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.

 

Concrete submarines?

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 28 2004 @ 08:55 AM
link   
I found some info about weird russian submarine project - concrete sub. Well it is not the concrete used on buildings, because this one has ceramic dust instead of sand. Whole construction is reinforced with a kevlar armature. The concrete has a 2 000 Kg/m3 density (30% in comparison with normal steel sub) and is very resistant so it can withstand torpedo or bomb blast and also extreme pressure so it can go over 900 m deep. The sub should be propelled with hydroreactive system with moveable nozzles. The sub is armed with 13 vertical lounched shkval torpedoes and 4 normal electrical. So is this a just hoax or is it possible? And has (or had) US Navy some simillar project?


[Edited on 28-5-2004 by longbow]




posted on May, 28 2004 @ 11:46 AM
link   
Good concept, but Russia doesn't have the money to pull this off.



posted on May, 28 2004 @ 11:58 AM
link   
would and will work!
iv seen a guy build his boat out of concrete its floats fine just get the right bouynacy



posted on May, 28 2004 @ 12:10 PM
link   
The Japanese actually built an aircraft carrier in WW-II with a concrete hull, looking at the illustration I do wonder if bouancy is an issue knowing how much concrete weighs, also concrete although strong in compression, is weak in that its brittle to shock.



posted on May, 29 2004 @ 08:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by elmariachi
Good concept, but Russia doesn't have the money to pull this off.


Actually the concrete hull should cost much less than traditional steel or titanium hull.



posted on May, 29 2004 @ 06:47 PM
link   
Looks real...I don't know if I could bring myself to ride in one of these though. Sink like concrete galoshes.



posted on May, 29 2004 @ 06:51 PM
link   
A great concept, but i doubt it will ever get off the drawing board.



posted on May, 29 2004 @ 08:06 PM
link   
I've seen boats out of concrete. They work fine.
Why would you be worried about a concrete boat/sub more then a steal one? I mean sure a concrete brick sinks, but steal also sinks with out boyancy.
It also seems to me it would be easier to repair if damaged.



posted on May, 30 2004 @ 07:43 AM
link   
It does seem logical that the concept could be implemented, but what about the fact that concrete is so brittle? I mean, drop a cinder block off a two story building and the block will shatter. Now drop any alloy and it'll barely dent. Also, is concrete not succeptible to erosion?






[Edited on 5-30-2004 by WaStEdDeAtH777]



posted on May, 30 2004 @ 08:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by WaStEdDeAtH777
It does seem logical that the concept could be implemented, but what about the fact that concrete is so brittle? I mean, drop a cinder block off a two story building and the block will shatter. Now drop any alloy and it'll barely dent. Also, is concrete not succeptible to erosion?
[Edited on 5-30-2004 by WaStEdDeAtH777]


It should be no normal concrete as I said the sand is replaced with the ceramic dust plus it has kevlar armature, so I don't think it will react like a reguler concrete.

P.S. Didn't anybody have some info about the anglo-american "project HABABUK"? It was a WWII project to build a large carrier from ICE!!! (well it was actually pykrit=86% ice and 14% cellulose). The smaller working model was built, but the thing was too expensive so it was cancelled. I googled for more info but was unable to find anything.

[Edited on 30-5-2004 by longbow]



posted on May, 30 2004 @ 08:31 AM
link   
Actually I bet it will work, and Russia may rpodece more if they get some money...



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 07:38 PM
link   
Wasnt there disposable concrete ships back in WW2 called Liberties?



posted on Mar, 6 2006 @ 10:03 PM
link   
Are those Shkval torpedoes launched vertically?!
What could be the purpose?
Logic (my logic
) would dictate that supercavitation would work better with horizontally launched devices..



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 12:52 AM
link   
there's about a dozen concrete hull boats at the marina where i live. not to mention the 3 floating bridges here in the north west that use concrete pontoons






here's the evergreen point floating bridge





the hood canal with an ohio class sub on its way out to patrol





and the I-90 twin floating bridges. of course the bridge on the right in this picture sank right after the newest one was opened. that was the original bridge.

and ironicly the hood canal bridge sank shortly after the bonds were paid off and the toll booths removed. both sunk bridges have been rebuilt


[edit on 7-3-2006 by bigx01]



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 02:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by WaStEdDeAtH777
It does seem logical that the concept could be implemented, but what about the fact that concrete is so brittle? I mean, drop a cinder block off a two story building and the block will shatter. Now drop any alloy and it'll barely dent.

That's because tension forces occur, under compression concrete is extremely strong. When subjected to the large presssures under water, you'll need to superpose a lot of tension forces to make the overall net tension force negative and the concrete brittle.



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 05:16 AM
link   
heres a link

Popular mechanics : CONCRETE SUBMARINES

A concrete boat from china. i seen on of these made. cheap and easy



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 08:48 AM
link   
i was actually gonna post a thread on this earlier but forgot about it.

I doubt a country even as financially troubled as russia would have much difficutly in constructing one (or more) of these. Concrete can be produced dirt cheap just about anywhere, and there nothing especially cutting edge about the technology by any means. The whole idea about these things is that they hunt passively, sitting on the sea bed waiting for shipping to pass nearby, hence the vertical launch tubes. Imagine what iran could do with a few of these sitting in the arabian gulf.

the only thing i can think of why they wouldnt work would be these shkval torpedos. Although the sub can withstand sinking to the 1800 ft "crush depth", im not sure about a think skinned metal torpedo. Also seeing they allegedly travel at 230 mph (vertically), whats to stop the immense water pressure compacting it to the size of a cola can as soon as it leaves the launch tube?



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 09:07 AM
link   
Wouldn't a concrete sub absorb more sonar waves then steel, making it less vi sable? The sound deadening of interior noises would be better too.

These could be a good sub to use, seems to have a lot of advantages over steel.

We used to have a 'concrete' boat, it was an excellent sea boat. The material used to create these boats is called Ferrocement it has a steel mesh core. It is widely accepted to be a fine material for marine use as it flexes a lot more the Steel, so its not as bad if you hit something. The only problem is that the average life expectancy of this material is only 50 years, after that the Ferrocement starts to return to its natural state.



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 05:55 PM
link   
I don't think Iran would really get as much use out of it as some other countries. Verticle torpedos and a stupidly high crush depth indicate it could use the depths of the ocean as it's hunting grounds, always trying to stay below any other threats, and shooting up.

As for crushing torpedos, I was under the impression that torps were flooded anyhow, thus equalising the pressure?



posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 06:56 PM
link   
Seems plausible but not an entirely good idea because who in the world wants verticaly launched torpedoes, and the propulsion seems to me like it would be very slow. I don't know.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join