747400sp
Topic Author
Posts: 3833
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 7:27 pm

What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Sun Jan 16, 2011 7:59 am

I was wondering, what do think is the strongest and weakest types of ships built?


For me.

Strongest:

Battleships

Aircraft Carriers

Ocean Liners

Weakest:

Cruise Ships

Tankers
 
User avatar
2707200X
Posts: 4756
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 5:31 am

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Sun Jan 16, 2011 8:40 am

Quoting 747400sp (Thread starter):
Cruise Ships

Cruise ships have a lot of windows and glass a rouge wave can do damage and the water can make its way in, rough sea conditions often move tables and chairs around a room injuring passengers.

Quoting 747400sp (Thread starter):
Tankers

All the mass really makes them susceptible to hogging and sagging in rough seas as much of a loaded tanker is below the water line.


Quoting 747400sp (Thread starter):
Battleships
Quoting 747400sp (Thread starter):
Aircraft Carriers

They are made for the high seas and having few windows and watertight doors helps.
"And all I ask is a tall ship and a star to steer her by." John Masefield Sea-Fever
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4292
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Sun Jan 16, 2011 10:00 am

Quoting 747400sp (Thread starter):
For me.

Strongest:

ICE Breakers, especially the Russian atomic powered ones.

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
gkirk
Posts: 23345
Joined: Thu Jun 15, 2000 3:29 am

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Sun Jan 16, 2011 10:04 am

Strongest: Titanic
Weakest: Titanic

...
When you hear the noise of the Tartan Army Boys, we'll be coming down the road!
 
ltbewr
Posts: 12361
Joined: Thu Jan 29, 2004 1:24 pm

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Sun Jan 16, 2011 12:52 pm

Some of the weakest ships as to build were some of the 'liberty ships' of the USA during WW II. Mainly for cargo use, but also to transport troops and for limited battle use, these ships were very famous for the quick build times, using prefabricated sections, extensive welding instead of rivets, with final assembly from keel to flotable in as little as less than 5 days. Earlier versions were designed to only really last about 5 years. They were also infamous with a relatively small number of them breaking apart in rough seas vs. that other ships at the time.

The quality of metal, cold weather stress in use in the North Atlantic, the techniques of manufacturing, engineering flaws, overloading along with a huge need for many such ships quickly and cheaply, since many were also lost to enemy led to a combination of decisions that caused their higher that desirable loss rates. Many had to be modified and many were scrapped over time as they had these flaws. Some were retained after WW II for military use, speciality use but most became the backbone of post-WWII shipping companies in Europe and elsewhere.
 
PC12Fan
Posts: 1967
Joined: Sat Jan 27, 2007 11:50 pm

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Sun Jan 16, 2011 2:01 pm

IMO, the U.S. Coast Guards self righting lifeboat is a tough one.

http://www.uscg.mil/d11/stahumboldtbay/img/Humboldt_bar.jpg
Just when I think you've said the stupidest thing ever, you keep talkin'!
 
Quokka
Posts: 1315
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2010 12:26 pm

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Sun Jan 16, 2011 2:12 pm

Do you include submarines in the definition of ships? Would these not need to be fairly strong to withstand water pressure when submerged? Serious question, because I genuinely do not know. I haven't studied it at all and I know that shipwrecks can lie under the ocean for many years relatively intact but they are not moving through water. So are submarines subject to greater pressure and would their construction need to make them "stronger"?

Over to the engineers...
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Sun Jan 16, 2011 2:22 pm

Among the toughest surface ships would be SAR cruisers as they are being used in the North Sea:

Seenotrettungskreuzer – Wikipedia

They are specifically designed to operate under conditions where other ships get into trouble.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 9852
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Sun Jan 16, 2011 2:42 pm

Some of the strongest ships would have to be ice breakers, platform supply vessels and standby vessesls. However any flaw in the design and you strong vessel could end up a lemon. In the case of standby vessels they can't leave there position watever the weather, they have to ride out whatever hits them, these are very strongly built ships.

Quoting gemuser (Reply 2):
ICE Breakers, especially the Russian atomic powered ones.

What's interesting about these vessels is that they can't operate anywhere other than in the artic, if they go south, they overheat. A new class of atomic powered ice breakers is currently being designed.

Quoting 2707200X (Reply 1):
Cruise ships have a lot of windows and glass a rouge wave can do damage and the water can make its way in, rough sea conditions often move tables and chairs around a room injuring passengers.

Lot's of windows doesn't make them weak.
 
User avatar
Mortyman
Posts: 4078
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Sun Jan 16, 2011 2:46 pm

 
Quokka
Posts: 1315
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2010 12:26 pm

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Sun Jan 16, 2011 2:51 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 8):
What's interesting about these vessels is that they can't operate anywhere other than in the arctic, if they go south, they overheat.

Sorry but I don't understand this. Are you saying only that they can not make the journey from the Arctic Ocean through warmer waters to the Antarctic, or that they can't operate in the Antarctic Circle?
 
hka098
Posts: 532
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 3:50 pm

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Sun Jan 16, 2011 2:52 pm

I know jack about sea vessels (other than I would rather stay off of them). I would think the Soviet Typhoon and Alfa class submarines would be some pretty tough customers. The Typhoon is the biggest sub and the Alfa was the fastest with it's titanium hull.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 9852
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Sun Jan 16, 2011 4:44 pm

Quoting Quokka (Reply 10):
Are you saying only that they can not make the journey from the Arctic Ocean through warmer waters to the Antarctic, or that they can't operate in the Antarctic Circle?

These ships must cruise in cold water to cool their reactors, so they cannot pass through the tropics to undertake voyages in the Southern hemisphere.
 
User avatar
2707200X
Posts: 4756
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 5:31 am

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Sun Jan 16, 2011 7:27 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 8):
Lot's of windows doesn't make them weak.

It does not make them weak but more vulnerable to damage in rough seas as water may punch through windows in the lower section of the superstructure. The hull if fine.
"And all I ask is a tall ship and a star to steer her by." John Masefield Sea-Fever
 
mbmbos
Posts: 2565
Joined: Sat May 27, 2000 4:16 am

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Sun Jan 16, 2011 8:13 pm

Quoting ltbewr (Reply 4):
Some of the weakest ships as to build were some of the 'liberty ships'...

Very interesting summary. Thanks!
 
shamrock137
Posts: 227
Joined: Mon Jul 25, 2005 7:10 am

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Sun Jan 16, 2011 10:10 pm

Roll on / Roll off ferries seem to be particularly vulnerable in heavy seas if their is any type of failure in the bow door. Also even a small amount of water on the car deck can cause a loss of stability. The MS Estonia, a 155ft passenger ferry of this design sank less than 45 min after the bow door failed in a storm.
Time to spare? Go by air!
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4292
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Sun Jan 16, 2011 11:25 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 12):

These ships must cruise in cold water to cool their reactors, so they cannot pass through the tropics to undertake voyages in the Southern hemisphere.

Interesting tid-bit, Rob!

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
Geezer
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:37 am

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Mon Jan 17, 2011 1:50 am

Trying to determine what is the "strongest" ship is an impossibility; there are too many kinds of ships, each specifically designed for specific jobs.

Someone mentioned the Russian Typhoon class submarines. They are by far the largest subs ever built, and having a double titanium hull, it takes an awful lot to sink one, ( So far, no one has ever accomplished it. ) But are they the "strongest" overall ? That's a very difficult question to answer; They are designed to dive at very deep depths, but on the other hand, so are a lot of other submarines, I can tell you this; there are NO submarines, Russian, U.S., British or any other that can withstand the pressure at much more than maybe 1,500 feet. Inasmuch as there are places in the oceans that are over 30,000 ft deep, NO sub will EVER be able to dive anywhere near this deep without being crushed by the extreme pressure.

A lot of things are involved in making something "strong". Overall size has a lot to do with it, shape of hull, type of metal in hull, etc. Example; a Los Angeles class attack sub has a hull that is a perfect cylinder, with a hemispherical cap on either end. this is as strong as you can make a sub; without making it so heavy it would be useless. U.S.N. attack subs all have hulls of "around" 3" thickness; they are all able to operate at or below 1,000 ft. ( just how far below is classified )
They are also able to go quite "fast" submerged. Again, just "how fast" is classified. If you increased hull thickness to, say, 6", sure, you could dive much deeper, but the thing would be so heavy it would be much slower.

Actually, submarines have much in common with airplanes; they are all "purpose built" depending on their mission.
They are all designed to be "just strong enough", just "fast" enough, and just as safe as it is possible to make them.
( The U.S.N. is very "big" on safety, but even they have lost two SSN's so far. )

If you want to see something that is REALLY strong, ( although it is not classified as a "ship" ), the bathyscaphe "Trieste" is, to this day, the only manned vessel ever to reach the bottom of deepest place in the world's oceans. In 1960 it reached the bottom of the Mariana Trench, near Guam, a depth of 35,797 feet. the thing is essentially a 50ft long tank filled with gasoline for buoyancy, with a 7ft diameter sphere suspended beneath it for the 2 man crew. Suffice to say, spheres are VERY strong.

To make something the size of a submarine, that could withstand 35,000 feet........probably need to be 6 feet thick !
( I'm just guessing ) ( and it would probably sink under it's own weight )

A modern aircraft carrier ? A very strong ship.........just "strong enough" to accomplish it's intended purpose.

It's very safe to say, all modern submarines are very "strong" ships, but they can also ALL be lost, destroyed, sunk; either by "accident", ( U.S.S. Thresher , U.S.S. Scorpion ), and at least 3 Russian SSN's.
All modern warships are very strong, but none are "impervious" to being "lost".

BTW...........I don't know where this thing about nuclear ice-breakers being unable to operate in "warmer" waters came from ?
If that really is the case with a particular Russian vessel, then it has a very poorly designed cooling system ! The U.S. Navy has a lot of nuclear powered vessels, submarines, aircraft carriers, cruisers, etc etc, and I GUARANTEE you, any one of them is capable of going ANYPLACE in the world's oceans !

Charley
Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
 
BMI727
Posts: 11089
Joined: Mon Feb 02, 2009 9:29 pm

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Mon Jan 17, 2011 2:03 am

Quoting Geezer (Reply 17):
If that really is the case with a particular Russian vessel, then it has a very poorly designed cooling system !

Why? If you can use the surrounding frigid water as a heat sink, why bother with the complicated cooling system? And what sort of icebreaker would need to operate in warm climates, and there isn't a whole lot of need for the Russians to operate in Antarctica.

Quoting Geezer (Reply 17):
The U.S. Navy has a lot of nuclear powered vessels, submarines, aircraft carriers, cruisers, etc etc, and I GUARANTEE you, any one of them is capable of going ANYPLACE in the world's oceans !

As does the Soviet/Russian Navy on vessels that need to be able to go anywhere. But there isn't much reason why they should go out of their way to make sure that their icebreakers can work in the Persian Gulf. After all:

Quoting Geezer (Reply 17):
they are all "purpose built" depending on their mission.
Why do Aerospace Engineering students have to turn things in on time?
 
KingFriday013
Posts: 879
Joined: Fri May 18, 2007 7:56 am

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Mon Jan 17, 2011 2:48 am

Do surfboards count?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0f/Plane_crash_into_Hudson_River_%28crop%29.jpg

-J.
Tho' I've belted you an' flayed you, By the livin' Gawd that made you, You're a better man than I am, Gunga Din!
 
Gemuser
Posts: 4292
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2003 12:07 pm

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Mon Jan 17, 2011 3:14 am

Quoting Geezer (Reply 17):
If that really is the case with a particular Russian vessel, then it has a very poorly designed cooling system

I'd say its very clever, SPECIALIST design! These ships are designed to serve the Russian north coast for as long a season as possible, a location where cold ambient water is never in short supply. The Russians have sent ice breakers to Antarctica in the past, but i have no idea if they were atomic powered.

Gemuser
DC23468910;B72172273373G73873H74374475275376377L77W;A319 320321332333343;BAe146;C402;DHC6;F27;L188;MD80MD85
 
Doona
Posts: 3382
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 9:43 am

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Mon Jan 17, 2011 8:01 am

Quoting Shamrock137 (Reply 15):
155ft

Actually, that's 155 metres.  

Cheers
Mats
Sure, we're concerned for our lives. Just not as concerned as saving 9 bucks on a roundtrip to Ft. Myers.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 9852
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Mon Jan 17, 2011 8:28 am

Quoting gemuser (Reply 20):
The Russians have sent ice breakers to Antarctica in the past, but i have no idea if they were atomic powered.

Not the nuclear powered ones. They have two types of nuclear Ice Breakers in service, 2 with shallow draft built in Finland for rivers Taimyr class and 4 operational Arktika class (6 constructed) for the Arctic.

The newest Russian Icebreakers are the conventially powered Moscow and St Petersburg built at Baltisky Shipyard in St Petersburg. I got to go onboard St Petersburg for an inspection of equipment my company supplied. These can and will also be used in the Antartic supporting Russian activities down there.
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Mon Jan 17, 2011 1:04 pm

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 18):
Quoting Geezer (Reply 17):
If that really is the case with a particular Russian vessel, then it has a very poorly designed cooling system !

Why? If you can use the surrounding frigid water as a heat sink, why bother with the complicated cooling system?

The cooling systems always work with sea water in every case (even for non-nuclear propulsion). The main variables for differing sea water temperatures would be pump capacities and pipe diameters. The complexity isn't much different.

Some soviet-era technology is known for cutting corners on certain specs, but I would still be surprised if there were many if any icebreakers which would be incapable of operating in a warm climate. Possibly not at peak performance, but then again there usually isn't much ice to break in the tropics.

Quoting BMI727 (Reply 18):
And what sort of icebreaker would need to operate in warm climates, and there isn't a whole lot of need for the Russians to operate in Antarctica.

The Soviet Union and later Russia has been conducting research on Antarctica for scientific and possibly strategic reasons. Icebreakers are a necessity there.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 3679
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Mon Jan 17, 2011 5:18 pm

Quoting 747400sp (Thread starter):

For me.

Strongest:

Battleships

Aircraft Carriers

Ocean Liners

Weakest:

Cruise Ships

Tankers

I would put cargo ships as being weaker than tankers... remember that most tankers are built double-hulled and somewhat strong to avoid a huge oil spill... who really cares if a cargo ship goes down.
56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
Kiwirob
Posts: 9852
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Mon Jan 17, 2011 6:06 pm

Quoting Klaus (Reply 23):
Some soviet-era technology is known for cutting corners on certain specs, but I would still be surprised if there were many if any icebreakers which would be incapable of operating in a warm climate. Possibly not at peak performance, but then again there usually isn't much ice to break in the tropics.

I learn't this from one of the designers at Baltisky, the Soviets never invisaged sending these vessels South so they didn't design the cooling system to cope with tropical waters. They have other conventional powered icebreakers to send south.
Here's a photo of Saint Petersburg during construction, she is Russias latest icebreaker, I sold all the lights for this vessel and her sister ship Moscow.

http://img196.imageshack.us/img196/1393/83456786.jpg
 
Klaus
Posts: 20578
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2001 7:41 am

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Mon Jan 17, 2011 7:09 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 25):
I learn't this from one of the designers at Baltisky, the Soviets never invisaged sending these vessels South so they didn't design the cooling system to cope with tropical waters.

Okay, but that's simply a matter of insufficient dimensioning – there is no inherent impossibility involved.
 
sw733
Posts: 5298
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 6:19 am

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Mon Jan 17, 2011 7:15 pm

 
Kiwirob
Posts: 9852
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Mon Jan 17, 2011 10:46 pm

Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 24):
who really cares if a cargo ship goes down.

In decending order, the sailors, there families, Lloyds, the ships owners and the owners of the cargo.
 
User avatar
Zkpilot
Posts: 3679
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:21 pm

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Mon Jan 17, 2011 11:19 pm

Quoting KiwiRob (Reply 28):
Quoting Zkpilot (Reply 24):
who really cares if a cargo ship goes down.

In decending order, the sailors, there families, Lloyds, the ships owners and the owners of the cargo.

Firstly that was a rheotorical question in comparison to an oil supertanker.

But yes you are right. The sailors of course have motorised lifeboats that can handle pretty much anything (full sealed, enclosed able to roll over etc painted dayglow orange). Yes the cargo is valuable and containers can pose a shipping hazard, but on the whole nothing like what happens when an oil supertanker springs a leak or sinks.
56 types. 38 countries. 24 airlines.
 
Geezer
Posts: 1413
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 4:37 am

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Tue Jan 18, 2011 6:03 am

quote= Zkpilot, reply=24

who really cares if a cargo ship goes down.


My guess would be........ the crew..........
Stupidity: Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result; Albert Einstein
 
PlymSpotter
Posts: 9986
Joined: Thu Jun 17, 2004 7:32 am

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Tue Jan 18, 2011 7:47 pm

There was one type of British frigate/warship which was known to be structurally very weak according to some friends who worked in Drake Yard through the 1960s to early 1990s. I forget the type, but apparently it was solved by adding a large horizontal brace down the side of the ship, formed to look like additional armour plating. All ships are designed to flex, which is visible when you look down a long corridor running through multiple frames, but this one was unintentionally over flexible I am told.


Dan  
...love is just a camouflage for what resembles rage again...
 
Bongodog1964
Posts: 3069
Joined: Wed Oct 18, 2006 6:29 am

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Wed Jan 19, 2011 12:01 pm

Quoting PlymSpotter (Reply 31):
There was one type of British frigate/warship which was known to be structurally very weak according to some friends who worked in Drake Yard through the 1960s to early 1990s. I forget the type, but apparently it was solved by adding a large horizontal brace down the side of the ship, formed to look like additional armour plating. All ships are designed to flex, which is visible when you look down a long corridor running through multiple frames, but this one was unintentionally over flexible I am told.

The type 21 frigate suffered from cracking due to its steel/aluminium construction and required reinforcing plates.

The type 42 destroyer was updated after the intial batch and stretched, this had a highly visible external strengthening beam on the side of the hull to prevent it hogging.

All the result of building too small/ using aluminium for the superstructure to reduce top weight/ reducing close in armament to reduce weight we ended up with classes of ships which were underarmed and high maintenance.

The type 22 frigates returned to all steel construction, but with the same initial problwem of being too short to carry all that was required.
Subsequent to the Falklands war all UK frigates and destroyers were better fire proofed and better armed.

We weren't the only nation to fall foul of this 1970's thinking, the US Oliver Hazard Perry suffered from the same problems.
 
JBirdAV8r
Posts: 3454
Joined: Sun Jun 24, 2001 4:44 am

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Wed Jan 19, 2011 1:22 pm

For "weak," there was always the Liberty Ship (which had a propensity for, you know, breaking in half without warning):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberty_ship
I got my head checked--by a jumbo jet
 
Schienenflieger
Posts: 25
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 7:49 pm

RE: What Are The Strongest And Weakest Ships Built?

Fri Jan 21, 2011 3:16 pm

To second Klaus, I've got to mention our lifeboats again.

In one accident in 1967, the Adolph Bermpohl tried to rescue some Dutch fisherman and apparently was buried under a Caventsman. The ship was found drifting around two days later, with some windows smashed in and the port engine still running. Three of four crewman were washed ashore some months later. The boat was returned to service and still is a lifeboat in Lithuania.

A similar accident happened in 1995 with the Alfried Krupp, and the boat is still in service.
"Railways are not intended to generate a profit, but to be a beneficial institution for the public." - Otto von Bismarck

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Channex757, Google Adsense [Bot], MaverickM11, pvjin and 17 guests