Why The US Military Doesn't Build Its Subs With Titanium Hulls
Story by Jonathan H. Kantor • 1h
The United States Navy operates a large fleet of submarines, and each class brings something different to the table. However, there's something puzzling about how they're constructed: None of the Navy's submarine hulls are built with titanium. Titanium is stronger, more corrosive resistant, lighter, and better than steel in some applications, so why aren't the Navy's subs at least coated with it?
Titanium is a pure elemental metal, whereas industrial steel is typically an alloy of iron and carbon. American submarines are primarily made using HY-80, a steel alloy of nickel, molybdenum, and chromium. It's reliable and durable, but it's not titanium. During the Cold War, the Soviet Union saw the benefits of building submarines with titanium and designed its Lira-class (NATO designation "Alfa") using the metal in its hulls. This made Soviet submarines faster, quieter, and able to reach lower depths than their American counterparts.
Ultimately, the reason the Americans stuck with steel is pretty practical.Titanium is much more expensive than steel alloys, and because of its properties, it's harder to use for construction. And it's not like carbon steel held the U.S. Navy back from fielding some of the most advanced nuclear submarines in the world. But let's a take a closer look.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/why-the-us-military-doesn-t-build-its-subs-with-titanium-hulls/ar-AA1sXU2P?ocid=anaheim-ntp-feeds&pc=HCTS&cvid=04e5387e79d042b7bb6cdefd5ebefc0c&ei=121
