WinterBorn
Diamond Member
- Thread starter
- Moderator
- #21
OK I get that. But it still doesn't make sense to me to impose a Space temperature requirement on a Submarine. If metal fatigue is the issue then design a metal fatigue test. If hardness is the issue then design a test for busting through ice.I read the article and it says the only test where results were falsified was a hardness test at minus 100 degrees F. That seems like a ridiculous over test to me. The coldest ocean water is around positive 28 degrees F. Am I missing something here?Feds say company provided subpar steel for US Navy subs
For decades, the U.S. Navy’s leading supplier of high-strength steel for submarines provided subpar metal because one of the company’s longtime employees falsified lab results.www.defensenews.com
"The foundry's director of metallurgy, Elaine Thomas, 66, of Auburn, Washington, also was charged criminally with one count of major fraud against the United States. Thomas, who worked in various capacities at the lab for 40 years, was due to make an initial appearance in federal court June 30."
"The criminal complaint said she fabricated the results of more than 200 productions of steel, representing a substantial percentage of the castings Bradken produced for the Navy."
Bitch needs to spend the rest of her life in prison. But first, send her out on one of those submarines and take it to test depth. I bet the sound of the hull creaking and popping would freak her the fuck out.
The steel was verified to be at certain specs. It either is or it isn't.
Also, the testing is done at extremes because there are not tests to simulate diving to deep depths and surfacing again over and over for years. Metal fatigue become a factor that must be accounted for.
And subs do break through Arctic ice. I have been on cruises under the ice. I have my Bluenose certificate (for going inside the Arctic Circle) to prove it.
I have no idea why the temperature of the testing was set as it was. I am sure it was an extreme for some reason.
But if you accept a contract to provide steel within certain specs, you provide it. If a batch somehow gets screwed up and isn't to spec, you eat that batch rather than pass it on to the shipbuilders.
There were a lot of seemingly minor repair parts that were tested extensively too. In most situations, the manufacturers test a few per batch, or 1 in 1,000. But for submarines some parts manufacturers were required to test as many as 1 in 10. It made the parts much more expensive. But it had to be done. On a surface ship, if something fails you can get help, or at worst, you abandon ship. In a submarine, if things fail, you either fix it quick or everyone dies. There is a small valve on the air system used to blow the ballast tanks. On the USS Thresher, the system was found to not remove the moisture as needed. That resulted in ice forming inside the lines, which plugged them. The reactor had shutdown due to anothe issue. But they could have blown ballast tanks and surfaced. The ice plugs prevents that and 129 lives were lost.
Probably more info than you needed, huh? lol