Why do posters here gloat over the Kursk peacetime submarine disaster that killed something like 200 young men, leaving widows and fatherless children? Why is that something to be happy or self-satisfied about?
I also do not see it as relevant to the question of what hull layer design is superior - clearly no submarine hull design will protect against a catastrophic internal explosion of combustible weapons systems.
The US is the world leader in most defence technology, and is widely believed to have an overwhelmingly superior navy to all other nations. This probably means, by and large, their submarines are superior to Russian ones.
However, it appears the US’ lead has shrunk rapidly in the last decade or so, and Russians may have technological leads in niche areas of weapons systems. The concern I would have, if I were American - and I’m not - is the seemingly crazy cost escalations of major US projects, and here I’m thinking F-35, and Ohio-replacement,but there are just too many examples.
To me it seems obvious that the US will continue to lose leverage and the edge despite its greater defence budget if it costs the Russians $900 million to make a sub the US equivalent of which (ie. the Ohio replacement) will cost $5 billion.
I don’t know why US defence costs have escalated crazily because it seems the US has such strong anti-corruption laws, but I wonder if it is not corruption as legally defined but more a sort of overpaid-gravy-train you-scratch-my-back-I’ll-scratch-yours situation with hi-tech military industries in the US employing ex US senior military officers.
Anyway, I guess the Chinese and Russians aren’t exactly unhappy with the situation.
I personally couldn’t care less, and could think of few things worse than having to work on a submarine.