfaced displacement"
No, I have double checked, its the different figures given for the submerged weight.
There is also a huge discrepancy of typhon weight on surface ... ... ... |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
