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: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 12:05 AM
link   
The latest "Shkval" has the ability to track targets and adjust accordingly. So fired the idea would be to find a target within X miles, fire the Shkval straight up, and let it make the adjustments.




posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 06:14 AM
link   

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


Are you crazy? Russia has a huge amount of money which they aren't using for anything.

They're even in the top 10 countries with most forex.

What I want to know is, how recent is this project?



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 12:34 PM
link   
if russia has that much capital how come their navy has gone to hell and is being raped by satan



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 01:51 PM
link   
Actually they are abandoning theire older ships and are replacing them with new ships. Ships like from the Kirov class are still very well maintained. Russia is starting to get rid of the badly maintained things.



posted on Mar, 8 2006 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by maninblack
if russia has that much capital how come their navy has gone to hell and is being raped by satan


Quite simply not true.

That might have been the case in the 90s, but not now.

Their big cruisers and frigates get all the maintenance they need, and very frequently participate in naval excercises with the US and other countries.

Their Carrier, along with other ships were rapidly repaired after Putin got in office, and cleaned things up.



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 06:51 PM
link   
Some stuff on here, Including the Liberty Ships

www.concreteships.org...

It would be a good idea becouse they wont rust, resist water pressure/explosions, cheap 'n' easy to build for mass production and save strategic materials like steel.

Somthing for emergency production during a war!



[edit on 13-3-2006 by Browno]



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 12:58 AM
link   
I don't think this is a real plan.

I have been purusing quite a bit of governmental sites on the Russian submarine projects (searching for information on Borey class subs) and this has never come to my attention.

So it's probably a hoax.

1) It lacks the ballast used to submerge.

2) It uses the propulsion unit from Hunt for Red October; the Caterpiller...haha



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 03:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus
I don't think this is a real plan.


2) It uses the propulsion unit from Hunt for Red October; the Caterpiller...haha


no it doesn't. look closely. you will see a water inlet---water turbine---water outlet. a typical jet drive set up



posted on Mar, 17 2006 @ 03:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by bigx01

Originally posted by Stratrf_Rus
I don't think this is a real plan.


2) It uses the propulsion unit from Hunt for Red October; the Caterpiller...haha


no it doesn't. look closely. you will see a water inlet---water turbine---water outlet. a typical jet drive set up


You're right and the other was a magnetically driven pump.

Either way; there's no ballast.

And no source; no project number; and no designation Russian or NATO.

These are crucial elements all of them are missing.

Also I don't believe Kevlar is a synthetic material produced in Russia; but I could be very wrong about that. Either way I don't see Kevlar as being useful to strengthening concrete. Perhaps there is a Civil Engineer or Materials' Scientist who could shed light on that.

[edit on 17-3-2006 by Stratrf_Rus]



posted on Mar, 18 2006 @ 04:09 AM
link   
did you ever see the documentery about the troll platform.

platform a is a concrete structure that rests on the sea floor at a depth of 330 meters





these guys are about 1000 feet below the surface of the north sea



The Troll A platform is a huge platform for production of gas; one of the largest and most complex engineering projects in history. Built by Norske Shell, the platform was a televised sensation when it was towed into the North Sea in 1996, where it was handed over to Statoil.

The platform is built from concrete, using the Condeep technology, and stands on the sea floor, 303 metres below the surface of the Norwegian Sea. Gas rises from 40 wells, and is exported through a number of pipes. The overall height of the platform is 472 meters and it weighs 656,000 tons. It was the tallest structure ever moved. The base and the deck were built separately (starting in 1991-1992). They were joined while the base was partially submerged. The Troll platform was towed over 200 km from Vats, in the northern part of Rogaland, to the Troll field, 80 km north-west of Bergen. The tow took seven days.

Troll A platform


i'm pretty sure that if thesr guys can make hollow legs out of concrete that can withstand the pressure at 1000 feet, that a concrete sub is not out of the question



posted on Nov, 18 2008 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by bigx01 Yes, it is true concrete is an extremely viable and inexpensive building material usually overlooked. There was an earlier post in regards to a cinder block being dropped and it is brittle, but solid concrete is not a cinder block, which is loaded with air bubbles, thereby it's density isn't near that of solid concrete. There are concrete hulled boats world wide. As a matter of fact there is an Austria gentleman who currently builds concrete hulls for personal submarines at a cost of 331 euros/ ton. Anyone in structural engineering or in the construction field knows that concrete really never cures and tends to harden through the years and has been known to exceed 10,000 psi out of water and can exceed that possibly by much more when constantly in water. Water reacts within it's matrix to tighten and compact the material more and more throughout time.
 



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join