It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

nuclear Submarines

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 29 2007 @ 01:18 AM
link   
[edit on 29-10-2007 by orangetom1999]

[edit on 29-10-2007 by orangetom1999]




posted on Oct, 29 2007 @ 02:45 AM
link   
a sub can probably tool along at 60 knots - and everyone with a passive sonar within 1000 miles will hear you


slow speed is teh key to being quiet - a hole in the water.



posted on Oct, 29 2007 @ 04:27 PM
link   
What about supercavitation?
This idea is used currently to allow torpedos to reach very high speeds underwater. I am wondering if this same technology could be used on the submarine itself which would allow for incredible underwater speeds.

HERE is a article about supercavitiation.

[edit on 29-10-2007 by 4thDoctorWhoFan]



posted on Oct, 29 2007 @ 06:03 PM
link   
en.wikipedia.org...

and

www.reuters.com...

video link

the russians allready make torpedos that supercavitate and sold them to iran ages ago.



posted on Oct, 29 2007 @ 06:20 PM
link   
I don't know too much about submarines but there is a FAS that is about 70 feet long, nuclear powered, 9 man crew, with a 12 man SEAL lockout and several ROV's in the back. It can do at least 100 knots using boundary layer control. A friend of mine has seen them at Pearl.



posted on Oct, 29 2007 @ 07:04 PM
link   
The Nimitz class carriers are so fast that they can make a twenty knot headwind for launching its aircraft with no wind what so ever, They are the fastest ships in the navy.
I bet the subs can zoom zoom too if they need to. I Wonder how fast that LA class sub was going when it smashed its nose in awhile back.



posted on Oct, 29 2007 @ 08:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by Harlequin
the russians allready make torpedos that supercavitate and sold them to iran ages ago.

The U.S. has had torpedos that supercavitate for some time, even before the Russians. My thought was if this technology could be applied to the submarine itself in order to increase speed.



posted on Oct, 30 2007 @ 12:14 AM
link   
Originally posted by Sky watcher



The Nimitz class carriers are so fast that they can make a twenty knot headwind for launching its aircraft with no wind what so ever, They are the fastest ships in the navy.


Thanks for the post Sky watcher. Even if they were the fastest ships in the Navy wouldn't they only have to go 20 knots to have a twenty knot headwind over the flight deck? I think the Nimitz class carriers can do 90 knots minimum. Maybe faster.


I bet the subs can zoom zoom too if they need to.


The subs can't but the ROV's can.


I Wonder how fast that LA class sub was going when it smashed its nose in awhile back.


Probably a lot faster than you think. The speed of a sub is dependant on the electrrical power to control the boundary layer. The new Fast Attack Subs can go at least 100 knots.


Thanks for the post.



posted on Oct, 30 2007 @ 02:48 AM
link   
reply to post by 4thDoctorWhoFan
 


The issue is one of noise - the faster you make something the further away someone can hear it - as i said with the alpha class - coming of a 45 knot sprint it culd be heard 1000 miles away.

and AFAIK the us has never tested nor fieled a working supercav torpedo, however the germans have Barracuda and in 2005 DARPA awarded a contract to both Northrop and Gneral Dynamics to make a small littoral vessel capabale of 100 knots source



posted on Oct, 30 2007 @ 07:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Thanks for the post Sky watcher. Even if they were the fastest ships in the Navy wouldn't they only have to go 20 knots to have a twenty knot headwind over the flight deck? I think the Nimitz class carriers can do 90 knots minimum. Maybe faster.


Uh, how?

Can you show some proof for that, or the calcuations that support it.



posted on Oct, 30 2007 @ 09:55 AM
link   
Originally posted by COOL HAND


Uh, how?

Can you show some proof for that, or the calcuations that support it.



Thank for the post COOL HAND. Basically what they do is move the boundary layer away from the hull.

When you do that you free the hull from the hull speed limitation of 1.34 times the square root of the waterline.

The exact method, of course, is classified but you can browse the subject here:

Naval Hydrodynamics Symposium (12th) on Boundary Layer Stability and Transition Ship Boundary Layers and Propeller Hull Interaction Cavitation Geophysical Fluid Dynamics.

stinet.dtic.mil...

The Navy has been gradually introducing boundary layer control since the 60’s. For one thing it used to require an enormous amount of electrical power.

The development of a new material for the hull requires less power and is used on the newer ships such as the small (70 ft. or so) Fast Attack Subs and SDU’s.

Thanks for the post.



posted on Oct, 30 2007 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Thank for the post COOL HAND. Basically what they do is move the boundary layer away from the hull.


If you move the boundary layer away from the hull, you move the water away from the propellors. Without the use of propellors, how do you make the ship move?


Can you site some examples of Navy vessels that use boundary layer control?


[edit on 30/10/07 by COOL HAND]



posted on Oct, 30 2007 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Originally posted by COOL HAND



If you move the boundary layer away from the hull, you move the water away from the propellors. Without the use of propellors, how do you make the ship move?


Thanks for the post COOL HAND. Let me respectfully suggest that you do a little reading up on boundary layer control.



Can you site some examples of Navy vessels that use boundary layer control?


My opinion is:

Nimitz class
Fast Attack Subs (the 70 ft. ones)
SDU's
Fleet 21's

There are probably way more that use boundary layer but I don't know about them,

Thanks again for the post.



posted on Oct, 30 2007 @ 10:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
Thanks for the post COOL HAND. Let me respectfully suggest that you do a little reading up on boundary layer control.

Uhh, I did and that is why my question is valid. Boundary Layer control is not something that can be applied to surface vessels.





Can you site some examples of Navy vessels that use boundary layer control?


My opinion is:

Nimitz class
Fast Attack Subs (the 70 ft. ones)
SDU's
Fleet 21's

There are probably way more that use boundary layer but I don't know about them,

Thanks again for the post.



What are SDUs, 70ft FA subs, and Fleet 21s? I have never heard of them, and Jane's has no info on them.



posted on Oct, 30 2007 @ 11:03 AM
link   
Originally posted by COOL HAND




What are SDUs, 70ft FA subs, and Fleet 21s? I have never heard of them, and Jane's has no info on them.



These are secret Naval vessels. There is no published information on any of them. Those who know, know. Those who don't needn't bother.

Thanks for the post and your input, it is greatly appreciated.



posted on Oct, 30 2007 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
These are secret Naval vessels. There is no published information on any of them. Those who know, know. Those who don't needn't bother.

Thanks for the post and your input, it is greatly appreciated.


Or, could it be that they do not exist and you do not know what you are talking about?

Fleet 21 is not a vessel, it is a plan for building the fleet for the 21st century.

SDU is the Advaced SEAL Delivery vehicle or ASDV.

I won't even bother with the 70ft attack sub. You probably mean the NR-1.

I am curious as to why you would be revealing what you believe to be classified projects? You do realize if you ever actually revealed a classifed project you would be subject to prosecution and could possible get the website shut down.



posted on Oct, 30 2007 @ 11:30 AM
link   
SDUs might be this but its tech. data says it can only do 8 kts.


more or less 70 ft or so

This here's the only thing i can find on fleet 21 using google:


good luck searching



posted on Oct, 30 2007 @ 12:49 PM
link   
John Lear,

You do know that there are new types of electrical generators coming on line...yes?? Smaller..more compact capable of higher voltages..etc etc.

THe concept of electrical catapults on the new carriers to replace the steam catapult systems of the Nimitz class indicates a different electrical system and also possibly dedicated generators specifically for the service this type of system.

So the engineering/design problem is how to properly fit variations of this system into a submarine??

Plug this in and see what surfaces. No pun intended!!

THe technique would not be to remove the water from the propellor area...but to remove the water away from certain areas only ..enough to reduce friction. Obviously you dont want to remove water from around important control surfaces thus affecting rise/dive/ steering capability. You only want enough to reduce fricton in certain areas.
Seems to me removing water from around the propellor/propulsor would be no different that the ineffiecncy of cavitation.

Also I think a system like this would not be quiet...but used for rapid escape or transit to and fro a patrol area.

But once again...you must have absolute control of your boat..one mistake at these speeds and you can transit below crush depth in a matter of seconds. Lord what a thought!! Talk about a pucker factor!!

Just some random thoughts here.

Thanks,
Orangetom

[edit on 30-10-2007 by orangetom1999]

[edit on 30-10-2007 by orangetom1999]



posted on Oct, 30 2007 @ 02:34 PM
link   
Originally posted by COOL HAND




Or, could it be that they do not exist and you do not know what you are talking about?


No, they exist.


Fleet 21 is not a vessel, it is a plan for building the fleet for the 21st century.


Yes, like Sandia is a laboratory or mountain.

Like the F-19 is the F-117A.

About 20 years ago instead of pulling names out of a hat for new projects they started using common names for several projects. Fleet 21 is an example. Yes, it is a plan for building a fleet for the 21st century and guess what? We're here! And Fleet 21 is also a vessel just finishing up sea trials southwest of San Diego.


I won't even bother with the 70ft attack sub. You probably mean the NR-1.


NR-1 is not a Fast Attack Sub and is not 70 feet long, nor is it nuclear powered.


I am curious as to why you would be revealing what you believe to be classified projects? You do realize if you ever actually revealed a classifed project you would be subject to prosecution and could possible get the website shut down.


I believe I said they were 'secret' not classified. Keeping stuff secret and classified was getting too cumbersome. So now, in many cases they don't actually classify a program as "top secret' or something ike that. They just try to plug every possible leak.

Most of the stuff I talk about is known by all the major players, including but not limited to China, Russia, Japan, Israel and England. Its the public they don't want knowing any of this about because if the public knew then Congress would know and what Congress would know is that they never approved any of this and wonder where so much money came from. Thats what has to be kept secret.

This country in the stranglehold of the Military-Industrial Complex and its difficult to see how we will ever get out of this fix.

At the very highest levels all major countries are allies. They are allied in technological achievement for their own benefit, not the benefit of the common man or public or you and I.

As far as shutting a website down, no. If there was any material posted they didn't want up they would get a court order to have it removed. Shutting a website such as this down would be silly and unproductive. A website like this helps them keep track of who knows what and whats leaking. They need ATS.

And as far as prosecuting me? You think they would want to prosecute someone who says there is a breathable atmosphere on the moon? Guess again.


Thanks for the post and your input, it is greatly appreciated.



posted on Oct, 30 2007 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnlear
No, they exist.

Then show some proof. How can I believe something I know is not true if you do not show something for it.



About 20 years ago instead of pulling names out of a hat for new projects they started using common names for several projects. Fleet 21 is an example. Yes, it is a plan for building a fleet for the 21st century and guess what? We're here! And Fleet 21 is also a vessel just finishing up sea trials southwest of San Diego.


Really, then who built it?



NR-1 is not a Fast Attack Sub and is not 70 feet long, nor is it nuclear powered.

Now I know you are full of crap, I have seen the reactor with my own eyes.



And as far as prosecuting me? You think they would want to prosecute someone who says there is a breathable atmosphere on the moon? Guess again.


If you had revealed any actual classified material, yes they would.

Look at what they went through for folks like John Walker, and the stuff he put out is no where near as explosive as the stuff you "claim."



new topics




 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join