Has the U.S. virtually wiped out all competition in the military fighter/bomber field?

a reply to: Blackfinger

China also claimed they're years ahead of the US Navy because their new SSN and SSBN will use pump jets, which the US is still developing.

Take them with a big grain of salt.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Everything Chinese needs proof of concept. They say everything does x, y, and z but they say we will show you x and just ask or expect us to kindly be aware of y and z's possible existence.

a reply to: Caughtlurking

What makes this so funny is the Seawolf used a pump jet in the 90s or early 2000s when they commissioned.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Weve had various prepulsors on our subs besides screws for a while now. Good to know china doesnt know our current state of the art.

Bet they think they tricked us too when they surfaced amongst our fleet.

The chumps.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Those subs and how they get pushed are still some the most highly classified stuff out in the open.

a reply to: Caughtlurking

There's quite a bit out there if you look hard enough. The big secret has been the shape of the prop. The shape is key to prevent cavitation and be as efficient as possible.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Then there was that time google earth got imagery of a Boomer in dry dock screw and all. That didnt go over well.

Now if you look on google maps at moored decommissioned SSN and SSBN you notice all the screws were literally removed so sats couldnt see their blade shapes.

The cutback blade shape is the most efficient for cavitation mitigation. Wonder if shapes like that would be useful on aircraft wingtips.

More blades the less vibration or noise. But theyre less efficient. so you have to start making the blades variable pitch to be dynamic enough to prevent slippage. Ie if a full revolution of a screw theoretically pushes 35 feet of water or something. Due to higher blade count and slippage in actuality you push only 28 feet of water and efficiency goes down in exchange for less vibration and cavitation.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Is the reason these technologies are not more widely available and less then 5% of DOD know about them because they are such a game changer? To the point where Russia/China are so outmatched they would go M.A.D on us since they have no equivalent technologies and are impotent unless Nukes fly?

It breaks my heart that these technologies don't slide down to the common Aiman/Soldier/Sailor/Marine. If we have the ability to END the NK or Iran threat with only minimal to no casualties but resort to Legacy aircraft and tech in the campaign, and end up losing thousands or tens of thousands of lives....I'd call that TREASON.