mordorbund Posted June 11, 2020 Report Share Posted June 11, 2020 5 hours ago, Traveler said: When I was working for the anti-submarine department there was a book published titled "Hunt for Red October". Later the book was made into a movie. I read the book and there was a lot of classified data in the book. I took the book to the security officer over where I worked. Of course they already knew all about it. I asked specifically why I had not been briefed on how I should respond if asked questions about the book in public. And so I learned that I could say there was classified material in the book but I was not allowed to say what it was. If asked specifically about something classified I should respond either that it was not accurate or that I did not know about it. Also I could talk about anything that I speculated as long as I do not give out information that I know and that was classified. If Traveler is asked about something classified he'll say "that's not accurate". Got it. 5 hours ago, Traveler said: For the record - I do not believe in extraterrestrial UFO. There are electromagnetic "interference" that can be cause by fracturing quarts from geographical events. These electromagnetic events can show on radar and inferred sensors - as well as visual to the human eye (mostly at night) and they can do some incredible moves that appear unnatural. Alien spaceships are "not accurate". Got it. Traveler, SilentOne, Vort and 1 other 1 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traveler Posted June 12, 2020 Report Share Posted June 12, 2020 On 6/10/2020 at 9:40 PM, mordorbund said: If Traveler is asked about something classified he'll say "that's not accurate". Got it. Alien spaceships are "not accurate". Got it. Any one that claims that submarines go faster than 25 nautical knots per hour or dive to depths greater than 600 feet are relying on data that is not accurate. The Traveler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carborendum Posted June 12, 2020 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2020 1 minute ago, Traveler said: 25 nautical knots per hour 1 minute ago, Traveler said: are relying on data that is not accurate. Just_A_Guy, Vort and mordorbund 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anatess2 Posted June 12, 2020 Report Share Posted June 12, 2020 8 minutes ago, Traveler said: Any one that claims that submarines go faster than 25 nautical knots per hour or dive to depths greater than 600 feet are relying on data that is not accurate. The Traveler Easy there, buddy. I'm no expert but I have it on good authority that nuclear submarines dive to depths of 300 meters. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carborendum Posted June 12, 2020 Author Report Share Posted June 12, 2020 7 minutes ago, anatess2 said: Easy there, buddy. I'm no expert but I have it on good authority that nuclear submarines dive to depths of 300 meters. Remember, he's not saying it is not accurate. He's saying it is "Not Accurate". (nudge nudge, wink wink). anatess2 and Vort 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted June 12, 2020 Report Share Posted June 12, 2020 (edited) 46 minutes ago, Traveler said: 25 nautical knots per hour A "nautical knot" appears to be used here to distinguish the unit of speed from the kind of knot you use to secure a sheet when trimming the sail. Very considerate. And for the record, a "knot per hour" is a unit of acceleration. If you start out motionless and accelerate at 25 knots per hour (nautical knots, that is), you will be doing 25 knots after one hour. So nuclear submarines can't accelerate very fast, but give them a few hours and they'll absolutely be flying through the ocean. Edited June 12, 2020 by Vort Carborendum 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traveler Posted June 12, 2020 Report Share Posted June 12, 2020 A most interspersing story about submarines. Submarines are the most lethal means to deliver atomic warheads accurately. The defense department goes through great lengths to keep track of all submarines capable of delivering a nuclear device. One day out of no where a submarine was picked up in the mid Pacific and no one knew how it got there. Also its signature was unknown - meaning it had never been cataloged. All efforts were made to find and track this new sub. But it all proved to be most difficult because the sub would go silent only to show up later at a great distance from where it was previously. For 3 days a most interesting game of cat and mouse occurred with many having great concern as an all out effort to gather more information was taking place. After 3 days it was finally discovered. But it was not a sub. It was a whale that was mimicking the sounds of a sub with amazing accuracy. Some things in life are best described as learning experiences. The Traveler NeuroTypical and Carborendum 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted June 12, 2020 Report Share Posted June 12, 2020 4 minutes ago, Traveler said: After 3 days it was finally discovered. But it was not a sub. It was a whale that was mimicking the sounds of a sub with amazing accuracy. I doubt this story, but I dearly hope it's true. That would be so awesome. Like the whales are trying to learn to communicate with these interlopers whose screaming drowns out the communication between whales separated by hundreds or (so they say) even thousands of miles. Our submarines actually have caused (and continue to cause) significant auditory disturbances throughout the oceans. Obviously it's nothing that most people have ever heard or even know about, but the oceanic acoustic environment has been substantially altered by human presence. We should take greater efforts to keep our acoustic footprint in the oceans very light, which today is not the case. Just_A_Guy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traveler Posted June 13, 2020 Report Share Posted June 13, 2020 7 hours ago, Vort said: I doubt this story, but I dearly hope it's true. That would be so awesome. Like the whales are trying to learn to communicate with these interlopers whose screaming drowns out the communication between whales separated by hundreds or (so they say) even thousands of miles. Our submarines actually have caused (and continue to cause) significant auditory disturbances throughout the oceans. Obviously it's nothing that most people have ever heard or even know about, but the oceanic acoustic environment has been substantially altered by human presence. We should take greater efforts to keep our acoustic footprint in the oceans very light, which today is not the case. Surface ships are much more noisy than submarines. And commercial ships are not at all interested in running silent as many military ships are. The Traveler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Scott Posted June 13, 2020 Report Share Posted June 13, 2020 8 hours ago, Traveler said: But it was not a sub. It was a whale that was mimicking the sounds of a sub with amazing accuracy. I would assume that the story is just another military tall tale, but that would be quite hilarious. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traveler Posted June 14, 2020 Report Share Posted June 14, 2020 23 hours ago, Scott said: I would assume that the story is just another military tall tale, but that would be quite hilarious. The problem is that submarines are so dangerous. Even the most remote possibility must be investigated and resolved. Once something is determined we can use the data to deal with future events. The Traveler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anatess2 Posted June 25, 2020 Report Share Posted June 25, 2020 On 6/13/2020 at 9:23 PM, Traveler said: The problem is that submarines are so dangerous. Even the most remote possibility must be investigated and resolved. Once something is determined we can use the data to deal with future events. The Traveler What surprised me is that there are women in a submarine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Just_A_Guy Posted June 25, 2020 Report Share Posted June 25, 2020 On 6/12/2020 at 11:14 AM, Vort said: . . . the kind of knot you use to secure a sheet when trimming the sail. Very considerate. Knot? That’s what cam cleats are for. 😛 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carborendum Posted June 25, 2020 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2020 42 minutes ago, anatess2 said: What surprised me is that there are women in a submarine. Why is that surprising? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anatess2 Posted June 25, 2020 Report Share Posted June 25, 2020 (edited) 29 minutes ago, Carborendum said: Why is that surprising? Because men's ability to objectively reason their way out of danger or sacrifice themselves for the greater good is instinctively impeded when women are within that blast radius. Many movies have illustrated this quite accurately. GI Jane was one of those movies. And I firmly believe we shouldn't try to wipe out those instinctive qualities out of men. Especially our soldiers. Edited June 25, 2020 by anatess2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carborendum Posted June 25, 2020 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2020 54 minutes ago, anatess2 said: Because men's ability to objectively reason their way out of danger or sacrifice themselves for the greater good is instinctively impeded when women are within that blast radius. Many movies have illustrated this quite accurately. GI Jane was one of those movies. And I firmly believe we shouldn't try to wipe out those instinctive qualities out of men. Especially our soldiers. I understand the reasoning for why it shouldn't be done. But I don't understand the surprise at it being done anyway. It's like saying I'm surprised there are murderers because it is wrong to murder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Traveler Posted June 25, 2020 Report Share Posted June 25, 2020 4 hours ago, anatess2 said: Because men's ability to objectively reason their way out of danger or sacrifice themselves for the greater good is instinctively impeded when women are within that blast radius. Many movies have illustrated this quite accurately. GI Jane was one of those movies. And I firmly believe we shouldn't try to wipe out those instinctive qualities out of men. Especially our soldiers. I am amazed that anyone can last beyond a few hours on a submarine - especially at depth. The sailors love to string a very taught wire across the bulkhead prior to a dive to help the firs timers better realize their experience. At depth the wire will sag 3 feet. The distance across the bulkhead is not very far at all. The wire is tightened prior to resurfacing and will quickly break. The water pressure on the sub shrinks it much more than you would imagine possible. The Traveler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anatess2 Posted June 25, 2020 Report Share Posted June 25, 2020 3 hours ago, Carborendum said: I understand the reasoning for why it shouldn't be done. But I don't understand the surprise at it being done anyway. It's like saying I'm surprised there are murderers because it is wrong to murder. I'm surprised that military commanders have not objected strenuously to the suggestion enough to prevent it from happening to one of the most dangerous and critical components of military arsenal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anatess2 Posted June 25, 2020 Report Share Posted June 25, 2020 5 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said: Knot? That’s what cam cleats are for. 😛 Careful there... that could be mistaken for a noose. Just_A_Guy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carborendum Posted June 25, 2020 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2020 6 minutes ago, anatess2 said: I'm surprised that military commanders have not objected strenuously to the suggestion enough to prevent it from happening to one of the most dangerous and critical components of military arsenal. They have. Obama didn't care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anatess2 Posted June 25, 2020 Report Share Posted June 25, 2020 7 minutes ago, Carborendum said: They have. Obama didn't care. In that case, I'm surprised they haven't installed transgender bathrooms in submarines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carborendum Posted June 25, 2020 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2020 Just now, anatess2 said: In that case, I'm surprised they haven't installed transgender bathrooms in submarines. What makes you think they haven't? anatess2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anatess2 Posted June 25, 2020 Report Share Posted June 25, 2020 29 minutes ago, Carborendum said: What makes you think they haven't? Did they retrofit a torpedo bay? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vort Posted June 25, 2020 Report Share Posted June 25, 2020 31 minutes ago, Carborendum said: What makes you think they haven't? They're just outside the screen door. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Carborendum Posted June 25, 2020 Author Report Share Posted June 25, 2020 27 minutes ago, anatess2 said: Did they retrofit a torpedo bay? I could tell you, but whatever I told you would be "not accurate". mordorbund and anatess2 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.