Why is The US Building Aluminum Warships?
Vložit
- čas přidán 25. 03. 2021
- Ships were historically built from steel, so why did The US start building warships from aluminium?
Maybe it's because aluminium is #NotWhatYouThink!
Music:
Oceanic Adventure - Bonnie Grace
Clearer Views - From Now On
Urgent News - Wendel Scherer
Fire Storm 3 - Fredrik Ekstrom
Arizona - Brendon Moeller-01
Smart Cube - Jobii
Sidelined - Dip Diet
Evolutionary Plans - Farrell Wooten
Footage:
Department of Defense, Royal Navy, Austal, Charles Walker, MrRIDE82, National Archives
Note: "The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement."
REFERENCES:
news.usni.org/2013/01/17/navy...
navalmarinearchive.com/researc...
www.hazegray.org/faq/smn6.htm#F7
apnews.com/article/fb3c5f5bb2...
www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/C...
www.shipmodels.info/mws_forum/...
www.smh.com.au/business/rust-...
www.fi-aeroweb.com/Defense/Lit...
www.magoda.com/construction/w...
apnews.com/article/c10693f883...
www.austal.com/sites/default/...
www.rbth.com/articles/2012/10...
www.dailypress.com/news/dp-xp...
www.navyrecognition.com/index...
www.offshore-energy.biz/new-i...
Near future: This Plastic Destroyer is light and won't corrode.
We got something similar to that 😁
czcams.com/video/Yi8ltZoR3fw/video.html
But melts at very low temperatures
There’s bacteria in the ocean that can already eat plastic
@@MrOiram46 Bio war go brrrr
@@RottenFlesh-we6nu there are many plastics and special polymers with insane durability, resistance and high melting points. Bonkey
"... and does not need to be painted above the waterline."
Anyone who has been in the Navy:
"SOLD"
I worked at Navy Afloat Training Group (ATG) Pacific my last few years in the Navy. I personally inspected these new Aluminum warships. They are junk from the shipyards. They have so many structural issues its ridiculous, many due to their aluminum construction. They are a massive waste of money. Many parts of the skin of the ship can be penetrated by a round as small as .50 cal.
@@jeremiahharkema1232
Thank you for your service!
@@jeremiahharkema1232 I’m trying to join the navy as we speak hope I get in
@@jeremiahharkema1232 sounds like a very American thing
@@Shotgun93Alexander hell try join the submarine squad you get the best food and most money and tbh ur safe as fuck with the new subs
13:20 SpaceX isnt using stainless steel because it surpasses carbon fiber in mechanical properties. Theyre using stainless steel because its cheaper and easier to produce.
That, and they're interested in some pretty extreme temperature behaviours that are not a consideration when building ships.
@@asharak84 yepp, in reentry stainless steel (of course a special production) can absorb heat far better then carbon fiber and is far cheaper and easier to maintain then ceramics etc.
And just WTF does THAT have to do with aluminium warships my friend?
Carbon fiber is a composite material, it's carbon and normally epoxy.
Stainless steel will handle the heat of reentry with their new cooling system, where as carbon fiber will just melt into goo and burn.
It has nothing to do with cost, although doubtless it's a bonus for business profits.
It beats carbon because carbon cracks when damaged where steel will deform. Steel also can withstand vast amounts of heat.
We are at a point technologically where everything that is mobile is a glass cannon, as the offense far exceeds the defense possible. This is true in ships, planes, tanks etc.
Yep. Very dense point defenses are the only thing that might save a ship at this point.
The Admirals won't tell you but the Chinese could sink our entire Navy with huge flurries of cheap hypersonic, broken-trajectory missiles that can overwhelm All defenses, including Phalanx.
@@cybervigilante Ballistic missiles if you are speaking of the Dong-Feng.
Except for infantry against small arms. I know there is a smart targeting system for hunting. Like tracking point.
Offensive weapons have became so strong that bombs are used to protect tanks instead of conventional armour lol
(Explosive reactive armour)
"Why is The US Building Aluminum Warships?" Well, all those billions of soda cans we throw away every year need to be recycled into something.
Answer they big smooth brain 🧠
I wonder how many brown envelopes are needed for big contracts like this.
The large bulk of them get recycled into ... aluminum soda cans!
Its win win situation
and if a hole gets blown in it then the sailors can patch it with discarded PBR
I like to make my Multi-million dollar warships from Radium personally
Same
I prefer enriched plutonium
I prefer the hulls to be made of enriched uranium with a bit of neutrons for the contingency plan
So specific 😅
Personally I prefer Niobium.
It’s all about duct tape these days, gentlemen. Duct Tape.
Nah, Flex Tape.
Just make the siren's and alarms out of cowbells, and I will ride that ship to new lands!
"To prove how strong Flex Tape is!
I sawed this stealth, multi-continental $600,000 purpose built ship in half!
If you can't duc it fuc it
@@HisHolinessMadarchode -👊🎯
Also, aluminum has far less cycle life. So say a bar of steel, can take 1000kg before bending. You can essentially cycle it tens of millions of times below that deformation point without it failing.
Conversely, Aluminum, work hardens and if you cycled it at 50% of it's deformation limit (not failure limit), it will eventually fail.
If you wanted to stress cycle steel right around it's failure limit, you can still essentially do it millions of times before failure, aluminum you drop down to the tens of thousands if you're loading it that much.
This is why airframes have flight hour limits. The aluminum skeleton has been flexed/stress too much and must go through a total overhaul/inspection/replacement.
Sheffield
So this is why we’ve been recycling all those soda cans
if the cans said "recycle this to build war ships" that would be plenty of motivation for me to do it.
Yes. Andebetytime you open the doors of those ships, it sounds like a soda can being opened....”fff! Zzzzzzz.......”
@UCXG7ePzlzyFSp7GP8tSKGrw lol no keep drinking your beers patriot we need that aluminum for the war effort.
@@skymaster4121 Actually they sound cheap, and rattle compared to steel doors which shut with just 2 dogs instead of the whole set on a wobbly lever..
Haha nah. The reason why cans are made out of aluminum is because it saves up on transport cost. But to manufacture aluminum is extremely bad for the environment.
There is a combination of poisonous chemical waste and extreme energy requirements that makes aluminum can really bad.
My father's destroyer, the USS Mackenzie DD-836, was made of Bethlehem Steel, from the old steel works in Bethlehem PA. It was an awesome ship.
I don't know what kind of steel my old man's ship was made out of, but I'm sure somewhere there's a record of where the ship was built. It was the USS Manley I think DD-940. I know it was an old WW2 ship that went through a full retrofit before Vietnam started. Believe it has long since been decommissioned.
Now it is a casino complex.
@@WALTERBROADDUS The Sands is adjacent to it, but the stacks and buildings are still intact. My ex-girlfriend is in Bethlehem, the apartment I got her overlooks the stacks: it's an unteresting place, the Moravian Church and museum, and there's a little known Tomb of the Unknown soldiers of the Revolutionary war there because the town served as a hospital.
@@williamm374 Drove up 309 to Bethlehem once. Yep, a place one escapes from.
They are all aluminum above the main deck. it saves weight and keeps them from being top heavy.. Increases their speed..
Very interesting and very well done. I am from South Louisiana where literally hundreds of aluminum vessels of all sizes have been built to support the offshore oil industry. Most evident are the passenger carrying "crew boats" used to transport workers to and from offshore rigs. Aluminum is light, light is fast, and fast means reduced trip times in a business where time is money. I have never heard of aluminum boats experiencing more or more severe problems than their steel counterparts. If I ever win the lottery and become capable of building a retirement yacht, it will be built of aluminum...sort of putting my money where my mouth is so to speak.
You will spend all your retirement money on sacrificing anode and welding patches for missing structures. You may drop into the water while sitting on your toilet. Corporations are spending investors money. Navy, Army, USMC, and Air Force are spending tax payers money. Who is caring the cost. Mr Rouge
@@larrylam2648 The US oil industry is not fond of wasting money. Having a vessel in dry dock can cost the owner(s) a fortune. If aluminum was that much of a problem, they would have quit using it before you were born.
@@LA_Viking Being a Mechanical engineer nearly forty years, I have witnessed many dumb ideas regarding the weight saving. For example Dodge were using plastic for door latches, B-1B GE engine dis-integrated during flight because some engineers decide to reduce the fan blades retaining to .020 in thick. X33 spacecraft fuel tank without metal lining, and hydrogen seeped through composite like there was no tank wall. F35B aircraft could not land on any ground unless there is steel floor to dissipate the heat. Some of my trainees showed new components from the dark project. Without spending time, I recommended them making the vendors redesigned to add some more weight. I took a corrosion engineering course 400+ at UW, and my professor had worked for Boeing high speed boat with hydrofoil. He mentioned that putting aluminum into sea water like putting iron into the acid. In this world there are many inexperienced engineers always wanted prove the other conservative group that they are more advance and smarter. I am in the conservative group. My design will last to the end life cycle of the products. I fixed many thousand poor engineering designs.
I love to put heart pacemaker with aluminum housing into your chest if you need one, so you can be smarter.
Yeah man. We have aluminum boats in the Gulf of Mexico. Paint it all. Use isolation sleeves on through hull bolts. 316 L bolts. Avoid dissimilar metals touching and don’t worry about galvanic crud.
Crew boats are small enough that you can make them very rigid, thus cracking isn't an issue. You can't do that with a 750 foot vessel... it will flex in heavy seas.
The fact that that little HK diesel got close enough for a torpedo strike on the carrier in that battlegroup exercise just shows that the skipper of the sub was strategically smart, and that the ASW net of the battlegroup had some holes in it. That, or sub tech has gotten insanely better since I was in an ASW patrol squadron.
R.I.P. VP-22 Blue Geese. Always in my heart. ⚓❤⚓
They cost more and wear out sooner. That's good for keeping the budget up.
aren't military programs focusing on providing jobs?
Yeah. I understand using it in smaller ships such as coast guard where the ship or boat being faster would help as aluminium is lighter
@@hphp31416 no
Not only faster. But any seas over 10ft damage them.
@@MinehowTech Actually, yes...the more people who die in your thin ship hulls, the more people you hire to make more ships, and more people recruited to be in your new ships...that will die. Repeat cycle.
Using the shuttle as a example how good aluminum works in extreme heat is really poor choice... the tiles that protected it were extremely fragile,expensive and required a lot maintenance.Don't think a navy vessel would be suitable
Russians wont use aluminum....
They will use stalinium......
But it still didn't melt. According to the video modern ships have fire/heat protection in key areas, so the example applies.
I know you try to to be smart, but let me tell you it simply does not work....The space shuttle example is fine, you just don't get what he was saying thats the problem ;)
@@IIISentorIII no, the example was shit, just like hin saying that Elon doesn't approve of the Russians building composite superstructures "because the new starships are made from steel instead of CF". They aren't made from steel because it's a a better material, they're made from steel cause it's far cheaper and stronger than CF at cryogenic and reentry temperatures
@@krupert8355 "it didn't melt" Columbia disaster would like to have a word with you
thank you for the video and! that you added the music in descriptions.
3:20
Crew: omg there's a huge bomb that could rip our ship in half
Damage control crew: blow it up lol
You'll be surprised how tanks protect themselves from projectiles.
@@yamby6709 exept that tanks blow the projectiles outside of their "hull"
@@suntzu1719 its still funny that tanks protect themselves from exploding by exploding shit outside their hull
Anyone ever heard of Royal British Navy's insane plan to make an aircraft carrier from an iceberg
Yes amd its called ( project habbakukk ) the biggest aircraft carrier out of ice (which is pycrete) they cancelled the project because its expensive to make one or there stupid because the ice is weak and it can melt through hot temperature but anyways the project habbakukk is bigger than any aircraft carrier
At least it’s not going to catch on fire!
Probably......
Well it was not going to be made out of pure Ice.. But a mixed Ice sawdust composite.. The sawdust added strength to the Ice and also has some insulating properties that slowed the melting of the ice.. The ACC was supposed to have a refrigeration unit on board with pipes running through the ice to keep the Ice cold.. In the end with the USA building so many conventional ships and the effective countermeasures they had against subs the need for the ICE carrier was no longer deemed necessary..
They tried shooting the Ice, they shot the Normal ice then it went thru, they shot the Customize Ice and it bounched and shot another Person
Well I mean wtf, pycrete cannot cracked or destroyed from torpedoes but it will from stronger projectiles like bullets, mines or high power torpedoes but also maybe incendiary ammunitons cuz it could melt pycrete
13:18 If I recall correctly, Elon didn't say Carbon Fiber (CF) lacked those properties, actually it seems CF is better than steel for space applications. The main problem SpaceX had with CF is that it is WAY more expensive than steel and a lot more difficult to work with and since they needed to quickly iterate, they opted to use steel because of those two reasons. At least that's what I remember their reasoning being.
It was also the fact that CF is best when one solid unit and there just isn't an oven big enough to house the parts he needed, this caused structural issues as they had to make multiple parts for one weakening the total strength of the craft
@@cheeseninja1115 Oh yes, you're right!! I completely forgot about not having a big enough oven problem.
Now that you mention it, I wonder how the Russians would go about making a ship made of CF.
I think what they realized is that if they used a specific type of stainless steel which gets stronger at cryogenic temperatures (like in a super chilled rocket propellant tank) then they could actually get much better strength to weight ratios than using carbon composites so even ignoring the price and workability the stainless steel was actually the logical option. However, in a use case with more normal temperatures such as a ship carbon composites are almost definitely lighter for the same strength.
As other's have pointed out, stainless steel has a more consistent performance over a wide range of temperatures. The crazy genius expects these ships to launch with cryogenic fuels than recover from the hypersonic heat of reentry.
@@AlexTamayo. ship don't have to take pressure, their hulk only need to hold their shape so they can be jigsaw together.
I used to work at Austal. LCS 700 had a major crack develop on main deck at the H05 and H06 bulkhead. It span from port to starboard and opened up 2.5 inches. All before heading out to sea trials. The EFT class ships (formally jhsv joint high speed vessel) suffered frame cracks near the bow during rough sea.
this was awesome! Thanks for doing all that research and putting that together for me ;).
Imagine telling a captain from the age of sail that ships will be built out of metal, yet fires will still be an issue.
(EDIT) I understand why fires are an issue, but still, they built their ships entirely out of flammable material. Ours are made out of a similar material to what they made cannons out of.
I see your point.
Yes, wood is flammable, but it's surprisingly stable and load-resistant while burning ; it retain its mechanical properties way better than steel which will collapse sooner under a similar weight (at least in the case of buiding, which, I'm assuming, is quite similar, structurally speaking, to a ship).
Anything can burn if you try hard enough
Big brane
"Ours are made out of a similar material to what they made cannons out of."
_Bronze_ ships would be awesome.
Think of the faces of future archeologists when they discover wrecks in _perfect_ preservation at the bottom of shores...
This was a really great episode, perfectly explained and nicely technical; accurate and enjoyable: thank you!
Very good, I'm a Falklands war navy veteran, your comment on Hms Sheffield I'd like to expand on. The Exocet missile that hit her never exploded its warhead. The missile did as designed by entering horizontally then Changing direction to go down in to the hull. The missiles rocket engine burned through decks incenirating everything on its way down. I was on the Hms Hermes flght deck which was close by & took many helicopters of badly burned sailors on board while return flights left with firefighting equipment.
I served on two Oliver Hazard Perry class frigates in the 1980's, both ships experienced cracking in the aluminum superstructure after extended deployments at sea. One of them had a crack large enough that I could put my hand through from the inside of the ship to the outside. Those cracked areas were later reinforced with considerably thicker aluminum plating.
Your longer videos are really good, keep on doing them!
It would have been quite ironic to build a ship out of anything other than steel and then name it “Sheffield”
My thought. Sheffield, Broadsword and Coventry were all sunk and their aluminium structures melted before they went down.
I want a coal-structured ship named 'Newcastle'
Thanks for all the great info! I am amazed by the amount of research you guys do for a video.
I learned something new today. Our warships super structures have been made out of aluminum on some ships. Didn't know that. I can see why it hasn't been used often after learning about the melting of the metal during fires.
U.S Navy: _replaces aluminum completely_
Aluminum Manufacturers: *>:0*
The Hamiltom-class WHECs did have issues with cracks forming between steel and aluminum. But only during very heavy seas, such as typhoons, hurricanes and North Atlantic and Pacific Northwest storms. Hearing reports of green water entering at the base of the superstructure does make you wonder.
Hahaha Philippine Navy is using Hamilton Class as an Off shore patrol vessel and yet she still runs good and they upgraded some systems
Another good one! Very informative.
This was a very nice overview. Pros and cons laid out in what appeared to me was a fair, balanced fashion.
I make my ships out of elemental sodium currently.
Can't seem to get then to float without burning up though. Not sure why
Try bicarbonating the sodium. 😁
Did you try restarting it?
Why not try a Francium Coated Enriched Uranium and Cobalt Alloy?
Just make your ships outta H2O, there problem solved.
@@justiron2999 Yes, you have the same density with water, therefore you can also act like a Submarine!👍👍👍
Must be that "military grade" aluminium Ford talks so much about
🤣
Military grade = cheap
@@themeanestkitten When electronic component manufacturers make their products they test and classify quality and designate their best product as "military grade".
My Ford has been trouble free and it is the first model year they used Aluminum. Semi trucks have been built out of aluminum since the 1950s.
@@flamingfrancis so they grade their own products🤨 that's like getting to grade your own work when your in school.
worked on the port royal when i first was starting out in the shipyards. Everything above the main deck was aluminum. Sure was a sight to see when it pulled in
This is information I didn't know I needed!!
0:12 that's a boat right? given what i learned from this channel xd
USS Pegasus, yes we have made a short on it czcams.com/video/eNVyxw44-Yk/video.html
Just play Azur Lane EZ
Is that a SNAFU cover as your pfp
@@bottomtext5872 yes, book 14th cover
I served on an FFG (Oliver Hazard Perry class). The ship had to be put in dry dock to attach plates to the sides, to stop it from buckling. And then USS Stark was hit by two Exocets. One missile didn't even explode... instead its fuel set fire to the ship, doing as much damage as if it had exploded.
And that's the thing: if you're attacked in an aluminium ship, you are at extreme danger of being burned to death, or being hit by the shrapnel. Even if Phalanx was able to intercept a missile, hundreds of missile fragments would still be inbound, at high speed, and would go right through aluminium.
Really well done video!
This video, like most of your work, is fact rich, clearly presented, and relevant.
towards the end, spacex chose steel over composites for starship due to cost and speed of fabrication, not due to structural issues
Also stainless steel is very strong at cryo temps
why is your voice so calming
ikr!? he sounds like hes always on the verge of telling a joke!
I had a good laugh Andy. Thanks 😂
Calming ? he annoyed teh fuck out of me with the American pronunciation of aluminium
@@gowdsake7103 I was going to say the same thing, I had to stop watching after 5 minutes
o
Bit of a walk here but... my dad was an engineer on a tug that supported Project Sea Shadow (IX-529). This kind of aluminum hull kinda tumble home form was exactly the kind of thing they were testing back then. It goes a long way to explaining the Independence hull form and this kind of light weight superstructure.
I think they should use steel hulls with superstructures out of of other materials (but more modular) and trapped, clamped, or bolted down rather than welded for greater strength and for easy replacement.
I am pretty sure they have considered such simple solutions.
Yay I love these longer vids
By WWII we learned that no matter how big and heavy a ship you make, it can be sunk by a single aircraft.
I'd make my whole navy out of balsa wood if it meant I could mount more long range missles.
"I'd make my whole navy out of balsa wood if it meant I could mount more long range missles."
Welcome to Elmo Zumwalt's *'High-Low' plan* that still doesn't seem to be implemented as the US Navy has abandoned it's 1980s *'600 ships navy'* policy target in favour of 'high-end procurement in prototype production numbers' - ironically exemplified in the 'Zumwalt-class'...
news.usni.org/2013/06/10/analysis-the-u-s-navys-high-low-mix
www.history.navy.mil/content/dam/nhhc/research/publications/1910/11%20Chapter11.pdf
Balsa wood can't sink;)
@@nstl440 I think you need to read 'Kon-Tiki'. Unless the surface is protected with fiberglass/epoxy or something, it eventually becomes waterlogged. Then it most certainly CAN and DOES sink. It does perform well as a composite core though.
those ship are literally cheaper than this useless ship made out of alluminium that probably wont even stand a chances against 40MM cannon
USS America would like to have a word
Combining aluminum with other metals in a salt water environment is problematic.
Sitting in salt water on its own is a problem, let alone in a galvanic couple
And not to mention that littlle nasty combination of aluminium oxide and rust combination one hit or fire and it burns down like a roman candle.
The britsh learend that during the falklands war , several ships had minor/medium impact damage but the fuel started a chainreaction and burned out those ships.
Aluminum-bronze is a monolithic alloy so it does not have this problem. They should have took a hint from tool makers. My Aluminum-bronze wrenches are light as a feather, do not rust and are Rockwell 65 hardness. Aluminum-bronze propellers have a great track record too. The melting point is high too at 2000 F. which is higher than BRASS!!
@@johnslugger aluminium bronze is a mostly copper alloy, with the aluminium addition partially in solution and partially precipitated as strengthening nanonscale particles. This is not a relevant addition to the discussion *at all* and the people upvoting you aren't making it any moreso. Their general corrosion resistance is also primarily due to them being a copper-nickel-iron alloy, contrary to some of the nonsense put about.
Further, they're 'light as a feather' only in your mind, aluminium bronzes are denser than steels and less strong. They only exist at all because they're nonsparking and intended for use in applications where sparking may present a risk of fire. Their application in saltwater environments came as an additional benefit because those spark-sensitive applications are primarily oil and gas pipeline, and these alloys were first used by Europeans where a considerable proportion of oil and gas comes from deep sea drilling
I have a 40 year old aluminum boat. Looks new.
It's alright as long as an enemy doesn't make a huge can opener.
How many nickels would you get back in Iowa if you COULD sail it to Iowa?
Lmao😂😂😂
@@lexwaldez go to the gulf of Mexico, enter the Mississippi river, sail upstream and turn into the Missouri river, head upstream, stop in Iowa.
Only limit is length and draft of the craft.
WHAT "enemy?" We haven't had a legitimate one since WWII - EXCEPT our own worthless GOVERNMENT!
@@ForeverBleedinGreen any enemy? What, you want the name of a threat that isn't organized or maybe not even formed yet?
Ship: is made of aluminium
Mercury thermometers in the infirmary: bonjour
I remember having welders adding gussets in different locations on the FFG46 USS Rentz when I was on her. It was a good ship.
Was a DC aboard Antrim FFG20, and remember a lot of extra welding from both our shop and "yard birds".
Galvanic corrosion wasn't ever discussed, but the bar stock holding the super structure to the main deck required a "code" to weld on it...squids weren't allowed anywhere near it with our PowCon unit!
This does remind me of hearing about one of the great footnotes of the Falkland Islands War, when the British were using polyesther uniforms for troops, which they found out not only were prone to melting in far more conditions than wool, they also tended to result in worse burns.
I've always wondered about using either heat treated steel or cold worked to save weight, both are wildly stronger than untreated material, but both suffer from serious heat vulnerability, which is a big issue in something like a ship, as the material will lose strength with exposure to heat and fail as it no longer meets he engineering requirements. I still think you could use stuff like that on an aircraft more reasonably, and it's strength is already competitive with titanium, the issue for the cold working is the dies, even diamonds stop being hard enough, while for the heat treatment it's hard to get deep heat treatment on thicker sections, which doesn't matter on aircraft at all. I also wonder about ceramics sometimes, aluminum oxide for example is extremely refractory, hard AF and exceedingly heat resistant.
I've never heard the myth about HMS Sheffield. It was reported at the time (I remember) that the Sheffield's defence systems failed to detect an incoming Exocet. Sheffield had no ECM. Sadly, HMS Glasgow did have ECM and its radar detected the launch of two Super Etenard missiles but, because the Sheffield didn't, Sheffield wasn't put into action stations and the Sheffield's captain was not aware of Glasgow's Handbrake warning having been issued.
It makes sense now why Antelope, Ardent, Sheffield, and Coventry were lost so easily. Every time I watch footage or a documentary about the war I realize that the ships are taken out of action in one hit. Never made sense to me until now because I thought these Warships could take on 5-10 anti-ship missiles + gunfire + torpedos.
But they did! these ships failed because they were overwhelmed or were shot at from blind angles
paper and actual combat can differ by a lot. just because it can survive a beating in paper, doesnt mean it will actually do that in actual combat. even a single, well placed hit can incapacitate a large warship if the attacker is lucky enough.
You look handsome
remember HMS Hood? Bismarck killed it with one shot through the ammo rack. Hood is a battlecruiser, supposedly can take as many punches as she can but no, Bismarck proved the otherwise despite the amount of steel in Battlecruiser.
high explosive will do that
How much money do you need?
US millitary: *yes*
Hur hur
Dipshit comment.
@@billrich9722 ?
@@fupoflapo2386 ?
I thought a lot of the issues around aluminium in the Falkands./RN were about crew survivability (i.e. the ability for the crew to survive and get off the ship) rather than ship survivability (i.e. the ability for damage crontolto keep the ship afloat/operational).
I remember seeing the aluminum ladders of HMCS Kootenay's engine room fire over 50 years ago. We could see how one poor sod had made it to the ladder, several steps up towards safety, and where his boots went through the melting aluminum. He perished in that extreme heat, fire, and melted aluminum...if he was on a steel ladder, he would have made it out of the Engine Room and probably lived.
I don't trust aluminum ships...naval architects need to grow out of the thoughts of entertaining using them in building warships with humans aboard.
I would not want to be aboard one if a heavy weight torpedo or pressure mine explodes beneath the keel........it'll certainly break the ship in two from the bottom up the way Titanic broke apart. And like Titanic, both halves will probably rapidly sink.
@@taraswertelecki3786 Which the aluminum will alleviate how, exactly? If you get hit by a torpedo, you're going down, no matter what you're made of. The only difference is with aluminum hulls, you can't take any hits _at all,_ let alone from a torpedo. Not exactly a good trade.
@@PhoenixT70 Not necessarily.....ships sometimes survive torpedoes. But I doubt aluminum ships will especially if the blast starts fires below decks.
Don't talk utter shit, aluminium melts at 660 degrees, the fire might have burned that hot but not while he was still alive
@@finnaustin4002 - There are photos of the ladder at Damage Contol Training Centre at CFB Naden which is a base that surrounds HMC Dockyard Esquimalt. Fire School is on the east side of the harbour, has classrooms and a massive three-deck high mock-up of a ship to practice fire fighting and fighting floods. Since I've actually been there, did my initial and advanced training there during the Cold War, eventually qualified as a Fire Team Leader and ship's Damage Control Officer, I totally understand where the 'shit-talking' is coming from.
You.
You have no understanding of: where the seat of the fire was (gear-box), why: an explosion during full-speed trials, where the engineering techs were after the explosion and fire: on the deck (grill) on their hands and knees crawling towards one of the two ladders, you do not know the layout of the engine room. In fact, you know nothing about the explosion and fire, or anything else about HMCS Kootenay (DDE 258).
Google "HMCS Kootenay fire," click on the google images tab: the 1st image, near the top centre left: that is a ladder with a rung clearly melted and where a seaboot went through and continued below down, bending the lower rung (centre left of photo) as the sailor fell to his demise.
Grow up and earn your right to be a part of adults' conversations. Start by reading about facts, question them, continue by writing without insulting people who know more than you have learned from books alone. (Original (larger) Image at Hazegray.org)
Interesting . I was a senior fabricator at Austals Australia. We were told the shelf life of a vessel was less than steel. So make them cheap and fast and up to date
"Yeah let's just diffuse the bomb with another bomb, they should cancel out right?"
Done correctly, it works. According to MARINE CORPS EOD GUNNERY SARGENT I WORKED WITH.
But, what would HE know?
Just a GUNNERY SARGENT in the fucking MARINE CORPS.
What have you done?
They try to destroy the detonator.
The system to ignite it "properly" and most effectively is fairly complicated.
Otherwise, stored weapons would accidentally go off all the time!
They do the same thing with the bomb squad, using a water jet blast to safely defuse stuff.
I think that actually works tho
Um yes, a small charge is often used to defuse something unstable. Depending on the explosive in the ED thats not always a bad idea. Some modern explosives dont explode with pressure, but have many other methods for ignition.
More importantly this can be done from afar afgter preperation, wich increases safety for the defusion personel.
@@donaldmurphy3148 He doesn't even know you or your supposed Marine friend, how would he know?
April 10, 2022 - I learned a lot from this video. I think that it looks at the subject in a very clinical and unbiased way. While I think that ships should be made so that they can sustain a certain amount of damage. I believe that modern anti ship weapons will always severely damage and/or sink just about any present day war vessel. Vessel defensive weapons, and good tactics will determine the out come of any conflict involving war ships in the foreseeable future.
Man I served on HSV -2 Swift, was a hell of a ride but was heart breaking to see her destroyed, she was still home for some time during my service, will miss her, and honestly can chill see myself walking through her decks in dreams and memories
Did they ever truly figure out who shot the Swift, or is the answer still "probably Houthis"?
@@josephshreeves8192 it was them they recorded the attack
Moral of the story:
Spare no expense on engineering.
Also make sure you have domestic control of your supply chain.
@@saureco agreed!
actually there is reason to make it lower price so you can make more lol. as long as trade off is reasonable.
This was highly instructive. Thanks for sharing! Just a minor quible - They aren't making warships out of soda can aluminum but from aluminum alloy, which is stronger. And that will work for now. In the future more and more "space age" materials will be invented that will make future warships much stronger with little or no weight gain.
Great video, Truly GREAT! Last Words.
Excellent video.
Cool, my first two ships are shown one right after the other, near the beginning (0:52) of the video, the USS Long Beach CGN-9, and the USS Tattnall DDG-19! 😎👍
I served on USS Semmes DDG 18
"Hopefully we will never find out"
Me: If there is humans, there will be wars.
@@SoloNit ye
If a war where to happen today i would be 100% because of rich assholes. If a war got a slight chance of removing some rich peoples debt, theyd be more than happy to try and create one.
@@TheGamingNorwegian Well, there's China to consider....
More about Politics lately.
I remember when the DNC STOOD WITH REPUBLICANS AGAINST IT.
@@SoloNit
And Comrade Biden just EXTENDED the war in Afghanistan.
I wonder, what is his cut of the $$$$?
The aluminum used in the super structer is alloyed with magnesium which lowers its ignition point below 1200 degrees farenhightt. I know this because I was a hull technician 2nd class in the US Navy and part of my rate was firefighting. Aluminum won’t burn by it’s self.
Itself.
Meanwhile in USSR : "Frick it!" builds out of titanium
They changed their view. Their hybrid procurement system doesn't allow much waste now. All the research bureaus share their work as spin offs across the board. All the Soviet era major research centers are accessible to all research bureaus. Supersonic wind tunnels for instance. The military state their needs, research bureaus prototype until a project is green lighted and industry takes over. All compartmentalized and rationalized for maximum result per rubble. Competition is horizontal and state management is vertical.
After making 1 ship: Welp, we're completely bankrupt.
@@manictiger What is dumbfounding is that the brain pool is there, resources are there and so are facilities. I remember a Congress oversight committee asking a submariner if turbo jet shrouds required making surface every 20 minute. As long as clueless decide on procurement the trend will go on. Try explaining to a noob that orbital inertia doesn't nail astronauts to the bulkhead.
@@manictiger Soviets could just ignore economic limitations
@@r.p5380
It's not about economics. It's a supply problem. Titanium is kind of rare, ergo the relatively high price tag and the lack of Titanium floating around in the industry. There's aluminum and steel everywhere you look, but Titanium bars... Yeah, several times the cost of even the highest quality aluminum billets.
As a seafarer, I really enjoy navy theme. Thanks a lot
What's a seafarer
@@okay2439 , sea man on board merchant fleet
I think you mean “superstructure” not “megastructure”, bro. Nice video, tho. I was a little disappointed you didn’t talk about USS Stark, though.
“Hopefully we’ll never find out”
That’s a sentiment I can get behind.
Aluminum does burn, it's next to Magnesium in the periodic table, it just takes a little more to light it. The Bradley AFV is aluminum, when hit with an AT round the vaporized Aluminum burns nicely.
All metals will burn under the right conditions.....but some make aluminum look inert. You would not want to sail on a boat made of potassium would you? Most metals don't easily burn unless they are powdered or otherwise in the form of small particles, which is why magnesium and even titanium fires can and do happen in machine shops. A machine shop near me burned down because titanium shavings caught fire.
@@taraswertelecki3786 Indeed thats true. Aluminum is far more combustible compared to steel though, steel does not ignite from an APC round. A Foxconn factory that was milling aluminum chassis for Apple iPhones and Macs did have a explosion, it's believed the production rates exceeded the ability of the ventilation systems and powdered aluminum in the air ignited.
Elon musk ditched carbon fiber for stainless because stainless was faster and easier to design and build with.
This ^
and better at low temperatures
@@Barten0071 in general better temperature handling especially in re-entry
lets face it, trying to build a rocket out of carbon fibre was never going to work out well
@@spawnof200 isn't a proton rocket from it?
Wait till they find out the spruce, kidd class destroyers and the Ticonderoga class Aegis cruisers are built from aluminum in the late 1970s, early 1980s.
My ship was Coontz class from the 50s.. It was still aluminum above the main deck ... I assume they all were it saves weight and keeps the ship from being top heavy.. Also being lighter helps top speed.. Not a revelation at all..
*_". . . while Aluminum doesn't burn . . ."_*
Aluminum, especially _powdered_ Aluminum, burns. The powdered version is often used to enhance explosives, including Thermite Reactions.
Falklands war and french excocet missile. You are spot on
I feel like I accidentally stumbled into a room of smart people on CZcams This is like a blurry video of sasquatch... no one's going to believe me.
@@vikingghost117 There are three things that Bigfoot always knows . . .
● when the Police are coming;
● when there are no High Quality cameras for a radius of 60 miles; and
● where the Smart People "hang out" on CZcams;
Powdered Aluminium burns but so does powdered steel, the pictures of "burnt" aluminium ships are really melted ships and if your ship reaches that temperature it doesn't really matter anyway, its scrap.
Regular solid aluminium wont burn, you can try this yourself or look up a number of videos on youtube, even if you put a blowtorch to it for several minutes all it will do is melt.
Isn't there also _powdered_ steel used in thermite? Also, _most_ powdered materials burn? Unless I'm wrong somehow.
I make pche's (printed circuit heat exchangers) which are made of steal, we bond them together which is to slightly melt the 2 surfaces so that they bond together and we learnt a while ago that steal & aluminium can be done but due to the extreme pressures of the exchangers their durability is not safe
They’re not. They even canceled these for being absolute shit. They bend and damage in any seas over 10ft.
It's not what you think
@@tridinh1011 it’s exactly what I think. I work on these ships for a living lol
@@mrmidnight32 well, im just citing the channel's name lol, the title isnt what you think it is
@@mrmidnight32 Just by looking at them you can tell they suck. Just wondering what will happen to the ones that were already built? Are they gonna be scrapped or something?
Pre or post delivery
Maybe they should start making gallium missiles? 🤔
13:10 i like the shock wave aka gravity waves
A well-balanced and informative video. At the end, the question is posed: “Is that enough to save a ship from modern anti-ship missiles during an actual war? Hopefully, we'll never find out”. I'm afraid that we will find out all too soon in the forthcoming invasion of Taiwan, which will be mainly an asymmetric ship-versus-missile war. My guess is that Taiwan will lose, primarily not because its anti-ship missiles will prove ineffective but because it will just run out of them.
Biden will give it away as he will not want to offend anyone, plus he loves China.
@@2000ViperGTSsubscribe 1.he knows he will lose his votes if hes not reacting, therefor if china should be so stuipid he will intervene.
2. China will not invade Taiwan anyway in the near future if you ask me.
@2000ViperGTSsubscribe You just made 2 subjective politically-motivated comments that are both quite ridiculous. Biden pulled us out of Afghanistan partially because he wanted to be able to commit more of our military assets to the Far East in order to protect Taiwan and to ensure freedom of navigation in the South China Sea. Biden and the State Department have also been working to enhance our relationships with our western Pacific allies such as Japan, South Korea, Philippines, and Australia in order to counter the growing military and economic strength of Communist China.
I believe that the main question should be, how the vessels are constructect and designed to protect the sailors? Survivability is the main topic here.
Who wan'ts protection
The real question is how to make them fully automated for our overlords.
Protection Onions
Avoid Encounter
Avoid Detection
Avoid Accusation
Avoid Hit
Avoid Penetration
Avoid Kill
It's important to recognise that survivability of the ship is different than survivability of the crew in the context of the loss of the ship. Aluminium produces incredible toxins that spread incredibly fast in fire that will also spread incredibly fast. Steel allows a crew time to fight and allows time for evacuation in case that fight looks futile. Aluminium gives one no such luxury of time.
It's been said that if a fire is not brought under control within a few minutes, it's time to abandon the ship because it's beyond saving.
You sounds like reformer, but US Army have already conducted tests on prototype M2 Bradley regarding similar issues and found no evidence to support that hypothesis.
Watch Spookston "problem with Pentagon War".
Since all construction of LCSs was stopped last year... maybe aluminum was a bad idea? On a side note war ships usually needs weapons big enough to damage other ships which could have been another failing.
Yeah, no one paid any attention to the aluminum framed class 8 trucks that destroyed themselves. Nor did they pay attention to the years and years of building superstructures. The only way to make aluminum tough is to use a hell of a lot of it. In fact if you use high grade steels you can make a far lighter structure when seeking fracture resistance. (Think 5 series vs. CrMo). So team dumb dumb (most admirals are great politicians, reasonable strategiest, and piss poor technocrats) thought hey the fast ferry tech is awesome, let's use that. Not thinking: This is a warship, not a fuel efficiency optimization experiment.
What kills me is you can make a warship basically impervious to most modern antiship missles by armor and hull shaping. A semi-submersible platform is far better for radar and makes a harpoon, silkworm, or Exocet simply not work. You can shape and armor the above surface / shallow surface significant to deflect blast and do the same far below the waterline for torpedoes. With bubblers you can dramatically reduce hull drag and sound signatures. Turbines are small and make a hell of a lot of power. You can run hotel loads off of a plutonium thermogenerator small like NR-1. You can run propulsion off of a high efficiency, high reliability diesel (think Napier deltic or equivalent in terms of performance). There's lots and lots of solutions that yield a 30+ knot vessel capable of the LCS mission with much greater survivability. Plus a vessel meant to pierce waves inherently is much better in rough conditions. Something is just off in the decision making.
It's not just about the ship surviving, it's also about the people inside surviving.
My dad should have been on the sheffield but ended up severely ill several weeks before deployment...
Thank god for the shits, eh?
@@krashd shingles doesnt give you the shits...
There are two kinds of ships: submarines and targets. Put all the steel you want if it makes you feel better.
The Germans made that same argument in two world wars and in the end submarines did not save them. Once submarines began being hunted by allied destroyer and their infrastructure began to be targeted, from sub tenders to pens, it was over for the submarines. They are but one weapon system in an arsenal of many, and alone they can be hunted down like any other system.
@@vmedhe2 that was due to the enigma code breakers my friend!
@@SerinaDeMadrigal On the other hand submarines are just weaker and more expensive destroyers, being submerged thus stealthier is their only selling point.
The very last advances in sensors, satellite/air infra red imaging, big data AI analysis, sensor integration and datalinks, underwater drones and computing power can make, in some two decades or so, even absolutely stealthiest submarines quite easy to detect and track in real time submerged in a deep ocean. And this would take away their only advantage.
Only time will tell, technological advances killed many naval vessel classes and created some others.
Suddenly everyone here is an expert on submarines
@@beaddy101Breaking enigma was part of it, but radar was also very important, along with the development of more effective anti sub weapons. Enigma, tells you what they are doing, radar told you where they are and the weapons destroyed them.
I would like to address the er elephant in the room.
With carbon fiber or nomex/aramid as a higher cost alternative.
Certainly, we have developed processes to assemble larger scale projects such as I described.
Couple that with hydro plaining and you get a low observable high speed shallow draft platform.
Not really sure if it would survive a weapon strike any better but it would surely cost more.
8:06 Nice pink lights!
What do they say, “Aluminum can only bend once”.
Simply put: because USN specified top speed and acceleration of speedboat for overgrown and under equipped, ocean capable frigate.
How do you get all this information ??
Isn't the background music the same as Steven He's Emotional damage clip?
Sailor: “check out this liquid metal stuff this shady guy gave me, catch!”😳😂😂
@@Feroce Superstructures have been made from aluminum for quite a while now. CGN 41 USS Arkansas had an aluminum superstructure
@@Feroce you don't need to risk it with mercury ( it can cause cancer) use Galium, Much safer, and as i remeber shoud do the job faster. + you can get it without raising any suspision and have your own inexperience as as mask. " Yea i saw some guys playin with it on YT it looked safe" XD
@@Feroce just noticed i replyed to your comment and not the one above :D, sry
@@DrPsych0piroman My thought also. Here's an example of the effect of gallium: czcams.com/video/IgXNwLoS-Hw/video.html
Now I want to get ahold of some mercury and a hunk of aluminum and see what happens when I put the two together . Hopefully ,it would do something cool like have weird flames or whatever.
"Aluminum doesn't burn". Yes, it does. It's used in some solid rocket fuels.
And in thermite too
@@MichealleShoemaker True.
I like how everyone is commenting how aluminium burns and bring up thermite as example while totally ignoring that iron oxide is used in the recipe. Iron-ic much?
Technically that's aluminum oxide, and it's not really the fuel, it's the oxidizer, so aluminum doesn't technically burn/undergo combustion.
yeah what machina said you are mistaking the function of the metallic salts, and forgetting that they are metallic salts which have different properties to the pure element, take sodium chloride for example, sodium in its pure form is a highly reactive metal a alkali metal, and chlorine is toxic to humans but combined it is just common house hold salt.
My old 1969, 14 foot aluminum V-bottom boat flexes. And it's never leaked even though it's only riveted, not welded. My buddy has a new all welded aluminum boat and it's already cracking in various places!
The EPF’s DO suffer from cracks in the Hull, particularly just above the waterline near the exhaust.
I'd say the Shuttle is precisely NOT a good example. It's killed more astronauts than any other vehicle with two LOVCs. One of them, caused precisely by tile damage. That could've happened yet another time, but by pure sheer luck, the missing tile just happened to be positioned over a structural part that was steel and not aluminum, and so it survived reentry anyway.
Not saying aluminum is a bad material, quite the contrary, it's a fantastic material. It's just a matter of using each when it makes sense to do so. In very large structures subjected to heavy stress, or structures where that might need to survive a lot of heat, steel ends up being better and even lighter, because while it is heavier than aluminum, it's stronger, and it reacts better at higher temps, so you require much less of it.
Titanium-A Battleplate seems a good compromise
Megastructures? Never heard that term used for a ships superstructure.
where in script did you encounter it, could be a typo! and yes - it is a superstructure
yes, please ignore "megastructure" everytime you hear it... it's superstructure.
Aside form scuttling, very few ships are sunk without onboard fires. The ones that come close are usually because of cracks developing from explosive shock and in many cases accentuated by fatigue from previous service in rough seas. Historically, aluminum deck houses have been compromised by destroyers firing their own guns. This problem was "solved" by upgrading the aft gun mount to a helicopter platform.
Hmn its good metal for time travel? Like the De lorean ?