Comments by "Abraham Dozer" (@abrahamdozer6273) on "H I Sutton" channel.

@stubones "It’s a lot shorter than the list of nato equipment and Ukrainian ships the Russians have destroyed" Not much of a list at all. Post one.Let's count them together.
21
@allansmith3837 "Yes and the Royal Navy has never lost a Submarine lmao." Not since WWII in battle. Lots of submarines have been lost by lots of countries (the Soviet Union lost a lot!) but we're talking about subs lost at war. Do try to keep up. "lmao"
15
These Russian dinosaurs always struck me as being propaganda media and not terribly practical warships. The Russian haven't engaged a naval adversary since 1945 and even then in WWII, their surface fleet wasn't up to much. The doctrine of "looking mean" may have eclipsed what they will really need to engage the Americans, British, French, Japanese, etc. in the real world. (You have to wonder if their tank design hasn't fallen into the same deep pit.)
14
@justinchen8583 "none after 1963's Thresher." None after 1968's Scorpion ...
13
Death traps ....
6
Pre-Dreadnought battleships looked like that.
5
@jebise1126 they also designed in a lot of tumblehome until they found they needed that space below the waterline for anti-torpedo belting.
4
@JohnRodriguesPhotographer It kicks up the waterline length and hence the maximum speed of a displacement hull.
3
@ycplum7062 If you are defending a coastline against incursions by nuclear boats, the diesel (or other non nuclear) boats have the upper hand and become the hunters. I would agree that it wouldn't happen in the mid Pacific.
2
It would be a worthwhile boat drone attack to take out the lock doors on the dry dock. That would render the Sevastopol base as far less useful all around.
2
It's pretty hard to make a non magnetic electric motor and they all have them, nuclear boats included.
1
@ycplum7062 Even a hovering helicopter?
1
@ycplum7062 Most of the nuclear boats out there can't operate in shallow coastal waters and none of the boomer subs.
1
@ycplum7062 So, in yet one other way, diesel/electric boats are stealthier. I would never have considered that they might have lower magnetic signatures as well as being quieter. Conventional subs are far more dangerous than their "press" would indicate that they are.
1
@markbrown4442 Hmmm China's first sea battle in their entire history in metal vessels .... seamanship and experience count for a lot. The PLAN is still amateur hour.
1
@Drew Peacock How do you demagnetize things like electric motors?
1
" is there not technology being examined to detect subs by their wakes?" I am aware of a technology whereby they "sniff" the water looking for the ionization products caused by particles emitted from nuclear reactors, thus locating wakes.
1
@Mar-s5q8m .... angles not normal to the direction of flow ... Wouldn't that create cavitation?
1
@Mar-s5q8m Yes, I see ... as long as there is no significant pressure difference between one side and the other ..,
1
It's not just in Australia where the media are the enemy of Defence. If you ask most Canadians about their submarines, they'll tell you "they're crap!" even though the Upholder/Victoria class is one of the best diesel boats out there. There is no publishied information about them that is not negative. The Canadian Armed Forces are terrible at selling themselves.
1
"the ping of an active radar bounces off the air inside the submarine." You need to have a second pressure hull outside of the first one with a vacuum maintained between the two., then.
1
@Kyoptic Yes but the sound waves wouldn't propagate through the vacuum layer in either direction. Anyway, you are right it would be impossible to do. You have to wonder though if the place for a second stealthy sound disrupting layer is between the outer hull and the pressure vessel inside.
1
@Drew Peacock Hmmm. Remove the crew first, if you please.
1
@SteamCrane Maybe so
1
@jebise1126 Our navy is currently building ships to cut through four feet of ice.
1
@jebise1126 It has a bow that cuts like a knife!
1
@jebise1126 True.
1