High-explosive cumulative torpedoes: a powerful argument in submarine warfare

Cumulative high-explosive torpedo Stingray. Photo: seaforces.org

Difficult target

What needs to be done to destroy a modern two-hull submarine? First of all, it is necessary to punch up to 50 mm of the external acoustic rubber layer, then about 10 mm of light-weight steel follows, a ballast water layer up to one and a half meters thick and, finally, about 8 cm of high-strength steel of the main body. For guaranteed defeat of such "armor", it is required to deliver at least 200 kilograms of explosives to the boat, and for this the carrier, that is, a torpedo or a rocket, must be very large. As one of the exits, gunsmith engineers suggest using several small torpedoes for the attack (it is required that they also hit approximately one part of the submarine), which is not much more effective than using one large 400-mm torpedo.

Small-sized Mk-46. Photo: seaforces.org

There is a need for the development of new schemes for underwater ammunition, the design of which departs from traditional high-explosive combat charging compartments with contact and non-contact fuses. As an option, the use of plastisol and aluminized explosives is considered, providing an excellent high-explosive effect in combination with a low shock-wave sensitivity. To increase the effective impact of a high-explosive torpedo on the hull of a submarine, multipoint charge initiation is used, which allows directing most of the energy of the detonation wave in the desired direction. Also, the superposition of shock waves from a synchronous explosion when exposed to the hull of a submarine looks effective - for this, several small torpedoes can be used. Finally, the most promising is the development of cumulative torpedoes by analogy with the "land" methods of combating heavily armored objects.

Small-sized anti-submarine torpedoes with cumulatively high-explosive combat loading compartments: a - torpedo MU-90 Umpact; b - torpedo Stingray "; c - torpedo TT-4. 1 - nasal compartment; 2 - combat charging compartment; 3 - instrument compartment; 4 - power unit compartment; 5 - aft compartment; 6 - braking and stabilization system. Source: Izvestia RARAN

At first glance, the cumulative torpedo is just a godsend for submarine hunters. The dimensions of such ammunition can be much smaller than traditional torpedoes, which allows you to mount them in pieces at once, even on an anti-submarine helicopter. In addition, the submarines have not yet been equipped with specific protection against such torpedoes by analogy with land-based armored vehicles, which makes them especially vulnerable to narrowly targeted gas-cumulative flows of detonating munitions. Among the specific conditions for the use of cumulative torpedoes, the requirement of observing the direction of the axis of the cumulative charge with the smallest deviation from the normal stands out. Simply put, if a high-explosive shell does not make much difference from which angle to approach the target, then the cumulative torpedo is important in time to orientate relative to the hull of the submarine. In full analogy with modern anti-tank anti-tank munitions, the developers of the domestic anti-submarine weapons offer to get away from the axial location of the cumulative charge. You can place charges either obliquely to the axis of the torpedo, or generally transversely - this allows you to hit the target on a “miss”. The transverse arrangement of the cumulative charge is advantageous in the absence of a massive torpedo head on the path of the damaging stream (no need to pierce the instrument compartment of the ammunition) and allows you to increase the diameter of the cumulative funnel without particularly increasing the dimensions of the ammunition. A new design complication is torpedoes. There will be a sensitive non-contact fuse taking into account the position of the ammunition relative to the submarine skin - no one has canceled the requirement of the smallest deviation from the normal.

The results of experimental studies in the laboratories of MSTU. N.E. Bauman. General view of the destruction of the barrier under the action of cumulative and high-explosive charges depending on the distance of the center of mass of the explosive charge to the obstacle: a - a distance of 13,6 times the radius of the explosive charge reduced to spherical, b - 3,8 radius of the explosive, c - 1,6 of the radius of the explosive and g - 1,1 of the radius of the explosive. Source: Izvestia RARAN

Researchers involved in the MSTU. N.E. Bauman problems of cumulative weapons, point to another potential drawback of such torpedoes - small diameter holes. In the case of using a large high-explosive charge, a deflection is formed on the casing, which subsequently breaks with the formation of oblong cracks. This occurs mainly in areas of greatest stress in the areas of frames. The cumulative stream leaves behind a through hole, not exceeding a width of 0,2-0,3 diameter of the internal cumulative lining of the munition. It is for this reason that now the most promising direction is the development of high-explosive-cumulative ammunition that combines high penetration and destruction of the submarine skin by the mechanism of crack formation.

324 millimeter

Mathematical calculations showed that it is possible to sink such a difficult target as a Los Angeles submarine at half the maximum depth by making a hole with a diameter of 180 mm in the skin, and at a shallow 50-meter depth, the width of the hole should be no less than 350 mm That is, the diameter of the cumulative charge in this case expands to 500 mm - and this is the minimum possible option. Only such a torpedo, which can no longer be called small-sized, can guaranteedly sink a nuclear submarine missile carrier. Only now small-sized torpedoes with a cumulative charge now have a diameter of only 324 mm, which even in the most successful outcome of an attack will form a through hole in Los Angeles with a diameter of only 75 mm.

Among the domestic developments in the 324-mm form factor, the small-sized anti-submarine stands out aviation torpedo TT-4 with a mass of explosives of 34 kilograms. In domestic cumulative torpedoes, TNT-TNT and TNT-Octogen explosive compositions with powdered aluminum are used as a charge: mixtures of MS-2, MS-2C, TG-40, THFA-30 and TOKFAL-37. Such explosives have relatively low detonation and density parameters, but high calorific value and fire and explosion safety.

Cumulative high-explosive combat charge compartments of small anti-submarine torpedoes: а - torpedo МВ-90 Umpact (France, Germany, Italy); b - SeaPike torpedo project (Germany). Source: Izvestia RARAN

In NATO countries, similar torpedoes of the Mk-46 modification 5A, containing 44,5 kilograms of the powerful blasting high explosive explosive PBXN-103 or PBXN-105, as well as expensive copper conical cumulative lining, were widely used. The torpedo allows you to approach the head of the submarine to orient the head part along the normal, or close to the perpendicular direction. Since 1997, serial joint Franco-German-Italian production of the small-sized cumulative torpedo MU-90 Umpact with a diameter of 324 mm has been carried out. In this munition, according to various sources, from 32,8 to 59 kg of explosive is stored, as it is assumed, made on the basis of triaminotrinitrobenzene. The next in the regiment of 324-mm torpedoes is the advanced Stingray with 45 kilograms of explosives of the PBX-104 type and the traditional already copper conical lining of the cumulative warhead. This torpedo is also equipped with a positioning system for the warhead, which ensures that the ammunition is brought to a course perpendicular to the surface of the submarine's hull.

324 mm small torpedo MU-90 Umpact. Photo: defense24.pl

However, all of the presented cumulative torpedoes have one common drawback - the presence of the head instrument compartment, which contributes to the dispersal of the cumulative jet. That is why the development of torpedoes with a transverse arrangement of a cumulative charge is of particular importance, as mentioned above. Naturally, engineers are trying to enhance the power of the cumulative charge with additional high-explosive effects. This allows in addition to a narrow through hole to form dents on the surface of the submarine with extensive steel ruptures, which can be fatal for the submarine. Another way out of the situation could be the strengthening of the backward action of cumulative torpedoes when explosives are brought into the hole, or others, as they are called, “active materials”. However, this approach has not yet received a more conceptual and real embodiment. This problem is partially solved by giving the cumulative cladding the shape of a meniscus, which makes it possible to form a shock core during detonation. As you know, such a core will leave a hole in the skin of a submarine serious and will destroy a lot inside the hull, but the penetration depth leaves much to be desired. As an option, the Russian torpedo TT-4 uses a combined cone and sphere lining, which makes it possible to obtain a hybrid jet with a large penetration depth and a small focal length, as well as a relatively large hole diameter.

Based on materials from the periodical "Izvestia RARAN".

Comments

[Snail N9]

On the Kursk one could clearly see a hole very similar as in the photo from cumulative torpedoes, directed slightly at an angle to the nose, near the bow of the submarine cut off and left at the bottom (why? What did they want to hide?). This byrka was called a "technological hole" against the background of the previously formed dent "Yeah .:

[BREAKTHROUGH READY]

A hole cut with a cutter was visible on the Kursk; it could not have anything to do with the torpedo. And the reason for the flooding was the detonation of the bow torpedoes, i.e. in a compartment that was far from this hole.

[bugagich]

there really was a hole in the LC, but not clearly cut out at once. from the starboard side. and, indeed, with a dent to the nose. but this is definitely not a trail of some kind of torpedo. there were stringers just opposite this "hole", and there were no traces on the PC.
I mean, the nose was cut off, but even taking into account the dent (if it was a torpedo), she did not go beyond the remaining building. those. if there was a torpedo, then it would fall into the remaining stiffnesses (though the part was already cut off). and the solid body along this trajectory was intact.
surrenders, these are traces of some kind of underwater work during the ascent or something random at the time of death. but the hole is painfully regular. I remember all tyrnet bloomed with these pictures ...
although the first is much more real than the second, as it seems to me.

Quote: READY FOR BREAKTHROUGH

And the cause of flooding was the detonation of nasal torpedoes

off the version is far from a fact ...

[Bad_gr]

Quote: bugagich

there was a hole in the LC

It ? For cumulative, it is too big. And a dent in.

[bugagich]

Yes it. I did not say that they are cumulative.

Quote: bugagich

traces of some underwater work when climbing or something random at the time of death

[Bad_gr]

Quote: bugagich

I did not say that they are cumulative.

Yes, these are my thoughts. If you are guided by people standing nearby, then the diameter of the hole is approximately 1,5 m (it seems to me). It does not fit the diameter of torpedoes.

[Nemchinov Vl]

Quote: Bad_gr

If you focus on people standing nearby, then the diameter of the hole is approximately 1,5 m (it seems to me)

Ahhh, that means people nearby are 3-3,5 meter high ...?!

[Chaldon48]

In general, someone can clearly explain what kind of technology according to which a hole must be drilled in the hull of a sunken submarine.

[Nemchinov Vl]

Quote: bugagich

... there really was a hole in the LC, but not explicitly cut out. from the starboard side. and, indeed, with a dent in the nose. but this is definitely not the trail of a torpedo.

? !! ? !!

Quote: bugagich

... these are traces of some kind of underwater work when climbing or something random ...

? !! think peanut trace ... ? !!

[tlauicol]

Swedish asw 601 bombs the size of a thermos at a diameter of 10cm pierce 5mm steel under water, then a meter of water, and two layers of spaced armor 35 + 80mm - so that there is nothing impossible for the cumulative, and the torpedoes have a reserve for high explosive impact.
Although I would advocate universal heavy torpedoes on ships in fixed vehicles: they will break the boat and break the tanker, range, speed, homing is better than small ones

[Santa Fe]

layer of spaced armor 35 + 80mm

The translator was wrong

In the official specification all the indicated figures appear, only they relate to the distance

30-85 are elevation angles in degrees))))

And everything else is twisted as well

3. It is difficult to make estimates for cum charges having multiple size differences. Everything is non-linear there

4. The very name of a high-explosive cumulative charge sounds like anti-tank shrapnel or anti-aircraft howitzer. Everyone repeats this nonsense without going into the meaning

Cumulative effect - the products of the explosion form a stream, "washing out" the hole in the barrier. Where can the explosive impact come from at this time (a rhetorical question)

[tlauicol]

Did the video translator also misinterpret?

[tlauicol]

at 4:30 all these numbers are also there

[Santa Fe]

But it doesn’t say that 80 mm pierced

80 mm - just the bottom lining, for measure

And the through hole is only in the 35 mm plate

[tlauicol]

Oleg, in any case, it’s not about pointing degrees, you are mistaken, not a translator. But even if this bundle pierced only two spaced layers through a meter of water ... How many centuries are there? A couple of kg?

[Santa Fe]

In such descriptions you need to be careful. Especially in another language

Similar combinations of numbers - always a reason to doubt
As well as obviously unrealistic facts

Thermos - there will be a hole in the centimeter.

The sizes are cum. holes weakly correlate with charge mass

[tlauicol]

there is about pointing angles, by the way 70-110 - you need to be careful.
the main thing here is that godfather. a jet can penetrate spaced layers of steel in water to a considerable depth. the boat will crash anyway at best.
Of course, I like the instant killing of a boat with a heavy torpedo or bomb, but the evolution of PLO went that way.

[Romario_Argo]

maybe it makes sense not to switch to one and a half hull boats but to introduce something new
the external and internal are combined into one strong case up to 3 meters thick, and the external light one will also be a double strong case

[Alf]

Quote: Santa Fe

The name itself is a high-explosive cumulative charge sounds like anti-tank shrapnel or anti-aircraft howitzer.

And then what to call it?

Cumulative-fragmentation projectile (CBS, sometimes also called multifunctional projectile) - the main artillery ammunition that combines a pronounced cumulative and weaker high-explosive fragmentation effect.

[Simargl]

Quote: Santa Fe

Cumulative effect - the products of the explosion form a stream, "washing out" the hole in the barrier. Where can the explosive impact come from at this time (a rhetorical question)

To begin with, a cumulative projectile (the one that flies after the detonation of the ammunition) is not a jet - its temperature is much lower than the melting point of the metal. A cumulative projectile is formed by compressing a sufficiently soft metal into a shape close to the cylinder, breaking through an obstacle ensures the acceleration of this "cylinder" to high speeds ...
If you add a slower, but higher explosive substance, then not only will the barrier be extended, but also damage to the surface (for a submarine - a soft body, for a tank - instruments, DZ), as well as a violation of the strength of the armor (dents, cracks).

Quote: Santa Fe

The name itself is a high-explosive cumulative charge sounds like anti-tank shrapnel or anti-aircraft howitzer. Everyone repeats this nonsense without going into the meaning

Spatter optics? nonsense! ... or not?
And how will a howitzer, with the corresponding instruments, be worse against attack aircraft?

[merkava-2bet]

The Swedish Saab ASW-601 bomb was not designed to destroy a submarine but inflict light damage and make it float. The fact is that the Swedes got boat-phobia after 1981, when the Soviet Project 363 S-613 boat surfaced in Swedish waterways near their military base. For example, Gothenburg-type corvettes can carry four 400 mm torpedo tubes in addition to the bomb, so if you need to destroy the boat, there are no problems. But the Swedes are more humane, forced to float and then PR to the camera.

[The leader of the Redskins]

Thanks to the author for interesting material. Never before heard of these types of weapons.

[Andrey77]

Torpedo weapons have always been a secret topic. Why - hell knows. Well, a torpedo and a torpedo: guidance system, warhead, electric motor and screw. What else is there to invent?

[Alf]

Quote: Andrey77

Torpedo weapons have always been a secret topic.

Rather, not sufficiently promoted. Here the tank is Yes, here it is, big, strong, with a long barrel or a fighter, all of itself elegant, with a bunch of missiles, and what is a torpedo? Something round, long, not visible, and there are no aces on it with hundreds of victories.

[Andrey77]

Precisely that secret. In 2002 I went to JSC "Gidropribor" (now "Marine underwater weapon - Gidropribor") for an interview. They immediately said - issue access to the state secret for 1 group. Just from the doorway. I got a job as a programmer. I went to Liteiny'4 (FSB for St. Petersburg and Leningrad Oblast) and ... spat on them (gidropribor). Everything is grown up there.

[bugagich]

Quote: Andrey77

What else is there to invent?

probably heard about toucan-2 (one of the non-acoustic detection systems on the wake trail)? so there’s something similar (more precisely, GOS on a similar principle) on the torpedoes. which is not news. so you can invent a lot.

[garri-lin]

Dangling copper? And what is cheaper? Multi-focus charges?

[Operator]

A short-focus charge like an impact core with a tantalum lining of a cumulative recess pierces a hole with a diameter equal to the diameter of a torpedo. A tandem strike core will pierce both hulls of the submarine. Then the high-explosive part of the charge will work to defeat the crew in the compartment.

The problem of reducing the penetration rate of the first shock core due to the presence of the GOS is solved by shooting the GOS before undermining the nucleus.

What are they doing there in their MVTU?

[tlauicol]

tantalum will penetrate to the DEPTH of steel equal to the diameter of the torpedo. And the core itself is a quarter of the diameter. Relying on the destruction of small nuclear submarines or surfacing under fire large. I would return to 533mm torpedoes - "moment at sea"

[CTABEP]

You can't stuff 533-mm into PLUR. More precisely, you can shove it, but then such a PLUR will not fit into the Caliber mine, you will have to make a whole cruiser under it. Plus torpedo tubes for such a caliber really take up a lot of space, where to shove it on frigates of project 22350 for example? Although, we have an intermediate version - 400-mm torpedoes from "Trumpet" and "Waterfall", to make a normal torpedo tube for them (and not this misunderstanding with the powder start now) - and perhaps some of the problems will be solved. Although, with torpedoes, we somehow do not really add up :(

[tlauicol]

4 fixed TAs even interfere with Mpc, on missile boats of 250 tons each. Such a torpedo will significantly expand the radius of Plo, and it will work against ships

[Operator]

The diameter of the hole depends on the distance between the point of detonation of the impact nucleus and the obstacle, at zero distance (laying the nucleus on the obstacle as in engineering ammunition for breaking through armored caps of bunkers) and tantalum lining, the diameter of the punched hole will be equal to the diameter of the torpedo - in this case, naturally, the penetration depth decreases. But for the case of a light submarine hull (50 mm rubber + 10 mm steel), the penetration depth of the first core will be sufficient. A solid submarine hull (80 mm) makes its way through the second core with a non-zero distance to the obstacle and a smaller hole diameter.

You can also use a tandem of annular long-focus cumulative charges, guaranteed to cut a hole in the obstacles with a diameter of the torpedo body.

Those. the question remains open - what are they doing there at MVTU?

[tlauicol]

This will not work against the single-hull apl - she immediately has a thick skin

[Operator]

In the case of a single-hull submarine, the pre-charge in the water of the impact core will rip off the rubber coating, and the ring shaped charge will cut a hole in the submarine’s solid hull — slightly less than the torpedo’s diameter (a linear analogue is the KZ-6 engineering shaped charge with armor penetration of 100 mm)

[Operator]

In conclusion, information for retarded MVTU employees on modern devices for cumulative perforation of steel structures

https://studfile.net/preview/8095287/

[tlauicol]

Yes, it’s not going to tear, it’ll just make a hole in rubber and steel. Only what for it is needed, a precharge? If in one warhead it is possible to form a cum stream and a core after it? Only extra difficulties and burdens

[Operator]

If you have one cumulative charge in the torpedo, then in the case of a two-hull submarine, he will have to penetrate not only two steel barriers, but also a meter-long layer of water between them.

[tlauicol]

pf what nonsense. at 4:30

[Operator]

An inch hole is about nothing (see article).

In addition, all sane countries for the fight against submarines switched to the use of homing torpedoes with a range of several miles and only the Swedes (who know a lot about perversions) still use unguided gravity munitions with a range of several cable

[tlauicol]

Of course, nothing. But it's ammo the size of a thermos. How many explosives are there? Less plumage, minus a jet engine. And so it sews
For a torpedo, even a 13-inch one does not need a precharge, there is enough foolishness to pierce the boats through and through.

[Operator]

All long-focus cumulative charges make inch holes, regardless of the diameter and mass of the charge - since the working fluid for breaking through the obstacles for all of them is a thin stream of metal (pest) with a diameter of ~ 10 mm.

[tlauicol]

The pestle is not telephoto, and its diameter is a quarter of the diameter of the torpedo, not 10mm. It will significantly expand the hole + explosive impact and water hammer. Will not be enough

[Alf]

Quote: Operator

gravity ammunition

What is this?

[Operator]

Heavier than water - drown under their own weight.

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Tlauicol

This will not work against the single-hull apl - she immediately has a thick skin

If this happens, then it is the single-hull submarine that will suffer the most. And the skin is now not very thick, only 4,0-4,5 cm of polymer coating. Jellyfish -2 was leaner - 10-15 cm.

Quote: Operator

a linear analogue is the KZ-6 engineering cumulative charge with 100 mm armor penetration

This is if it is attached directly to the obstacle, when the impact core immediately along the obstacle ...

Quote: Operator

If you have one cumulative charge in the torpedo, then in the case of a two-hull submarine, he will have to penetrate not only two steel barriers, but also a meter-long layer of water between them.

Yes, and not just a meter, and sometimes 1,5-2,0 meter! And by no means an empty space ... We have both the VVD cylinders there, and the auxiliary mechanisms for closing the scuppers and even the mooring device ... Therefore, it is not a fact that the shock core will reach the PC at all! Yes, the boat will receive damage, but not critical.

Quote: Operator

only the Swedes (who know a lot about perversions) still use unguided gravitational ammunition with a range of several cable

The range is really funny: 150-450m. And the probability of hitting the SP = 0,13 - 0,16%. This is essentially a "scarecrow" for the submarine to begin to evade and thereby substituted for the PLO TO.
In fact:
In general, I have big doubts about the effectiveness of small-sized torpedoes. Without GOS, it is not about anything. Shooting the GOS before the torpedo hits the submarine's LK? And what about the disturbance of the environment, and will the BZO with the shock core "attach" to the submarine's hull after such an explosion? These are all tough questions. And the main one is what will happen to the cumulative jet after encountering obstacles between the LC and the PC? what will remain of it when 1,5m of water passes (!), because this medium is not air at all. And its heat capacity is completely different!

[tlauicol]

Ohio also has a thick skin.
And about all these troubles with easily torpedoes .. that's why I stand for 533mm universal torpedoes.

[bk0010]

I don’t understand which cumulus. the stream may be in question after passing 1.5 m of water. Why is it not collapsing?

[tlauicol]

Does not want Swedish quality. Made wisely

[Morzh Redkovich Borschitsky]

Tantalum is needed here, tungsten is needed for bullets. I hope that they will pick up heavy isotopes that can be produced at nuclear power plants to replace them.

[Simple]

What needs to be done to destroy a modern double-hulled submarine?

It is enough to break through a couple of ballast tanks.

[BREAKTHROUGH READY]

sink ... Los Angeles, ”at half the maximum depth, you can make a hole in the skin with a diameter of 180 mm, and at a shallow 50-meter depth, the width of the hole should already be at least 350 mm.

some sort of schizany research. Flooding the entire submarine equally will not work due to the presence of automatic internal partitions, but to flood the compartment in a matter of seconds, a 35-centimeter diameter hole is not numb at all.
Torpedoes with a caliber of 324 mm may not be able to flood the nuclear submarine, but inflicting very severe damage by flooding the compartment and tearing the outer skin into shreds is easy.

[agond]

If a small torpedo in a sturdy hull made a small hole (which can be plugged with a cork), the boat is still detected, the first will be followed by the second, third ..., the boat is doomed. If the attack with small torpedoes will have a massive character, then the presence of an external light body, and many compartments, no matter how many there are, will not help, do not entertain yourself with children's illusions. No one will spare the torpedoes on the flooding of our PD (underwater airship)

[BREAKTHROUGH READY]

If a small torpedo in a sturdy hull made a small hole (which can be plugged with a cork)

This "small hole" will be more than 15 centimeters in diameter, which at a depth of 50 meters will give a water pressure of 200 kgf, which will not be plugged in the shortest possible time, and in a minute the compartment will take 12 tons of water, and so on until the pressure equals with all accompanying consequences. Surely they will be very heavy for a submarine ...
And this is a quick estimate for shallow water, on which nuclear powered ships do not go, at a depth of a few hundred meters close to reality, the submariners will not even have time to get scared.

If the attack with small torpedoes will be massive

"massive character" in this case is unlikely in view of the fact that "small" torpedoes are mainly armed with anti-submarine aircraft, which has a limited carrying capacity. ...

[Morzh Redkovich Borschitsky]

And if the explosive charge is made in the form of a roll of wallpaper that torpedoes unwinds on the side of the submarine and detonates the unwound strip? it will turn out “one-palm popping” over water and body, no?

[agond]

Quote: READY FOR BREAKTHROUGH

at a depth close to reality of several hundred meters, the submariners will not even have time to get scared.

In order to have time to get scared, it’s necessary to do the submarine with an external strong case, and keep the ballast water inside, then it will be possible -
A - make an external patch, plug, cork, patch (as they used to say in the sailing fleet), that is, some kind of mobile automatic device located outside the submarine and, in the event of a hole in the sturdy hull, quickly moves from its storage location (for example, somewhere behind the cabin) to the place of hole formation in order to close the hole outside, thereby sealing it. Such a patch-robot will have time to seal a hole and meter per meter in 10 seconds at the working depth for the boat, provided that the partitions of adjacent compartments can withstand pressure, and the submarine itself does not fall deeper during this time, during which time it is necessary to pump out water from the damaged compartment.
That's just such an external movable patch does not help with two or more holes.

[petrol cutter]

Yeah The question is of course interesting.
And the first thing that occurred to me was the end of deep bombs. Like a class.
At the same time, (here, of course, you will regret skipping school) some doubts attend.
After all, a submarine is still not a tank. She is in the midst of water. There is such a thing as water hammer. And as far as I heard, the water unfortunately does not shrink. And maybe fortunately. The devil knows him. This is for someone like.
And in my non-professional opinion, the whole satanic essence of the struggle against bathyscaphes and submarines to the heap is based on this.
Submarines had to be seen both outside and inside (so to speak in the context). There, one should not forget that behind the rubber and the light body, tanks / cylinders of the VVD (high pressure air) are usually located. And not just ballast seawater.
With this, the VVD actually blows up ballast for ascent. What is the conclusion from this? If the light body is damaged (rubber is unlikely to help), there is a huge probability of damage to the VVD tanks. And the boat, goodbye dear crew.
It is not necessary to have some cumulative torpedoes.
I could be wrong.

[agond]

When there is no argumentation, they turn to personalities, for example, they lower the rating, but I don't care about it, like stripes with stripes (I'm not a military man) ... and so we continue the conversation, .. a torpedo does not always have to have an armor-piercing high-explosive or shaped charge, it is possible at all to dispense with a charge if it is equipped with a device for "sticking" to the submarine body, in order to further unmask it with sound signals. such a torpedo bell can be very small and relatively cheap (sound can even be generated from an oncoming stream of water) and, most importantly, it can be used in peacetime.

[petrol cutter]

I did not minus, I am always for a constructive conversation.
As far as I know, submarines are first discovered by some methods.
Then they accompany her, as long as they decide at this time what to do with her? And most importantly, they look at what she does.
If there is an order to destroy this boat, then all possible forces are advanced.

[Andrey77]

I could be wrong too, but the VVD tank is not alone. The destruction of one is painful, but not critical. Also (according to memoirs), there is an emergency reserve of the VVD.

[AAK]

Colleagues, I am not special in anti-submarine weapons, and especially in their characteristics, from the word at all, but some colleagues, in my opinion, give very professional arguments from an engineering point of view ... I'm really interested, but I apologize, is it too frankly, let’s say ...

[petrol cutter]

No. Those who subscribed here will not be unnecessary.
Moreover, it must be said, to my surprise, the comrades from the First Division are actually not quite sleeping. We must give them their due
Our company has already invited comrades to clarify what and where to report. However much I would not blabber though.

[Andrey77]

"Comrades from Department 1" publish articles here, and then look at the comments. :)

[Operator]

Quote: Tlauicol

The pestle is not telephoto, and its diameter is a quarter of the diameter of the torpedo

Yeah yeah

Long-focus are not pestles, but cumulative charges, which differ in a conical notch in the explosive (rather than hemispherical as in short-focus ones).

Any long-focus short-circuit by default generates a stream - a pest of fluidized metal cladding of the smallest possible diameter (~ 10 mm) and the largest possible length to provide increased pressure at the point of contact with the barrier. The small diameter allows the pestle in the case of a short-circuit torpedo and a two-hull submarine structure to pass through the water with minimal hydrodynamic resistance.

But the same small diameter does not allow the pest to make a hole in a sturdy case of the desired diameter (see article).

[tlauicol]

"Jet" is not equal to "pest"

[Whalebone]

And if a small torpedo, and it’s better to demolish the rotor-steering gear a couple, it will not pull on the destruction of the boat? What will happen to the submarine, which has lost deep screws and steering wheels? Will pop up? Drown? Freezes up? Are there submariners here?

[petrol cutter]

If you take down the submarine propeller-steering group ...
This is the end for submarines on combat duty. There is no need to call submariners. They all will not answer one thing.
How do you imagine the explosion of one or two torpedoes under the keel of a submarine? And with the demolition of the screws / rudders?
It will be a blow of such strength that it would be better if we did not know this!
I don’t go to my grandmother; the boat will go to the bottom with a trim in the stern. And our children will not be born, they will not give us flowers ...

[agond]

Against a submarine with an outer strong hull, the cumulative torpedoes are the most, the outer hull will even break through the charge from an RPG, so torpedoes can be very small and massive attacks can be used.

[Andrey77]

The boat will lose course unambiguously. If they manage to get in time, emergency blowing of all tanks may give a chance. To straighten a boat, in this situation, will be a fatal mistake. The opinion of the amateur.