Именно поэтому я роюсь в документах и выкладываю тексты и анализы документов по истории Холодной Войны, чтоб был взгляд с той стороны, и документальные обоснования.
"резко ограниченные тактические возможности" (лозунг, отдающий дешевой комми-пропагандой, и, скорее всего, оттуда и извлеченный). - Washington Post изрядно удивляется такой своей характеристике. " They gave up what U.S. submarines had had since 1961: the ability to dive to 1,300 feet, the ability to run silent below the deep thermal cline -- a water layer in the ocean that sonar beams could not penetrate -- and to head for the bottom to let the sea and not the sub absorb the impact of an enemy weapon explosion.
By shaving the thickness of the hull, the panel got most of the weight savings the commanders were after, but they substantially narrowed the band of ocean in which the submarine could operate: no deeper than 950 feet. In the holy trinity of speed, stealth and depth, the submarine commanders had sacrificed one important attribute to acquire another." - вот оригинальный текст из статьи 21 сентября 1986 года. Ну и вот цитата из Cold Wars Submarine Полмара и Мура, тоже, безусловно, коммунистическая агитка: The decision to retain HY-80 steel rather than higher-strength HY-100 or HY-130 in U.S. submarines was dictated by their becoming "weight critical" because of increasing propulsion plant size, and difficulties in working the higher-strenghten steel. The penalties for this course of action have not only been restrictions in operating depth, but also a possible reduction in pressure-hull shock resistance, reduction in the nubmer of watertight components, a reduction in reserve buoyancy, and a minimal weight margin to accomodate future growth. In this same period Soviet submarine operating depths increased significantly.
Информация
В рейтинге
Не участвует
Откуда
Калининград (Кенигсберг), Калининградская обл., Россия
Спасибо за дополнение. Вторая часть и есть Беркут (С-25)
Именно поэтому я роюсь в документах и выкладываю тексты и анализы документов по истории Холодной Войны, чтоб был взгляд с той стороны, и документальные обоснования.
"резко ограниченные тактические возможности" (лозунг, отдающий дешевой комми-пропагандой, и, скорее всего, оттуда и извлеченный). - Washington Post изрядно удивляется такой своей характеристике. " They gave up what U.S. submarines had had since 1961: the ability to dive to 1,300 feet, the ability to run silent below the deep thermal cline -- a water layer in the ocean that sonar beams could not penetrate -- and to head for the bottom to let the sea and not the sub absorb the impact of an enemy weapon explosion.
By shaving the thickness of the hull, the panel got most of the weight savings the commanders were after, but they substantially narrowed the band of ocean in which the submarine could operate: no deeper than 950 feet. In the holy trinity of speed, stealth and depth, the submarine commanders had sacrificed one important attribute to acquire another." - вот оригинальный текст из статьи 21 сентября 1986 года.
Ну и вот цитата из Cold Wars Submarine Полмара и Мура, тоже, безусловно, коммунистическая агитка: The decision to retain HY-80 steel rather than higher-strength HY-100 or HY-130 in U.S. submarines was dictated by their becoming "weight critical" because of increasing propulsion plant size, and difficulties in working the higher-strenghten steel. The penalties for this course of action have not only been restrictions in operating depth, but also a possible reduction in pressure-hull shock resistance, reduction in the nubmer of watertight components, a reduction in reserve buoyancy, and a minimal weight margin to accomodate future growth. In this same period Soviet submarine operating depths increased significantly.