Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Soundbounder

GHOST Military Watercraft Prototype

Recommended Posts

If you combined a stealth jet fighter and an attack helicopter and stuck them in the water, what would you get? Well, according to the folks at New Hampshire's Juliet Marine Systems (JMS), you'd get the GHOST marine platform. Privately developed for possible use by the U.S. Navy, the boat would reportedly be invisible to enemy ships' radar, while also being faster and more economical than existing military vessels. The company's

big

claim, however, is that GHOST is the world's first super-cavitating watercraft.

http://boatinglocal.com/news/new-boat-flies-through-water.html

 

 

Imagine seeing this when you are underway tongue.gif

 

ghost-2.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I llke the picture with the nice houses in the background. That boat must be quite the sight from the front yards.

 

Here is another view. http://julietmarine.com/images/Juliet-MarineFPad-DefenseNewsJune30-2011.pdf

If you combined a stealth jet fighter and an attack helicopter and stuck them in the water, what would you get? Well, according to the folks at New Hampshire's Juliet Marine Systems (JMS), you'd get the GHOST marine platform. Privately developed for possible use by the U.S. Navy, the boat would reportedly be invisible to enemy ships' radar, while also being faster and more economical than existing military vessels. The company's

big

claim, however, is that GHOST is the world's first super-cavitating watercraft.

http://boatinglocal....ough-water.html

 

 

Imagine seeing this when you are underway tongue.gif

 

ghost-2.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like something out of a low-budget sci fi movie.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminds me of that camper/catamaran thing from one of the boat show threads that I can't find right now. Also like a mini of the 3200 sqft catamaran/condo. Is supercavitation like the 4th mode?

 

G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminds me of that camper/catamaran thing from one of the boat show threads that I can't find right now. Also like a mini of the 3200 sqft catamaran/condo. Is supercavitation like the 4th mode?

 

G

 

You're talking about the "Footprint":

 

85124985112687268019.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminds me of that camper/catamaran thing from one of the boat show threads that I can't find right now. Also like a mini of the 3200 sqft catamaran/condo. Is supercavitation like the 4th mode?

 

G

 

You're talking about the "Footprint":

 

85124985112687268019.jpg

 

That's the one. Yeesh.

 

G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks remarkably like this:

 

1721.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It looks like something that would shoot something terribly comical, like jars of glue and feathers, while a buffoonishly hilarious captain shakes his fist menacingly from that little triangular window.

 

Seriously, that boat isn't stealth, it might as well have a flashing neon sign on the bow saying "secret boat."

 

You want stealth? This is how they should disguise their secret technology ...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

00aaaar.jpg?w=490&h=484

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminds me of that camper/catamaran thing from one of the boat show threads that I can't find right now. Also like a mini of the 3200 sqft catamaran/condo. Is supercavitation like the 4th mode?

 

G

 

Russians have had torpedo's that use super cavication since the 70's. they are propelled by hydrogen peroxide rocket engines and it is believed this is what sunk the kursk when it malfunctioned. Basically a bubble is created around the object which reduces surface drag allowing speeds of 200 km through the water. The Navy is supposed to be working on a 100 km mini sub for the seals that will use this principle as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminds me of that camper/catamaran thing from one of the boat show threads that I can't find right now. Also like a mini of the 3200 sqft catamaran/condo. Is supercavitation like the 4th mode?

 

G

 

Russians have had torpedo's that use super cavication since the 70's. they are propelled by hydrogen peroxide rocket engines and it is believed this is what sunk the kursk when it malfunctioned. Basically a bubble is created around the object which reduces surface drag allowing speeds of 200 km through the water. The Navy is supposed to be working on a 100 km mini sub for the seals that will use this principle as well.

 

I think the Kursk was getting ready to show this technology to the Chinese when they bumped with a US sub which actually shot it with a torpedo and sunk it. Saw a documentary on TV about it with Peter Wolf narrating. Haven't seen it played again since. Had actual pics of a perfect hole in the starboard side forward where the torpedo went in then detonated inside the bow.

kazouille_1105145222_torpille4.jpg

Different documentary out as well touting the subject of the sinking was from the internal torpedo as you state above.

 

CBS news then broke the story that the United States had three ships in the vicinity observing the naval exercise that Kursk was taking part in, possibly a test of a new ultra-high speed torpedo. Two of the three ships were submarines, later determined to be USS Memphis and USS Toledo, type 688 Los Angeles class fast attack submarines which are often used for covert intelligence gathering.

 

Link

 

Also, if I am not mistaken, Clinton issued some coinage to Russia, something like $10 million or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the Kursk was getting ready to show this technology to the Chinese when they bumped with a US sub which actually shot it with a torpedo and sunk it. Saw a documentary on TV about it with Peter Wolf narrating. Haven't seen it played again since. Had actual pics of a perfect hole in the starboard side forward where the torpedo went in then detonated inside the bow.

 

can't believe everything you see on tv - that's not how torpedoes work - they are not armor piercing nor delayed detonation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the Kursk was getting ready to show this technology to the Chinese when they bumped with a US sub which actually shot it with a torpedo and sunk it. Saw a documentary on TV about it with Peter Wolf narrating. Haven't seen it played again since. Had actual pics of a perfect hole in the starboard side forward where the torpedo went in then detonated inside the bow.

 

can't believe everything you see on tv - that's not how torpedoes work - they are not armor piercing nor delayed detonation

 

Source or explain the inward damage on the Kursk bow?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
can't believe everything you see on tv - that's not how torpedoes work - they are not armor piercing nor delayed detonation

 

Source?

 

my job?

 

they are generally designed to detonate below the vessel to break it's back - no contact at all

 

if contact is made they are designed to detonate immediately - before the thing breaks up

 

really? armor piercing at 40 kts? can you make a car armor piercing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nuff said. I stand corrected.

 

854888.jpg

 

Please explain the forces at work here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please explain the forces at work here.

 

no - my comments are only on things i understand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Man I hope the Chinese never get their sweet and sour hands on this bad boy. Why this dangerous watercraft and the drone that Iran has sharked they'd be a danger above and below the waterline. Say those windshield wipers look like the ones on my minivan (low radar cross section). Happy chinese new year! (Its just like the real new years except you don't actually get a day off).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminds me of that camper/catamaran thing from one of the boat show threads that I can't find right now. Also like a mini of the 3200 sqft catamaran/condo. Is supercavitation like the 4th mode?

 

G

 

Russians have had torpedo's that use super cavication since the 70's. they are propelled by hydrogen peroxide rocket engines and it is believed this is what sunk the kursk when it malfunctioned. Basically a bubble is created around the object which reduces surface drag allowing speeds of 200 km through the water. The Navy is supposed to be working on a 100 km mini sub for the seals that will use this principle as well.

 

I think the Kursk was getting ready to show this technology to the Chinese when they bumped with a US sub which actually shot it with a torpedo and sunk it. Saw a documentary on TV about it with Peter Wolf narrating. Haven't seen it played again since. Had actual pics of a perfect hole in the starboard side forward where the torpedo went in then detonated inside the bow.

kazouille_1105145222_torpille4.jpg

Different documentary out as well touting the subject of the sinking was from the internal torpedo as you state above.

 

CBS news then broke the story that the United States had three ships in the vicinity observing the naval exercise that Kursk was taking part in, possibly a test of a new ultra-high speed torpedo. Two of the three ships were submarines, later determined to be USS Memphis and USS Toledo, type 688 Los Angeles class fast attack submarines which are often used for covert intelligence gathering.

 

Link

 

Also, if I am not mistaken, Clinton issued some coinage to Russia, something like $10 million or so.

 

 

Let me guess.....

 

You think 9/11 was an inside Job

JFK was assassinated by a LBJ/Mafia/Cuban Expat team

The Oil companies have bought out patents for 100mpg carburetors

 

and the Black Helicopters keep you up at night

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
can't believe everything you see on tv - that's not how torpedoes work - they are not armor piercing nor delayed detonation

 

Source?

 

my job?

 

they are generally designed to detonate below the vessel to break it's back - no contact at all

 

if contact is made they are designed to detonate immediately - before the thing breaks up

 

really? armor piercing at 40 kts? can you make a car armor piercing?

 

Cool - I never knew this. Couldn't they be designed to have a shaped charge on the bow of the torpedo & detonate on impact, similar to what was used on the USS Cole?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
can't believe everything you see on tv - that's not how torpedoes work - they are not armor piercing nor delayed detonation

 

Source?

 

my job?

 

they are generally designed to detonate below the vessel to break it's back - no contact at all

 

if contact is made they are designed to detonate immediately - before the thing breaks up

 

really? armor piercing at 40 kts? can you make a car armor piercing?

 

Cool - I never knew this. Couldn't they be designed to have a shaped charge on the bow of the torpedo & detonate on impact, similar to what was used on the USS Cole?

Why?

 

Most air to air missiles, and all torpedo's work on the near miss principal. That the explosion itself does more damage than hitting the target at speed. Missiles get to within 10 feet or so and basically act as a fragmentation grenade sending shrapel into the aircraft.

 

torpedos need to get close and use water pressure to rip the vessel apart. that is why depth charges work. you don't have to be direct on, only close enough for the explosion to cause a bubble. because water doesn't compress and the explosion has to go some where.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
can't believe everything you see on tv - that's not how torpedoes work - they are not armor piercing nor delayed detonation

 

Source?

 

my job?

 

they are generally designed to detonate below the vessel to break it's back - no contact at all

 

if contact is made they are designed to detonate immediately - before the thing breaks up

 

really? armor piercing at 40 kts? can you make a car armor piercing?

 

Cool - I never knew this. Couldn't they be designed to have a shaped charge on the bow of the torpedo & detonate on impact, similar to what was used on the USS Cole?

 

The shape of the charge used on the Cole was the shape of a small powerboat. No shape charge there just s shit ton of explosive allowed to get too close.

 

Torpedos and depth charges are designed to explode on contact or near their targets so that the local 'overpressure' of the explosion will crack the hull of the target (which is what the bomb did to the Cole) the not just punch a hole in it. The Cole was able to remain afloat because the majority of the damage was above the water line, not to discount the actions of number of brave men a women who worked damage control that day.

 

So imagine the damage on the Cole on a submerged submarine and contrast that with a neat hole punched by a shaped charge, the hole would be easier to deal with instead of a tear like the Cole had. In addition the hull shape of a sub also is designed to give it the ability to withstand the pressures underwater if you can destroy the integrity of that shape (break it's back) it will likely implode under the pressure. Look up a US sub called the scorpion(i think) that went down in the late fifties early sixties.

 

*** I type slow, peragrin beat me to it. *****

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the Kursk was getting ready to show this technology to the Chinese when they bumped with a US sub which actually shot it with a torpedo and sunk it. Saw a documentary on TV about it with Peter Wolf narrating. Haven't seen it played again since. Had actual pics of a perfect hole in the starboard side forward where the torpedo went in then detonated inside the bow.

 

can't believe everything you see on tv - that's not how torpedoes work - they are not armor piercing nor delayed detonation

Thanks, The MK-48 is bad bad boy, but armor piercing it is not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
can't believe everything you see on tv - that's not how torpedoes work - they are not armor piercing nor delayed detonation

 

Source?

 

my job?

 

they are generally designed to detonate below the vessel to break it's back - no contact at all

 

if contact is made they are designed to detonate immediately - before the thing breaks up

 

really? armor piercing at 40 kts? can you make a car armor piercing?

 

Cool - I never knew this. Couldn't they be designed to have a shaped charge on the bow of the torpedo & detonate on impact, similar to what was used on the USS Cole?

 

The shape of the charge used on the Cole was the shape of a small powerboat. No shape charge there just s shit ton of explosive allowed to get too close.

 

Torpedos and depth charges are designed to explode on contact or near their targets so that the local 'overpressure' of the explosion will crack the hull of the target (which is what the bomb did to the Cole) the not just punch a hole in it. The Cole was able to remain afloat because the majority of the damage was above the water line, not to discount the actions of number of brave men a women who worked damage control that day.

 

So imagine the damage on the Cole on a submerged submarine and contrast that with a neat hole punched by a shaped charge, the hole would be easier to deal with instead of a tear like the Cole had. In addition the hull shape of a sub also is designed to give it the ability to withstand the pressures underwater if you can destroy the integrity of that shape (break it's back) it will likely implode under the pressure. Look up a US sub called the scorpion(i think) that went down in the late fifties early sixties.

 

*** I type slow, peragrin beat me to it. *****

 

One other little detail is that the Cole, like most other military ships, is made of water tight compartments. Punching a hole into the hull then exploding inside the vessel would kill a lot of people, but would not sink the ship unless it was a real lucky shot.

 

The MK 48 (torpedo that US/Australian subs use) would explode causing a low pressure area that flexes the ship downward, then when water rushes in to fill the void pushes the ship upward at the same point. The result is like breaking a stick. I never really knew how powerful they were until years after getting out of the Navy. I did know they would get the job done. I just didn't know how good they got it done.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beU3sExN1BA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

because water doesn't compress and the explosion has to go some where.

 

True.

 

And the pressures created in this way are mind blowing, enough to compress steel.

 

This effect is used in a new method called laser shock peening and waterjet peening to harden steel instead of the old peening method. A thin curtain of water flows over the steel while a laser beam essentially creates lots of tiny explosions in an ablative paint on the metal. The water won't compress so it pushes into the steel, hardening it much deeper than mechanical peening.

 

Easy to see how the pressure can crush a hull.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

because water doesn't compress and the explosion has to go some where.

 

True.

 

And the pressures created in this way are mind blowing, enough to compress steel.

 

This effect is used in a new method called laser shock peening and waterjet peening to harden steel instead of the old peening method. A thin curtain of water flows over the steel while a laser beam essentially creates lots of tiny explosions in an ablative paint on the metal. The water won't compress so it pushes into the steel, hardening it much deeper than mechanical peening.

 

Easy to see how the pressure can crush a hull.

Now, how in the hell do I get 80 year old paint off of pine? Without hurting the wood and spending a fortune in time and money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
can't believe everything you see on tv - that's not how torpedoes work - they are not armor piercing nor delayed detonation

 

Source?

 

my job?

 

they are generally designed to detonate below the vessel to break it's back - no contact at all

 

if contact is made they are designed to detonate immediately - before the thing breaks up

 

really? armor piercing at 40 kts? can you make a car armor piercing?

 

Cool - I never knew this. Couldn't they be designed to have a shaped charge on the bow of the torpedo & detonate on impact, similar to what was used on the USS Cole?

 

The shape of the charge used on the Cole was the shape of a small powerboat. No shape charge there just s shit ton of explosive allowed to get too close.

 

Torpedos and depth charges are designed to explode on contact or near their targets so that the local 'overpressure' of the explosion will crack the hull of the target (which is what the bomb did to the Cole) the not just punch a hole in it. The Cole was able to remain afloat because the majority of the damage was above the water line, not to discount the actions of number of brave men a women who worked damage control that day.

 

So imagine the damage on the Cole on a submerged submarine and contrast that with a neat hole punched by a shaped charge, the hole would be easier to deal with instead of a tear like the Cole had. In addition the hull shape of a sub also is designed to give it the ability to withstand the pressures underwater if you can destroy the integrity of that shape (break it's back) it will likely implode under the pressure. Look up a US sub called the scorpion(i think) that went down in the late fifties early sixties.

 

*** I type slow, peragrin beat me to it. *****

 

One other little detail is that the Cole, like most other military ships, is made of water tight compartments. Punching a hole into the hull then exploding inside the vessel would kill a lot of people, but would not sink the ship unless it was a real lucky shot.

 

The MK 48 (torpedo that US/Australian subs use) would explode causing a low pressure area that flexes the ship downward, then when water rushes in to fill the void pushes the ship upward at the same point. The result is like breaking a stick. I never really knew how powerful they were until years after getting out of the Navy. I did know they would get the job done. I just didn't know how good they got it done.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=beU3sExN1BA

 

whouldn't the explosion cause a high pressure area lifting the ship and the the water rushing to fill make the low pressure, just asking not arguing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

whouldn't the explosion cause a high pressure area lifting the ship and the the water rushing to fill make the low pressure, just asking not arguing?

i caught that after... First up, then down, then back up. Thanks..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
whouldn't the explosion cause a high pressure area lifting the ship and the the water rushing to fill make the low pressure, just asking not arguing?

 

 

i caught that after... First up, then down, then back up. Thanks..

 

its the initial shock that fractures the hull - the after responses just help break it all the way

 

modern warships have all the sensitive equipment on board on massive shock absorbing springs - both for sound quieting and to try to save equipment in case of a near miss

 

and yes there are developments in small torpedoes with shaped charges - the problem is the density of water and specific detonation distance from the target hull, and going thru the torpodo nose sonar xducers - and double hulls can defeat them - plus it only makes a small hole.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
whouldn't the explosion cause a high pressure area lifting the ship and the the water rushing to fill make the low pressure, just asking not arguing?

 

 

i caught that after... First up, then down, then back up. Thanks..

 

its the initial shock that fractures the hull - the after responses just help break it all the way

 

modern warships have all the sensitive equipment on board on massive shock absorbing springs - both for sound quieting and to try to save equipment in case of a near miss

 

and yes there are developments in small torpedoes with shaped charges - the problem is the density of water and specific detonation distance from the target hull, and going thru the torpodo nose sonar xducers - and double hulls can defeat them - plus it only makes a small hole.

The shaped charges would be great for smaller targets. Why waste a 48 when only a fraction of the force is needed? Seems like a smart move in today's world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nuff said. I stand corrected.

 

854888.jpg

 

Please explain the forces at work here.

 

Maybe it can super-cavitate like this

shakira.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminds me of that camper/catamaran thing from one of the boat show threads that I can't find right now. Also like a mini of the 3200 sqft catamaran/condo. Is supercavitation like the 4th mode?

 

G

 

Russians have had torpedo's that use super cavication since the 70's. they are propelled by hydrogen peroxide rocket engines and it is believed this is what sunk the kursk when it malfunctioned. Basically a bubble is created around the object which reduces surface drag allowing speeds of 200 km through the water. The Navy is supposed to be working on a 100 km mini sub for the seals that will use this principle as well.

 

I think the Kursk was getting ready to show this technology to the Chinese when they bumped with a US sub which actually shot it with a torpedo and sunk it. Saw a documentary on TV about it with Peter Wolf narrating. Haven't seen it played again since. Had actual pics of a perfect hole in the starboard side forward where the torpedo went in then detonated inside the bow.

kazouille_1105145222_torpille4.jpg

Different documentary out as well touting the subject of the sinking was from the internal torpedo as you state above.

 

CBS news then broke the story that the United States had three ships in the vicinity observing the naval exercise that Kursk was taking part in, possibly a test of a new ultra-high speed torpedo. Two of the three ships were submarines, later determined to be USS Memphis and USS Toledo, type 688 Los Angeles class fast attack submarines which are often used for covert intelligence gathering.

 

Link

 

Also, if I am not mistaken, Clinton issued some coinage to Russia, something like $10 million or so.

$10 million?? Jeez those russian subs are cheap these days.

 

You might need an upgrade on that silver hat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Kursk was getting ready to show this technology to the Chinese when they bumped with a US sub which actually shot it with a torpedo and sunk it. Saw a documentary on TV about it with Peter Wolf narrating. Haven't seen it played again since. Had actual pics of a perfect hole in the starboard side forward where the torpedo went in then detonated inside the bow.

kazouille_1105145222_torpille4.jpg

Different documentary out as well touting the subject of the sinking was from the internal torpedo as you state above.

 

CBS news then broke the story that the United States had three ships in the vicinity observing the naval exercise that Kursk was taking part in, possibly a test of a new ultra-high speed torpedo. Two of the three ships were submarines, later determined to be USS Memphis and USS Toledo, type 688 Los Angeles class fast attack submarines which are often used for covert intelligence gathering.

 

Link

 

Also, if I am not mistaken, Clinton issued some coinage to Russia, something like $10 million or so.

 

The Kursk did not collide with a US vessel, or anything for that matter, nor did any vessel fire a weapon of any kind at the Kursk, and the United States did not pay any kind of renumeration.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(irony on) /*Wow, that thing is so high-tech that it can completely ignore harsh environmental conditions*/ (irony off)

Wouldn't you love to be the sailor riding in that thing bouncing like a wild bronco while crashing through 10ft waves in gale force winds at 40+ kts.? It would just break apart....

In real life you could only use the "GHOST" ship in the calm San Diego Bay to impress the bikini babes - but then, where do you want to put them to show off?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Kursk was getting ready to show this technology to the Chinese when they bumped with a US sub which actually shot it with a torpedo and sunk it. Saw a documentary on TV about it with Peter Wolf narrating. Haven't seen it played again since. Had actual pics of a perfect hole in the starboard side forward where the torpedo went in then detonated inside the bow.

kazouille_1105145222_torpille4.jpg

Different documentary out as well touting the subject of the sinking was from the internal torpedo as you state above.

 

CBS news then broke the story that the United States had three ships in the vicinity observing the naval exercise that Kursk was taking part in, possibly a test of a new ultra-high speed torpedo. Two of the three ships were submarines, later determined to be USS Memphis and USS Toledo, type 688 Los Angeles class fast attack submarines which are often used for covert intelligence gathering.

 

Link

 

Also, if I am not mistaken, Clinton issued some coinage to Russia, something like $10 million or so.

 

The Kursk did not collide with a US vessel, or anything for that matter, nor did any vessel fire a weapon of any kind at the Kursk, and the United States did not pay any kind of renumeration.

 

Ajax, believe it or not, it is remuneration, not renum........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ajax, believe it or not, it is remuneration, not renum........

 

Ugh, MUST stop posting before coffee. Thanks for the correction. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You've been getting a bit of a tickle up on the spelling & grammar lately old mate. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
whouldn't the explosion cause a high pressure area lifting the ship and the the water rushing to fill make the low pressure, just asking not arguing?

 

 

i caught that after... First up, then down, then back up. Thanks..

 

its the initial shock that fractures the hull - the after responses just help break it all the way

 

modern warships have all the sensitive equipment on board on massive shock absorbing springs - both for sound quieting and to try to save equipment in case of a near miss

 

and yes there are developments in small torpedoes with shaped charges - the problem is the density of water and specific detonation distance from the target hull, and going thru the torpodo nose sonar xducers - and double hulls can defeat them - plus it only makes a small hole.

The shaped charges would be great for smaller targets. Why waste a 48 when only a fraction of the force is needed? Seems like a smart move in today's world.

Because big booms are neat?!? In all reality, how often do we go after a "small" target with an attack sub? More to the point, how often is precision an issue? Unlike land targets, there usually aren't concerns like a school next to a target. Might as well make sure you get the job done with one shot.

 

That of course, is completely uninformed opinion and probably wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ajax, believe it or not, it is remuneration, not renum........

 

Ugh, MUST stop posting before coffee. Thanks for the correction. :)

I wouldn't worry. I actually thought it was spelled the incorrect way. I've now realized how low my life has sunk... I learned something on SA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

besides subs are multi [pressure] hulled. See typhoon class. Its a naval jawbreaker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ajax, believe it or not, it is remuneration, not renum........

 

Ugh, MUST stop posting before coffee. Thanks for the correction. :)

I wouldn't worry. I actually thought it was spelled the incorrect way. I've now realized how low my life has sunk... I learned something on SA.

 

don't feel bad, you're not alone, there's a support group for that problem down the hall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back on topic however, check out the action shot here:

http://julietmarine....June30-2011.pdf

 

It looks like they actually posed a bunch of action figures as their squad of marines. Which is strangely appropriate for this toylike vehicle

 

Hi Newbie. Please perform the requisite fucking off and showing of tits. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
whouldn't the explosion cause a high pressure area lifting the ship and the the water rushing to fill make the low pressure, just asking not arguing?

 

 

i caught that after... First up, then down, then back up. Thanks..

 

its the initial shock that fractures the hull - the after responses just help break it all the way

 

modern warships have all the sensitive equipment on board on massive shock absorbing springs - both for sound quieting and to try to save equipment in case of a near miss

 

and yes there are developments in small torpedoes with shaped charges - the problem is the density of water and specific detonation distance from the target hull, and going thru the torpodo nose sonar xducers - and double hulls can defeat them - plus it only makes a small hole.

The shaped charges would be great for smaller targets. Why waste a 48 when only a fraction of the force is needed? Seems like a smart move in today's world.

Because big booms are neat?!? In all reality, how often do we go after a "small" target with an attack sub? More to the point, how often is precision an issue? Unlike land targets, there usually aren't concerns like a school next to a target. Might as well make sure you get the job done with one shot.

 

That of course, is completely uninformed opinion and probably wrong.

The role of our subs is always changing. Back in the eighties, when the USSR was the enemy, and that enemy used boomers (ballistic missile subs) like the big was good. Now we are fighting pirates off of Africa. Smaller, might well be a better choice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Source or explain the inward damage on the Kursk bow?

 

 

It was sharks with freakn' lasers ... i have the pictures to prove it..

 

 

sharks-with-lasers-1.jpg

Bottom. Rock maybe? Besides all that stuff you see floating at sea during the day disappears at night.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
whouldn't the explosion cause a high pressure area lifting the ship and the the water rushing to fill make the low pressure, just asking not arguing?

 

 

i caught that after... First up, then down, then back up. Thanks..

 

its the initial shock that fractures the hull - the after responses just help break it all the way

 

modern warships have all the sensitive equipment on board on massive shock absorbing springs - both for sound quieting and to try to save equipment in case of a near miss

 

and yes there are developments in small torpedoes with shaped charges - the problem is the density of water and specific detonation distance from the target hull, and going thru the torpodo nose sonar xducers - and double hulls can defeat them - plus it only makes a small hole.

The shaped charges would be great for smaller targets. Why waste a 48 when only a fraction of the force is needed? Seems like a smart move in today's world.

Because big booms are neat?!? In all reality, how often do we go after a "small" target with an attack sub? More to the point, how often is precision an issue? Unlike land targets, there usually aren't concerns like a school next to a target. Might as well make sure you get the job done with one shot.

 

That of course, is completely uninformed opinion and probably wrong.

The role of our subs is always changing. Back in the eighties, when the USSR was the enemy, and that enemy used boomers (ballistic missile subs) like the big was good. Now we are fighting pirates off of Africa. Smaller, might well be a better choice.

I get what you're saying, but I don't see sub-launched torpedoes as a highly utilized weapon against the pirates. Don't forget, we're still supposed to pretend we give a damn about trying to arrest them first. Any sub involvement in the war on piracy is most likely surveillance and detection. However, I would love to see a YouTube clip of "pirate skiff vs. Mark-48!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminds me of that camper/catamaran thing from one of the boat show threads that I can't find right now. Also like a mini of the 3200 sqft catamaran/condo. Is supercavitation like the 4th mode?

 

G

 

Russians have had torpedo's that use super cavication since the 70's. they are propelled by hydrogen peroxide rocket engines and it is believed this is what sunk the kursk when it malfunctioned. Basically a bubble is created around the object which reduces surface drag allowing speeds of 200 km through the water. The Navy is supposed to be working on a 100 km mini sub for the seals that will use this principle as well.

 

I think the Kursk was getting ready to show this technology to the Chinese when they bumped with a US sub which actually shot it with a torpedo and sunk it. Saw a documentary on TV about it with Peter Wolf narrating. Haven't seen it played again since. Had actual pics of a perfect hole in the starboard side forward where the torpedo went in then detonated inside the bow.

kazouille_1105145222_torpille4.jpg

Different documentary out as well touting the subject of the sinking was from the internal torpedo as you state above.

 

CBS news then broke the story that the United States had three ships in the vicinity observing the naval exercise that Kursk was taking part in, possibly a test of a new ultra-high speed torpedo. Two of the three ships were submarines, later determined to be USS Memphis and USS Toledo, type 688 Los Angeles class fast attack submarines which are often used for covert intelligence gathering.

 

Link

 

Also, if I am not mistaken, Clinton issued some coinage to Russia, something like $10 million or so.

I agree on how torpedos work but I also have seen that documentary. It was done by a Russian news crew or maybe it was an Indie and I've never seen it again. Real damn convincing that WE blew the fuck out of it right down to having a "nurse" come in during the report being given to the families by what looked like an Admiral and druging a mother who wouldn't stop asking questions and then kicking all the news people out of the meeting. It was very spooky to say the very least.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanted one of these so bad as a kid. We all did, none of us got one, $8 was serious coin.

 

polarissub.jpg

 

+1

My brother would have made me sit in the backseat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I get what you're saying, but I don't see sub-launched torpedoes as a highly utilized weapon against the pirates. Don't forget, we're still supposed to pretend we give a damn about trying to arrest them first. Any sub involvement in the war on piracy is most likely surveillance and detection. However, I would love to see a YouTube clip of "pirate skiff vs. Mark-48!"

 

I am sure that the pirate's counter measures are extremely limited, probably best to use the subs for detection and let the surface fleet handle the elimination as target practice. The mark 48 explosion would probably get the pirate vessel airborne there by negating the effects of the pressure changes that would break it apart. I would agree that it would be something to see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanted one of these so bad as a kid. We all did, none of us got one, $8 was serious coin.

 

polarissub.jpg

 

I want to hear from anyone who actually got one of these!! Did they get a side of sea monkeys with it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminds me of that camper/catamaran thing from one of the boat show threads that I can't find right now. Also like a mini of the 3200 sqft catamaran/condo. Is supercavitation like the 4th mode?

 

G

 

Russians have had torpedo's that use super cavication since the 70's. they are propelled by hydrogen peroxide rocket engines and it is believed this is what sunk the kursk when it malfunctioned. Basically a bubble is created around the object which reduces surface drag allowing speeds of 200 km through the water. The Navy is supposed to be working on a 100 km mini sub for the seals that will use this principle as well.

 

I think the Kursk was getting ready to show this technology to the Chinese when they bumped with a US sub which actually shot it with a torpedo and sunk it. Saw a documentary on TV about it with Peter Wolf narrating. Haven't seen it played again since. Had actual pics of a perfect hole in the starboard side forward where the torpedo went in then detonated inside the bow.

kazouille_1105145222_torpille4.jpg

Different documentary out as well touting the subject of the sinking was from the internal torpedo as you state above.

 

CBS news then broke the story that the United States had three ships in the vicinity observing the naval exercise that Kursk was taking part in, possibly a test of a new ultra-high speed torpedo. Two of the three ships were submarines, later determined to be USS Memphis and USS Toledo, type 688 Los Angeles class fast attack submarines which are often used for covert intelligence gathering.

 

Link

 

Also, if I am not mistaken, Clinton issued some coinage to Russia, something like $10 million or so.

I agree on how torpedos work but I also have seen that documentary. It was done by a Russian news crew or maybe it was an Indie and I've never seen it again. Real damn convincing that WE blew the fuck out of it right down to having a "nurse" come in during the report being given to the families by what looked like an Admiral and druging a mother who wouldn't stop asking questions and then kicking all the news people out of the meeting. It was very spooky to say the very least.

 

 

How is a video clip of a Russian admiral giving a briefing to the Russian families in Russia and a Russian nurse coming in and drugging a babushka evidence of the US torpedoing a Russian boomer in three hundred feet of water off Scandinavia? I am not following your logic path? I think that the key words in your post are "done by a Russian news crew".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminds me of that camper/catamaran thing from one of the boat show threads that I can't find right now. Also like a mini of the 3200 sqft catamaran/condo. Is supercavitation like the 4th mode?

 

G

 

Russians have had torpedo's that use super cavication since the 70's. they are propelled by hydrogen peroxide rocket engines and it is believed this is what sunk the kursk when it malfunctioned. Basically a bubble is created around the object which reduces surface drag allowing speeds of 200 km through the water. The Navy is supposed to be working on a 100 km mini sub for the seals that will use this principle as well.

 

I think the Kursk was getting ready to show this technology to the Chinese when they bumped with a US sub which actually shot it with a torpedo and sunk it. Saw a documentary on TV about it with Peter Wolf narrating. Haven't seen it played again since. Had actual pics of a perfect hole in the starboard side forward where the torpedo went in then detonated inside the bow.

kazouille_1105145222_torpille4.jpg

Different documentary out as well touting the subject of the sinking was from the internal torpedo as you state above.

 

CBS news then broke the story that the United States had three ships in the vicinity observing the naval exercise that Kursk was taking part in, possibly a test of a new ultra-high speed torpedo. Two of the three ships were submarines, later determined to be USS Memphis and USS Toledo, type 688 Los Angeles class fast attack submarines which are often used for covert intelligence gathering.

 

Link

 

Also, if I am not mistaken, Clinton issued some coinage to Russia, something like $10 million or so.

I agree on how torpedos work but I also have seen that documentary. It was done by a Russian news crew or maybe it was an Indie and I've never seen it again. Real damn convincing that WE blew the fuck out of it right down to having a "nurse" come in during the report being given to the families by what looked like an Admiral and druging a mother who wouldn't stop asking questions and then kicking all the news people out of the meeting. It was very spooky to say the very least.

 

 

How is a video clip of a Russian admiral giving a briefing to the Russian families in Russia and a Russian nurse coming in and drugging a babushka evidence of the US torpedoing a Russian boomer in three hundred feet of water off Scandinavia? I am not following your logic path? I think that the key words in your post are "done by a Russian news crew".

That was just one of the examples of the Russians trying to cover it all up. Look I'm not saying it was true or not but it was damn convincing. I think it was actually a documentary on the Discovery Channel if I remember correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanted one of these so bad as a kid. We all did, none of us got one, $8 was serious coin.

 

polarissub.jpg

 

I want to hear from anyone who actually got one of these!! Did they get a side of sea monkeys with it?

 

Sea Monkeys sucked gorilla twat.

 

The sub was where it was at. The fact that so few of us ever actually had one is probably what kept the yacht industry alive as we struggled to right that wrong.

 

http://www.boingboing.net/2007/06/14/photo-of-comic-book-.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That was just one of the examples of the Russians trying to cover it all up. Look I'm not saying it was true or not but it was damn convincing. I think it was actually a documentary on the Discovery Channel if I remember correctly.

 

I am not trying to argue I just don't get the logic behind Russians trying to cover up an attack by the US. Now them blaming the US to cover up their own failures with the volatile peroxide fuel the use in their torps is right in character for them. The other fact they seem to point to is that there was a US sub in the area. It is a pretty well know fact that where ever a Russian boomer is a US attack sub will be in the area it's kind of their mission in life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That was just one of the examples of the Russians trying to cover it all up. Look I'm not saying it was true or not but it was damn convincing. I think it was actually a documentary on the Discovery Channel if I remember correctly.

 

I am not trying to argue I just don't get the logic behind Russians trying to cover up an attack by the US. Now them blaming the US to cover up their own failures with the volatile peroxide fuel the use in their torps is right in character for them. The other fact they seem to point to is that there was a US sub in the area. It is a pretty well know fact that where ever a Russian boomer is a US attack sub will be in the area it's kind of their mission in life.

Bingo.

 

If there was a major Russian operation going on and no American sub, then the Ruskies certainly kept a secret. I remember following that story very closely. It was big news then. I do have one question though, Why would an American Sub, that does not want to be detected, fire a torpedo at a Soviet/Russian sub in the first place? Giving the hair triggers of the past that would be grounds for a launch. We may do something silly like collide with the Russian Sub, but certainly would not fire at it. Bad juju

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That was just one of the examples of the Russians trying to cover it all up. Look I'm not saying it was true or not but it was damn convincing. I think it was actually a documentary on the Discovery Channel if I remember correctly.

 

I am not trying to argue I just don't get the logic behind Russians trying to cover up an attack by the US. Now them blaming the US to cover up their own failures with the volatile peroxide fuel the use in their torps is right in character for them. The other fact they seem to point to is that there was a US sub in the area. It is a pretty well know fact that where ever a Russian boomer is a US attack sub will be in the area it's kind of their mission in life.

Bingo.

 

If there was a major Russian operation going on and no American sub, then the Ruskies certainly kept a secret. I remember following that story very closely. It was big news then. I do have one question though, Why would an American Sub, that does not want to be detected, fire a torpedo at a Soviet/Russian sub in the first place? Giving the hair triggers of the past that would be grounds for a launch. We may do something silly like collide with the Russian Sub, but certainly would not fire at it. Bad juju

If I remember correctly it had something to do with selling the high speed torp technology to the Chinese as the were there that day.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That was just one of the examples of the Russians trying to cover it all up. Look I'm not saying it was true or not but it was damn convincing. I think it was actually a documentary on the Discovery Channel if I remember correctly.

 

I am not trying to argue I just don't get the logic behind Russians trying to cover up an attack by the US. Now them blaming the US to cover up their own failures with the volatile peroxide fuel the use in their torps is right in character for them. The other fact they seem to point to is that there was a US sub in the area. It is a pretty well know fact that where ever a Russian boomer is a US attack sub will be in the area it's kind of their mission in life.

Bingo.

 

If there was a major Russian operation going on and no American sub, then the Ruskies certainly kept a secret. I remember following that story very closely. It was big news then. I do have one question though, Why would an American Sub, that does not want to be detected, fire a torpedo at a Soviet/Russian sub in the first place? Giving the hair triggers of the past that would be grounds for a launch. We may do something silly like collide with the Russian Sub, but certainly would not fire at it. Bad juju

If I remember correctly it had something to do with selling the high speed torp technology to the Chinese as the were there that day.

 

It was a multi ship exhibition of some type. I can't remember if the Chinese were there or not. I do remember the offers from the US and others to help the downed sub. For a time there was the thought that survivors were a possibility and we were more than willing to help.

 

Of course we do have a history of finding downed Soviet subs before the Soviets could. Our program was far from perfect, but it was inherently safer to be in our program.

 

As for the Darth Vader thingy, it fits in with the new type of fighting we expect. Move small numbers of people fast without detection into the bad guys marina. It would be highly effective with the pirates, smugglers, or potential terrorists. The Bay of Pigs taught us what not to do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why?

 

Most air to air missiles, and all torpedo's work on the near miss principal. That the explosion itself does more damage than hitting the target at speed. Missiles get to within 10 feet or so and basically act as a fragmentation grenade sending shrapel into the aircraft.

 

torpedos need to get close and use water pressure to rip the vessel apart. that is why depth charges work. you don't have to be direct on, only close enough for the explosion to cause a bubble. because water doesn't compress and the explosion has to go some where.

 

you know, with that explanation i'm never going to feel safe farting in the bath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why?

 

Most air to air missiles, and all torpedo's work on the near miss principal. That the explosion itself does more damage than hitting the target at speed. Missiles get to within 10 feet or so and basically act as a fragmentation grenade sending shrapel into the aircraft.

 

torpedos need to get close and use water pressure to rip the vessel apart. that is why depth charges work. you don't have to be direct on, only close enough for the explosion to cause a bubble. because water doesn't compress and the explosion has to go some where.

 

you know, with that explanation i'm never going to feel safe farting in the bath

Next bath take a ballon, and your rubber ducky. Let ducky float around and blow the ballon up. push the ballon under water all the way to the bottom under the duck and either pop, or open the ballon up. Poor ducky will go for a ride.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

back to the op

 

the super caviting thing makes me kinda nervious

 

the super caviting torpedos are essentlly travelling in an air pocket - and are kinda unstable -

 

might be a bumpy ride

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanted one of these so bad as a kid. We all did, none of us got one, $8 was serious coin.

 

polarissub.jpg

 

We made our own... used a refrigerator box for the hull, a Batscope for the periscope and a couple of Whamo Air Blasters to fire the torpedos... a year or two later we refit the hull as the Starship Enterprise. :) :) :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Back on topic however, check out the action shot here:

http://julietmarine....June30-2011.pdf

 

It looks like they actually posed a bunch of action figures as their squad of marines. Which is strangely appropriate for this toylike vehicle

 

Hi Newbie. Please perform the requisite fucking off and showing of tits. :)

 

 

WTF?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Newbie. Please perform the requisite fucking off and showing of tits. :)

 

 

WTF?

 

It's a time honored tradition here to welcome a new member with an initiation test. While we don't hold you to this, the historical welcome is to say "fuck off and show us your girlfriend's tits". It's led to pics like this:

 

67378435406768206764.jpg

 

If you do post something worthwhile people will notice, and respond with posts containing pics like this:

 

13332642366825422822.jpg

 

If you post something repulsive you'll get something like this:

 

78209311427173726813.png

 

or maybe this:

 

73737593877157160092.jpg

 

Either way, here's an opportunity to make a lot of friends quickly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

That was just one of the examples of the Russians trying to cover it all up. Look I'm not saying it was true or not but it was damn convincing. I think it was actually a documentary on the Discovery Channel if I remember correctly.

 

I am not trying to argue I just don't get the logic behind Russians trying to cover up an attack by the US. Now them blaming the US to cover up their own failures with the volatile peroxide fuel the use in their torps is right in character for them. The other fact they seem to point to is that there was a US sub in the area. It is a pretty well know fact that where ever a Russian boomer is a US attack sub will be in the area it's kind of their mission in life.

Bingo.

 

If there was a major Russian operation going on and no American sub, then the Ruskies certainly kept a secret. I remember following that story very closely. It was big news then. I do have one question though, Why would an American Sub, that does not want to be detected, fire a torpedo at a Soviet/Russian sub in the first place? Giving the hair triggers of the past that would be grounds for a launch. We may do something silly like collide with the Russian Sub, but certainly would not fire at it. Bad juju

If I remember correctly it had something to do with selling the high speed torp technology to the Chinese as the were there that day.

 

It was a multi ship exhibition of some type. I can't remember if the Chinese were there or not. I do remember the offers from the US and others to help the downed sub. For a time there was the thought that survivors were a possibility and we were more than willing to help.

 

Of course we do have a history of finding downed Soviet subs before the Soviets could. Our program was far from perfect, but it was inherently safer to be in our program.

 

As for the Darth Vader thingy, it fits in with the new type of fighting we expect. Move small numbers of people fast without detection into the bad guys marina. It would be highly effective with the pirates, smugglers, or potential terrorists. The Bay of Pigs taught us what not to do.

 

I remember that too, the most painful part was that the sub was only about 350 feet down, not too deep for a quick rescue. But the Russians just let the survivors die down there.

 

Anyway, with the advent of synthetic aperture L-band remote sensing radar, subs are now only invisible at a depth below about 2 to 3 times their length. This is going to require smaller subs, or methods to attack from greater depth.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

250px-Ernest-Borgnine_2004.JPEG

 

Possibelle skippere? :)

 

And if it tips over on New Years Eve, he has the experience to lead the survivors to the top (bottom) of the ship. Too bad his wife, the former prostitute, is dead though.

 

stellastevens.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Docking is going to be a bitch....

 

JMarine-Ghost-dec08.jpg

 

i think it looks like vaders helmet.. or Helmets helmet i hope its Schwartz is bigger

darth-vader-face.jpeg?w=240&h=180ngbbs43756bea0a12a.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was just one of the examples of the Russians trying to cover it all up. Look I'm not saying it was true or not but it was damn convincing. I think it was actually a documentary on the Discovery Channel if I remember correctly.

 

I am not trying to argue I just don't get the logic behind Russians trying to cover up an attack by the US. Now them blaming the US to cover up their own failures with the volatile peroxide fuel the use in their torps is right in character for them. The other fact they seem to point to is that there was a US sub in the area. It is a pretty well know fact that where ever a Russian boomer is a US attack sub will be in the area it's kind of their mission in life.

Bingo.

 

If there was a major Russian operation going on and no American sub, then the Ruskies certainly kept a secret. I remember following that story very closely. It was big news then. I do have one question though, Why would an American Sub, that does not want to be detected, fire a torpedo at a Soviet/Russian sub in the first place? Giving the hair triggers of the past that would be grounds for a launch. We may do something silly like collide with the Russian Sub, but certainly would not fire at it. Bad juju

 

The Russians have a very strong sense of pride and nationalism. Rather than admit to the families, that extreme budget cuts, lax safety protocols and poor quality control during weapons production were responsible for a torpedo malfunction, it was easier and made more sense to blame the US "boogeymen". If a US submarine or other vessel had actually attacked and killed a Russian submarine, and the Russians had actual proof of this, then Russia would have treated it like the act of war that it really is. We would have gone to war, and Russia would have presented the proof at the UN Assembly.

 

I'm going to say this again: No U.S. vessel (or vessel belonging to any other nation) attacked, or otherwise caused the loss of the K-141. Any statement to the contrary is pure conspiracy-theory fantasy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wanted one of these so bad as a kid. We all did, none of us got one, $8 was serious coin.

 

polarissub.jpg

 

I still want one. Wonder if they're still in business? I should fill out the form, send it in and see what happens tongue.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember seeing a design that looked very much like this one. The sales pitch was from Lockheed Martin that the boat was part of a Litoral attack force. The concept was that several of these could be stored inside the Lockheed LCS and lowered out the back. The selling points was that it kept the LCS mother ship away from the coast. The GHOST could just sit and float for days hopefully undetected until it was needed. The cost was estimated at about 12 million per copy.

 

The design seems to have become bigger...imagine that! The concept was for GHOST to be able to go up rivers at night and just float very low to the water during the day.

 

The Kursk - Well the major problem with this being the work of the US Navy and so many other events is that somehow the US Navy can keep over 100 sailors quiet. Not to mention ship yard workers quiet, every single member of the Intelligence committee and a host of other addresses on message traffic that MUST be informed when anything goes bad....

 

We can't keep small Marine squads from filming themselves urinate on bodies and small puppies being thrown off a mountain. To be honest I can't think of anything that the Navy has been able to keep quiet for more than a couple of months.

 

Here is a challenge...when confronted by those with tin foil hats. Ask them to name an incident that has now come to light which happened with a boat load of enlisted sailors on board in the last thirty years. Keeping 100+ sailors quiet after they get home is about as easy as herding the same number of cats.

 

It just will not happen.

 

So someone tell me a success story of the US Navy keeping enlisted sailors quiet...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember seeing a design that looked very much like this one. The sales pitch was from Lockheed Martin that the boat was part of a Litoral attack force. The concept was that several of these could be stored inside the Lockheed LCS and lowered out the back. The selling points was that it kept the LCS mother ship away from the coast. The GHOST could just sit and float for days hopefully undetected until it was needed. The cost was estimated at about 12 million per copy.

 

The design seems to have become bigger...imagine that! The concept was for GHOST to be able to go up rivers at night and just float very low to the water during the day.

 

The Kursk - Well the major problem with this being the work of the US Navy and so many other events is that somehow the US Navy can keep over 100 sailors quiet. Not to mention ship yard workers quiet, every single member of the Intelligence committee and a host of other addresses on message traffic that MUST be informed when anything goes bad....

 

We can't keep small Marine squads from filming themselves urinate on bodies and small puppies being thrown off a mountain. To be honest I can't think of anything that the Navy has been able to keep quiet for more than a couple of months.

 

Here is a challenge...when confronted by those with tin foil hats. Ask them to name an incident that has now come to light which happened with a boat load of enlisted sailors on board in the last thirty years. Keeping 100+ sailors quiet after they get home is about as easy as herding the same number of cats.

 

It just will not happen.

 

So someone tell me a success story of the US Navy keeping enlisted sailors quiet...

If I told you it would not be a secret anymore. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here is a challenge...when confronted by those with tin foil hats. Ask them to name an incident that has now come to light which happened with a boat load of enlisted sailors on board in the last thirty years. Keeping 100+ sailors quiet after they get home is about as easy as herding the same number of cats.

 

Not the Navy, but what about that whole grassy-knoll thing..... :blink:

 

Or those filming the fake moon landings in back-lots in Hollywood ? They certainly have kept quiet over the years............ :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK So someone tell me a story of keeping a boat load of enlisted sailors quiet for more than a year......any story in our beautiful post Vietnam volunteer Navy....

 

Just 13 months.... Keep a crew silent for 13 months...no leaks! Please tell me the name of this tremendous leader of a Captain who convinced an entire crew of a submarine, destroyer or even the USS Mondale LS-1 (Laundry Ship) to stay quiet for more than the time it took to get a 10% of that crew out of the Navy?

 

Tell me this true story now....Where is the CBS News team for this story???

 

BTW - CBS news...the same news team that tried to blackmail David Letterman? The same group of misfits that even with Katy freakin Courie finish behind internet news sites in evening news ratings....that is your news source....where is that citation anyway?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Here is a challenge...when confronted by those with tin foil hats. Ask them to name an incident that has now come to light which happened with a boat load of enlisted sailors on board in the last thirty years. Keeping 100+ sailors quiet after they get home is about as easy as herding the same number of cats.

 

Not the Navy, but what about that whole grassy-knoll thing..... :blink:

 

Or those filming the fake moon landings in back-lots in Hollywood ? They certainly have kept quiet over the years............ :lol:

 

 

OK those things are true...but they happened over 40 years ago.....Notice that we just stopped landing on the moon shortly after Watergate and since the end of the Vietnam war 1975 nobody has left earth orbit....oh yea! Can't find a trusty sailor to man those space ships!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK So someone tell me a story of keeping a boat load of enlisted sailors quiet for more than a year......any story in our beautiful post Vietnam volunteer Navy....

 

Just 13 months.... Keep a crew silent for 13 months...no leaks! Please tell me the name of this tremendous leader of a Captain who convinced an entire crew of a submarine, destroyer or even the USS Mondale LS-1 (Laundry Ship) to stay quiet for more than the time it took to get a 10% of that crew out of the Navy?

 

Tell me this true story now....Where is the CBS News team for this story???

 

BTW - CBS news...the same news team that tried to blackmail David Letterman? The same group of misfits that even with Katy freakin Courie finish behind internet news sites in evening news ratings....that is your news source....where is that citation anyway?

I'll give you the name of a ship, USS Orion AS-18, and a year, 1994. That is all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My link

 

 

Mighty tough to have a boat load of enlisted sailors aboard a ship in 1994 when the decom date is September 1993.

 

Tell us this great event that has been kept secret for so long. They found out someone forgot to take the nukes off when the small arms ammo was turned in?

 

Minor problem happened to many ships and shore stations during the Clinton years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wasn't there some secret experiment in Philadelphia involving a warship?

 

Don't hear to much about that one.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites