[RoadGumby]

The idea is double hull, as in, not easily sinkable, which COULD block the strait.

[GonzoGOP]

The idea is double hull, as in, not easily sinkable, which COULD block the strait.

When you hit it with 400 pounds of TNT single or double hull isn't going to matter much. I have attached a picture of the mine damage to the USS Tripoli back in 1991. And warships are not only double hulled, but built stronger that merchants. You set off a mine against, or worse directly under, a ship and you are going to get a big honking hole, single or double hull.


The reason tankers are hard to sink is that when in ballast the oil tanks are full of air. And it isn't just one big tank. Some of the big ships have up to 50 separate tanks. Flooding one or two isn't going to sink the ship. And damage from a contact mine tends to be localized. A magnetic mine under the keel might blow the ship in half, but even then the parts would likely float long enough to tow them out of the channel. Several tankers have broken their backs in storms and stayed afloat for days. You would probably want a big salvage tug in the convoy in case of such an emergency or in case a ship took a hit to propellers or rudder.

There are also the ballast tanks. Those are full of water, but can be pumped out to make up for buoyancy lost to other flooded spaces.

[GATOR NAVY]

The idea is double hull, as in, not easily sinkable, which COULD block the strait.

The straits are a much wider and deeper feature than people seem to realize. One sunken ship, even the largest ULCC right in the middle of the TSS (Traffic Separation Scheme), is not going to physically block the straits. Ten sunken ULCCs are not going to physically block the straits. The straits can be closed by virtue of the fact that shipping will not take the risk of transiting due to fear of attack, but they cannot be "blocked" with a wreck in the sense that a waterway like the Suez Canal can.