Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 84

Thread: Unmanned Sub Tracker - Testers Wanted

  1. #61
    Doesn't aluminum seem like a bad idea for the hull?

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by ULTRA View Post
    Lordy, I didn't know that..They'd rather duke it out with a ton of Amatol or Torpex or whatever the hell they use? But then, I suppose it's the rational alternative..You don't want a great fat torpedo running it through like a virgin on prom-night half a mile underwater, do you?
    Reminds me of explosive reactive armour used on some main battle-tanks. On being hit, a flat plate of armour with a layer of plastic explosive behind it (not unlike a claymore in principal) detonates on impact with a HEAT round, deflecting the blast (in theory.)

    I like armour, interesting stuff.
    I believe the ADCAP was made so that it runs up along the side of an enemy submarine parallel to it before turning 90 degrees straight into the midsection of the submarine, hitting the thinnest part of it's armor.

  3. #63
    interesting fact, did you know that submarines can travel faster underwater then above?

  4. #64
    Bleed White and Blue! Shogun's Avatar
    Posts
    7,635
    Quote Originally Posted by ULTRA View Post
    The only use for armour now is to protect against heavy guns (which are a thing of the past now) and bombs dropped by aircraft.
    I found this message-board entry. With a tiny bit of searching you could find out plenty about it, it's no secret.. http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/.../t-256970.html
    Armor is useless in the face of modern air power.

  5. #65
    Aluminium makes for quite a lightweight and very strong construction. Excellent for boats, but pricey. The Finnish navy have built modular ships, that can be altered for specific services. Traditional armour used to get in the way, making vessels heavier and less versatile. Now they can be made stronger, lighter, even Stealthy as with aircraft. Aluminium actually burns quite well, so they equip them with radar controlled miniguns, rockets and a heap of electronic warfare technology.
    I was even asked to fit an electrically operated mortar I'd built to a boat once, you could probably spread chaff with it!

  6. #66
    Bleed White and Blue! Shogun's Avatar
    Posts
    7,635
    Quote Originally Posted by fedr808 View Post
    Doesn't aluminum seem like a bad idea for the hull?
    No, it is brilliant due to its weight/strength ratio.

  7. #67
    Bleed White and Blue! Shogun's Avatar
    Posts
    7,635
    Quote Originally Posted by fedr808 View Post
    interesting fact, did you know that submarines can travel faster underwater then above?
    Yeah, in the modern age due to its hydrodynamic teardrop shape.

  8. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by Shogun View Post
    No, it is brilliant due to its weight/strength ratio.
    Not the strength, but the radar visibility.

  9. #69
    Bleed White and Blue! Shogun's Avatar
    Posts
    7,635
    Quote Originally Posted by fedr808 View Post
    Not the strength, but the radar visibility.
    They can use geometry and anti-radar paint ( forgot what it is called ) to compromise. However, I don't believe the entire hull is aluminum, it is coated with something else, but I'm not sure.

    Anyways, a ship is visible enough as is.

  10. #70
    Heh! check out this little gizmo, $5m of boat, and cheap at the price if you ask me.. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...smugglers.html

  11. #71
    Seems like brutal overkill.

  12. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by fedr808 View Post
    Best guess is MAD. Then the sonar equivolant of the ESM mast.

    I can't think of any other passive sensors off the top of my head.
    Ah, passive acoustic, and non-acoustic. I didn't say the non-acoustic was passive,.... :-)

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by phlogistician View Post
    Ah, passive acoustic, and non-acoustic. I didn't say the non-acoustic was passive,.... :-)
    I'm guessing by acoustic you mean sonar right?

    I can't imagine a submarine using a MAD system.

    Although I do think it would be prudent to outfit a tomahawk cruise missile with a MAD sensor and program it to fly around where you think the enemy sub is.

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by fedr808 View Post
    I'm guessing by acoustic you mean sonar right?

    I can't imagine a submarine using a MAD system.

    Although I do think it would be prudent to outfit a tomahawk cruise missile with a MAD sensor and program it to fly around where you think the enemy sub is.
    Side scan RADAR and satellite imagery. Correlate data from devices in the water with those above.

    Ask yourself, does the submerged bow wave from a submarine travelling a few hundred metres below the surface leave a detectable impression on the surface, or make a significant difference to the shape of the waves where it meets the surface,....

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by phlogistician View Post
    Side scan RADAR and satellite imagery. Correlate data from devices in the water with those above.

    Ask yourself, does the submerged bow wave from a submarine travelling a few hundred metres below the surface leave a detectable impression on the surface, or make a significant difference to the shape of the waves where it meets the surface,....
    Not really no.

    Most submarines can't even communicate while submerged below 20 meters without a buoy.


    Even then its only a one way transmission from the surface to the submarine.

  16. #76
    Subs used to use ultra-long wavelengths for communication as it suits the aquatic environment. These days I wouldn't be surprised if comms were digitized, coded, compressed and delivered via what we used to call a "databurst" designed to be untraceable. The systems I was familliar with used a one-time-pad for secure comms. It was a good system, I wouldn't be surprised if it was still used.

  17. #77
    Bleed White and Blue! Shogun's Avatar
    Posts
    7,635
    Quote Originally Posted by phlogistician View Post
    Ask yourself, does the submerged bow wave from a submarine travelling a few hundred metres below the surface leave a detectable impression on the surface, or make a significant difference to the shape of the waves where it meets the surface,....
    Well, it really depends on a lot of factors.

  18. #78
    Quote Originally Posted by fedr808 View Post
    Not really no.

    Most submarines can't even communicate while submerged below 20 meters without a buoy.


    Even then its only a one way transmission from the surface to the submarine.
    Er dude?

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by phlogistician View Post
    Er dude?
    Phlo, water isn't exactly the best environment to transmit radio messages in.

  20. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by fedr808 View Post
    Phlo, water isn't exactly the best environment to transmit radio messages in.
    Er dude? Did I say the vessel doing the detecting was a sub?

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. By EndLightEnd in forum General Philosophy
    Last Post: 12-04-11, 04:57 PM
    Replies: 59
  2. By Someone in forum World Events
    Last Post: 09-14-10, 04:32 PM
    Replies: 57
  3. By one_raven in forum Linguistics
    Last Post: 04-07-07, 04:10 PM
    Replies: 38
  4. By draqon in forum Human Science
    Last Post: 02-26-07, 02:43 PM
    Replies: 27
  5. By Free_Matt_417 in forum Site Feedback
    Last Post: 01-13-07, 02:31 AM
    Replies: 2

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •