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.

 

supercavitating torpedoes

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 06:10 AM
link   
www.deepangel.com...

deepangel has some info on the torpedos but does not give any sources.

Interestingly they are now saying that the Germans have developed a steerable one using similar nosecone tech to that which is described earlier.

Kept that one quiet didnt they!!!! Am looking it up now




posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 06:29 AM
link   
Deep Angel is not a credible source.




seekerof



posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 07:14 AM
link   
did i say it was???????
I just ment they had some information on it that may prove useful in the search for a credible source. The information on cavitation on their site is however usually quite well researched and can be useful as a starting point. They make it quite clear what is fictiona nd what is not on their website.

[edit on 6-6-2005 by paperplane_uk]



posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 04:30 PM
link   
HSUW diagram

I want one.



posted on Jun, 6 2005 @ 05:10 PM
link   
Thanks for your posting on the symposium. It sounds like it was very informative. Understand about the information being limited. No problem.
It is great to get together with others in the same field and talk shop.
Also understand about the jet lag and the food. I myself am not much for traveling anymore especially half way round the world.
Always look foreward to your posts here..thanks again.

Orangetom.



posted on Jun, 7 2005 @ 05:54 AM
link   
Thanks, it is always nice to be appreciated. It was not really my field (but my own work skims the edge of it, so i always keep an eye on the drag reduction guys). The conference was also full of physicists rather than engineers. This nearly always means they come up with great stuff that works in the lab, but they often fail to consider what problems might occur at full scale. Case in point would be riblet drag reduction. Works well in labs but once you have figured out a way to spray it onto a ship (not easy by any means), you put the ship in the water and the fouling thinks they have won the lottery. Within weeks the hull is coated in barnacles, weed etc and any hope of drag reduction is out the window.

They get full marks for effort though.



posted on Jun, 12 2005 @ 06:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by paperplane_uk
Thanks, it is always nice to be appreciated. It was not really my field (but my own work skims the edge of it, so i always keep an eye on the drag reduction guys). The conference was also full of physicists rather than engineers. This nearly always means they come up with great stuff that works in the lab, but they often fail to consider what problems might occur at full scale. Case in point would be riblet drag reduction. Works well in labs but once you have figured out a way to spray it onto a ship (not easy by any means), you put the ship in the water and the fouling thinks they have won the lottery. Within weeks the hull is coated in barnacles, weed etc and any hope of drag reduction is out the window.

They get full marks for effort though.


Isn't that the truth! I remember our boat being drydocked with 50 or so uf us hanging over the side with chippers trying to knock off all the crap before repainting. As far as spraying anything onto a ship, I've seen the process of painting a boat *mine was an SSBN* and it's certainly no small task.



posted on Jun, 12 2005 @ 10:32 AM
link   
Ive been around when they spray this antifouling or anti growth paint. It is some potent stuff..you can literally get stoned and float off if your around that stuff long enough. Horrible potent smell. You need full face respirators with indepent air supply when spraying that stuff. It works but eventually has to be changed out...like all stuff nothing is forever.

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Jun, 13 2005 @ 04:32 AM
link   
the latest stuff lasts over 10 years and the stuff after that is based on nanotech and will last at least 12 years!!!



posted on Jun, 13 2005 @ 09:10 AM
link   
I always thought they should use a 1/8'th inch thick coating of a teflon-type material, but now that I think about it, it would be quite expensive. I remember immediately after curing, the stuff they used when I was in had an enamel-like feel to it, while the topside had a rubber-like consistency. I suppose, for safety's sake, teflon would be a terrible choice.



posted on Jun, 13 2005 @ 10:12 AM
link   
They tried teflon, but it is not as effective. The current best af coatings for high speed vessels are based on Polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS). It is a silicone elastometer that work by not allowing fouling to stick to it (much like teflon in your frying pan) rather than killing it once it has stuck to the surface. Above 15 knots they will even self-clean with the shear forces in the water pulling off anything that does manage to get a slight grip. They have lasted over 10years on some ships and aslo have a proven drag reducing capability (compared to std af coatings).



posted on Jun, 13 2005 @ 07:44 PM
link   
Yes..as I recall the history ...the coatings that kill the sealife that adheres to the hulls. There was alot of controversy over killing sea life in this manner as it actually breaks up alot of food chain as one type of life is dependent on another lower form of life for its food source. Worry being about the break up of the food chain. I suppose that is why they came up with that nanotech as another way of doing it. The first technology worked but the controversy was heavy surrounding it.
When you have slack time.and hang around the piers..there is a huge amount of sea life taking advantage of the piers and hulls to hunt for food...anything from ducks eating the alge on the hulls to other smaller forms of sea life.

This story makes me think of what happened years ago when I took my woman on a trip to Hawaii. We went on one of those Atlantis submarine tours in Kona, Hawaii. You know the ones with the little port holes all down the sides of the hulls. You can find their site on the web. We went down about 115 feet and set the skids down on the sand. When coming back up ...and making circles over the coral reefs..some large fish appeared in the portholes. The tour guide announced over the loudspeakers that the large predator fish have learned to hide in the shadow of the Submarine and swoop down on the unsuspecting fish on the coral reefs. Who said that animals are stupid.!! Smart eh!!???

Thanks,
Orangetom



posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 02:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1

Originally posted by orangetom1999
Anyone know if they have overcome the steering problem..controlability in these torpedos. I understand they are so fast that steering is a problem with them at high speeds.


The steering problem didn't so much have to do with the speed but rather the difficulty with the cavity, making any control surfaces useless. If the fins are extended through the cavity then the cavity will collapse.


Why would it collapse???

gas is being emited from the front, which creates a "bubble" around the torpedo, and the "fins" would petrude out of the "bubble's area", they would create more drag, but it would be worth it since they would allow you to turn it.



posted on Jun, 14 2005 @ 03:58 AM
link   
Gas is not emmited to create the cavity but to prolong and extend it. The fins sticking through the cavity wall would produce a dramatic increase in drag but also change the pressure field around the object. The fins generally lead to instability in the pressure field behind them causing the cavity to collapse sooner.



posted on Nov, 5 2008 @ 02:12 PM
link   
the kursk did not explode.it sank.it hit an american la class sub that put in for major hull repairs in sweden less than 48 hrs after the incident.yes the torpedo works and no steering problems.it is currently in production.the us navy is very concerned that the russians may have revolutionized under sea warfare.this is a real weapon that is currently off our shores in selected subs.in fact the akula programs are currently undergoing refit production for some new torpedos. hey navy i wonder what that could possibly be for.stop b.s.ing the public.this torpedo is 4 real guys and gals.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 12:44 AM
link   
I had an event happen when I was small,now I have dreams that turn out to be like future "guesses",anyways I dreamt that ufos travel in the air as fast as they do based on the same principles the supercavitating torpedo uses ONLY IT TRAVELS THROUGH AIR.

Will someone please substitute air for water and show the world how to catch ufos.This is a Canadian contribution and seeing as how a fellow in a Canadian University recently discovered how to create harvestable energy BY THROWING WATER AGAINST THE WALL,this is based on the same principals used to supergravitate the torpedo we would prefer a Canadian help us further this theory.The interaction of the different states of matter creates energy from ZERO POINT WHICH IS LIKE A VACUME THAT EXISTS BETWEEN DIFFERENT STATES OF MATTER,THE SPOT IN BETWEEN WHERE THEY PHYSICALLY MEET.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 01:11 AM
link   
Why not use tempature to alter the pressures in portions of the cavity. You could heat one side of the missle to expand that side of the cavity and create drag or reduce it on one side. Maybe even use sound waves to expand or contract the cavity in specific sections.



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 04:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Wertdagf
 


Wont work,
the water will take heat away faster than it will be able to affect the pressure inside the envelope.
and sound waves will only work to destabilize the envelope.
but your on the right track, by manipulating the envelope's size and shape you can control the direction of the projetctile to some degree, but there is no way to have feed back to the projectile.
It is effectively isolated from the rest of the word by the envelope itself, there is no way to guide a super cavitating projectile with out a direct hard link to the guidence/tracking system( the wire in a regular topedo).

for those of you who may not know, modern topredoes have dual targeting/tracking system.
When the topedo is launched it plays out a very fine wire that connects it with the launching vessel. It is controled by the shipboard firecontrol till it gets to within a predetermined range to target, then it goes "free", it cuts the wire and goes to active on board tracking(pining with sonar) till impact.
In modern western torpedoes, if they dont hit the target within the target range parameters they can go to a search and destroy mode, they will slow way down and move in a pre programed pattern, occasionally pinging for a target.
Once a target is found they go back to full speed attack mode til impact or they run out of fuel.
This was the case in at least one lost us nuclear submarine.
Now as I look for this case, it is not to be found, really wierd.
I remeber reading about it in the 80's.
A US attack sub on patrol in the near the azores, reported a malfunctioning torpedo then failed to report back.
They reported they had a torpedo go hot in the tube, so it was summarily ejcted with all saftey intgerlocks engaged, it should have exited the sub and fallen harmlessly to the bottom.
It appears as though the torpedo was ejected without the saftey interlocks, and went hot as soon as it was launched and aquired its own launching vessel and sank it.
It was in looking for this vessel that Bob Ballard found the Titanic.
He was Commander in naval intel and the whole "search for the titanic" was just a cover, for a huge naval intel operation to locate this lost sub.
Much of the central/north atlantic was searched in the course of this multiyear operation. It only went public after the wreck was found and recovered by the glomar explorer.
A sunken older model soviet sub may also have been recovered, that may have been related to the loss of the scorpion.
During this search they found the titanic, the bismark and several other notable lost ships.
But in order to keep the real reason for the search secret, it toook several years to bring it all to the public view, sort of.
In 1989 I remeber watching a documentary about the the whole affair, and bob ballard freely talks about being a commander in a naval intel unit
that was tasked with finding this lost sub.
Sorry i digress


years ago while flying to my in-laws funerals(my mother/father inlaw died 36 hrs apart from natural causes, really really wierd), i busied myself by reading a paper on super cavitating projectiles, ie torpedoes/underwater missles and under water cannon projectiles.

At the time of the article there was no effective way of guiding super-cavitating topedoes. they would have to fired in a spread and hope that some wou;d hot a target.






[edit on 23-6-2009 by punkinworks]



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 04:08 AM
link   
whoa what was that all about.
nevermind double post

[edit on 23-6-2009 by punkinworks]



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 05:13 AM
link   
Any way the paper i read, reaserches had achieved muzzle velocities of 1400f/s thats freackin cookin underwater
Those velocities would be adequate for a viable under water CIWS.




























































/s




top topics



 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join