Are modern warships armour plated?
Discussion
It is not designed to stop the shaft being damaged by a direct torpedo hit, rather to stop the shaft breaking loose in the event of a nearby hit or shock load.
But generally lots of lessons have been learnt (and sometimes subsequently forgotten) from previous wars.
These lessons are not always implemented as effectively as possible in modern warships due to the effects on cost, weight, performance etc, As with all design, it is a trade off.
But generally lots of lessons have been learnt (and sometimes subsequently forgotten) from previous wars.
These lessons are not always implemented as effectively as possible in modern warships due to the effects on cost, weight, performance etc, As with all design, it is a trade off.
Edited by jkh112 on Saturday 13th January 15:07
Nanook, I am not sure why you are being so argumentative.
These lessons are not implemented as effectively as possible because to do so would introduce space constraint, weight and cost penalties which would be prohibitive to the customer being able to afford the ship.
The level of self defence, armour, shock rating, captivity etc is determined through a balance of what threats the ship is expected to see against what can be achieved within budget. It is rare for the absolute perfect best possible design to be produced because if it was then it would be unaffordable. I am not saying that the modern warships are not optimised because they are but that optimisation takes place within certain constraints.
I presume from your job you are familiar with the requirement for certain items to remain captive. The level at which they have to remain captive varies according to customer budget, customer requirement, mass of the item, location of item, criticality of item etc. Hence some items have a higher captivity requirement than others even onboard the same vessel.
These lessons are not implemented as effectively as possible because to do so would introduce space constraint, weight and cost penalties which would be prohibitive to the customer being able to afford the ship.
The level of self defence, armour, shock rating, captivity etc is determined through a balance of what threats the ship is expected to see against what can be achieved within budget. It is rare for the absolute perfect best possible design to be produced because if it was then it would be unaffordable. I am not saying that the modern warships are not optimised because they are but that optimisation takes place within certain constraints.
I presume from your job you are familiar with the requirement for certain items to remain captive. The level at which they have to remain captive varies according to customer budget, customer requirement, mass of the item, location of item, criticality of item etc. Hence some items have a higher captivity requirement than others even onboard the same vessel.
I agree.
I have had varying levels of involvement with different classes of vessel for various navies but those where I have spent a large part of my career, mainly RN vessels, make me proud of what was built. Despite my desire to deliver the best product, my role has often been in the decision making around survivability optimisation and trying to maximise the operational capability intrinsic in the design whilst having to remain within the customers budgets and other constraints.
For those classes where I have had a long involvement I can identify a number of changes to the design which would improve the capability of the vessel to withstand damage. These changes were not implemented because they would impact on such factors as weight, cost, sortie generation rate etc.
I have had varying levels of involvement with different classes of vessel for various navies but those where I have spent a large part of my career, mainly RN vessels, make me proud of what was built. Despite my desire to deliver the best product, my role has often been in the decision making around survivability optimisation and trying to maximise the operational capability intrinsic in the design whilst having to remain within the customers budgets and other constraints.
For those classes where I have had a long involvement I can identify a number of changes to the design which would improve the capability of the vessel to withstand damage. These changes were not implemented because they would impact on such factors as weight, cost, sortie generation rate etc.
Edited by jkh112 on Saturday 13th January 16:45
Thanks guys - this is an interesting thread and I'm enjoing the insights 
(RE: The shaft thing...went and re-read that instance with PoW in WW2... it was a near miss detonation that bent the shaft, they couldn't stop the drive intime and the shaft operating out of round ripped the arse out of the ship...not really pertinent to what we are discussing here vis a vis stuff coming loose and acting as untethered projectiles inside the ship)
(RE: The shaft thing...went and re-read that instance with PoW in WW2... it was a near miss detonation that bent the shaft, they couldn't stop the drive intime and the shaft operating out of round ripped the arse out of the ship...not really pertinent to what we are discussing here vis a vis stuff coming loose and acting as untethered projectiles inside the ship)
Interestingly on TV last night Michael Portillo was in Sheffield on his railway journey and he was being shown "the biggest/most powerfull preserved steam engine in Europe. It was a 3 cylinder stationary engine that was used to roll armour plate for the navy. Built around 1904 for HMS Dreadnought ......and retired in the 1970's at Sheffield Forgemasters. Very impressive and able to go straight from forward to reverse.
Flying Phil said:
Interestingly on TV last night Michael Portillo was in Sheffield on his railway journey and he was being shown "the biggest/most powerfull preserved steam engine in Europe. It was a 3 cylinder stationary engine that was used to roll armour plate for the navy. Built around 1904 for HMS Dreadnought ......and retired in the 1970's at Sheffield Forgemasters. Very impressive and able to go straight from forward to reverse.
Will have to look that one up BrettMRC said:
Flying Phil said:
Interestingly on TV last night Michael Portillo was in Sheffield on his railway journey and he was being shown "the biggest/most powerfull preserved steam engine in Europe. It was a 3 cylinder stationary engine that was used to roll armour plate for the navy. Built around 1904 for HMS Dreadnought ......and retired in the 1970's at Sheffield Forgemasters. Very impressive and able to go straight from forward to reverse.
Will have to look that one up Flying Phil said:
Interestingly on TV last night Michael Portillo was in Sheffield on his railway journey and he was being shown "the biggest/most powerfull preserved steam engine in Europe. It was a 3 cylinder stationary engine that was used to roll armour plate for the navy. Built around 1904 for HMS Dreadnought ......and retired in the 1970's at Sheffield Forgemasters. Very impressive and able to go straight from forward to reverse.
I saw that! Very impressive, I could watch those big steam engines for hours, very cathartic.BrettMRC said:
theplayingmantis said:
Dont think it will happen.
Why not? This may be worth its own thread.
My understanding was that modern torpedos explode beneath the ship and create a huge gas bubble that lifts the ship out of the water and breaks its back, no amount of armour is going to help with that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c--fP017Xoc
theplayingmantis said:
Dont quote me as this is from memory chatting to someone either in or with knowledge quite high up in US Navy (relatively) and haven't time to do some research at mo, but something to do with power generation on the type of ships that it could theoretically be useful, and specifically power generation in the short space of time for multiple uses. Not sure if recoil issues too. Likewise the supposed benefits around the type of ammo being safer in storage and the fact that conventional propulsion means achieve nearly the same result with a fraction of the cost.
This may be worth its own thread.
Good shout:This may be worth its own thread.
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...
tuffer said:
My understanding was that modern torpedos explode beneath the ship and create a huge gas bubble that lifts the ship out of the water and breaks its back, no amount of armour is going to help with that. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c--fP017Xoc
I think it is more a huge shock wave than just a bubble. That is much like the way depth charges work: huge shock wave cracks and splits and damages subs. Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff