You must try harder to be seen as an objective analyser of data, rather than a transmitter of propaganda materials.
That is rich, coming from someone who lied about the Virginia's price tag, the rate of Russian ship construction and the properties of pump jet engines. You are the one who is willfully obfuscating data and facts to achieve your own nebulous end.
So, we don't know the internal arrangement of the Yasen, there are pictures those showing the crew compartment with single wall, and the engine with double.
Except we do know
Coming from the director of the Company who designed the Yasen itself, the quote is "one length and a half single hull) so it is not a full double hull design as you claimed. And countless time again and again, size does not dictate the level of quietness, but rather it is to do with design. You can scream that to high heavens but it will never ever change. I can bring up countless examples like how the Borei is considered to be more quieter than the Typhoon subs despite the former being 50 percent more heavier and much larger than latter. Or the earlier example of the U212 and the Victor III class. But I know you will most likely ignore that again.
But it doesn't affect the basic wisdom that can be supported by a glazier : if you want quiet house then you need more glass layer, spaced by different distances. And that needs space.
Space which the Yasen's extra 6 torpedo tubes, 10-20 torpedos and countermeasures plus the extra 36 missiles and VLS silos on the back will have taken up. But they all seem to vanish into a black hole for all that you are concerned. And a double hull designs makes up at least 20-30 percent of a sub which is fill with nothing but an empty clanking void.
So, if the diameter of the sub is 30% smaller ,then there is 30% less space for sound insulation and encapsulation - and any technological marvel and wunderweapon can only try compensate it.
Refer to the post above as I am done feeding the pigeon on the chess table, the only compensation done here is on your part thinking that waving a magic wand will magically make all those missiles and torpedos on board the Yasen vanish into a magical pocket dimension.
It is the same discussion like F-35 vs any double engine bird, or a 2 litre tuned "race" car with lot of optical tuning vs a 6 litre real race car with simple design.
Oh, have you heard about towed sonar ? Do you know the connection between receiver spacing and frequency sensitivity?
Yes I have heard of both and I know for a fact that the Yasen is not going to lug around a sonar the size of a container behind it.
I am still amazed, how can you be so emotionally motivated in a topic that is simple basic math and engineering ?
Attempting to paint my posts as being emotionally attached does not ignore the fact that your "simple basic math and engineering" are founded on erroneous assumptions, cherry picked research and hyperbolic claims.
And how you can think that a swasplate monopropelant internal combustion engine is quiet?
Seriously ?
Because for a start Otto II fueled engines relies on a chemical reaction and not the actual burning of chemicals to achieve it's energy release. For frack's sake's do you know nothing.
And for the second the propeller of modern torpedoes are pump jet design which greatly reduce noise signatures at high speeds.
And frankly, the torpedo range is not something mythical, knowing the energy density of the propellant, and the water resistance it is damned easy to calculate every other parameter.
It is something that done in the generic "internal combustion engine design"class at any university (usually for more complicated engines)
Then post a research detailing the so called short range of 10-20 kilometers for modern torpedoes as you claimed. Or just admit you are pulling crap outta thin air.
A commercial ship has no other activity than the engine .
The carrier has +6000 man on board, with lot of pumps, lifts , cooling systems, toilets , maintenance activities , arresting gears, radars, valves and so on.
The very use of the word "commercial" by you here betrays how little you know. A commercial ship has no "other activity " other than the engine ? Well I guess the use of civilian search radar and guidance systems. The various cooling systems required by large diesel class engines which are not subjected to the same standards of quality and acoustics as military engines, and toilets (I did not know that civilian ship are automated by robots), the gears and pulleys used fishing nets (if it is a trawler) or the mulitude of stacked containers all groaning in union (for super cargo carriers) must be a mirage to you. All these systems produce a racket which is much greater then any navy vessels of the same size.
Get real.
