09III/09IV (093/094) Nuclear Submarine Thread

[Blitzo]

Reading your post I know that you are not an engineer . From my personal experience it is much easier to improve the design if you have model in front of you. They even have a term for it "GO BY"

I don't find anywhere the article exaggerate anything It is you who are smart alec

You clearly did not even read my post, I said that it makes sense for them to have wanted a 3D model, but it is completely different to "basing" a design of a real life submarine off of a plastic toy. The shape of the toy would have helped them in the right direction to do their own tests.

The article is exaggerating because it makes it sound like looking at 3D models was something rare back in those days, and the article's title is exaggerating because it completely misleads a reader into thinking you can base the design of a nuclear submarine on a toy.

And you should really calm yourself, it seems that everytime someone disagrees with you, you take it quite personally.

 

[Hendrik_2000]

You clearly did not even read my post, I said that it makes sense for them to have wanted a 3D model, but it is completely different to "basing" a design of a real life submarine off of a plastic toy. The shape of the toy would have helped them in the right direction to do their own tests.

The article is exaggerating because it makes it sound like looking at 3D models was something rare back in those days, and the article's title is exaggerating because it completely misleads a reader into thinking you can base the design of a nuclear submarine on a toy.

And you should really calm yourself, it seems that everytime someone disagrees with you, you take it quite personally.

That is your personal interpretation of the article I don't have the same impression

No where in the article that it said you can design submarine by looking at the toy What it says is China is so backward and isolated back then that they have to scrounge submarine toy to learn how submarine is constructed

 

[Zool]

I'm just guessing here, but if this toy or model was of any value to the Chinese engineering their first SSN way back when, it was for general shaping/hydrodynamics at a basic level.

For understanding internal placement of machinery and such you would need to have a reference of scale for the hull and machinery and then a schematic to tell the Chinese where the various equipment and stations are located in the sub. Guessing again, but I doubt the toy came with schematics. So the value of the toy itself was likely minimal, hence inflated by the article.

 

[Blitzo]

Zool has said it, basically.

Hendrik, I'm not saying the model wasn't useful, I'm just saying it was not as useful as the article and the title makes it out to be. Want China Times is a tabloid quality site at best. What they do is take little bits of dubious information and twist it into something that will catch attention and give them readers.

 

[tphuang]

I'm not too clear why Hendrik is having such a vigorous desire to debate with Bltizo here. Either way, cut it out and get back to topic.

 

[Jeff Head]

I do not doubt that the PRC may have bought a model or toy for visualization.

But a toy/model would not have been accurate in the least...and given standard drafting and scaling capabilities, they could have used an actual picture to get much more accurate data for modeling.

I have done this type of modeling myself for military systems, starting working on drafting boards back in the 70s and working up through full 3-D models and ultimately solids modeling on computers like we do today.

All of the modeling techniques programmed into the computers my friends, were merely what we already knew how to do building three D models mathematically and graphically. They used as accurate data as they could find to feed those computations...and photographic data is much more accurate than any toy model.

Plain and simple...end of story.

My issue is simple...I do not for an instant believe that they toy is what allowed the Chinese designers to build their sub. It may well have helped to visualize things in a simple way...but visualizing nonetheless. When it came to designing the actual model and form, they used engineering, design, and math...and they would have relied on much more accurate data with which they created those models.

The source of this story is subject enough. The actual data it is providing is simply not credible.

Either they are making it up...or the old engineer is feeble in mind and not sharing accurate data after all of these years. If we are to believe either is the case...do we really believe the PRC would allow such access to such an individual for interview?

Very doubtful in my mind.

...and, as Tphuang stated (which I did not see until after my post), there is no sense in arguing it further.

So...end the meaningless arguement.

DO NOT RESPOND TO THIS MODERATION

 

[tidalwave]

Speculating these are 093G improved version.

 

[antiterror13]

how many of 093G has been produced?

 

[tidalwave]

how many of 093G has been produced?

around 3 built and rumored it has VLS cruise missiles.

台湾的《全球防卫杂志》近日刊登了大陆一款新型潜艇的图片。这款潜艇意思是093的第二代改良型，可称093G2。去年12月，葫芦岛造船厂已完成2艘093G核子动力攻击潜艇，另有1艘在干船坞中。093G与093的差别在于增加了垂直发射器，可能用于发射巡航导弹或鹰击18反舰导弹

 

[tidalwave]

third one in dry dock under construction.