FREE AMERICA Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : FREE AMERICA

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: goldworldnet who wrote (1602)	4/5/2006 7:58:30 PM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (3) of 14758

Something about that "200+ mph" torpedo doesn't quite float with me. Think of the massive pressure building up on something moving that fast under water. It would require an incredibly sturdy (read heavy) outer hull. If it were designed to sink even moderately sized naval warships, the warhead would have to be huge. The fuel requirements to move what would likely be by far the largest, heaviest torpedo ever made so it could achieve 200+ mph would be.... what's the word I'm looking for.... HUGE! IMO, it would have to weigh several tons at least. It would burn many, many gallons of fuel per second. Even a very short range torpedo, say 2 miles, would, at 200 mph burn for 36 seconds, plus another 15 or more seconds to get up to speed. If it is a short range torpedo, how would they get close enough to launch it? Small suicide boat? It would be nearly impossible to steer something that big & that fast under water. The design specs for such a torpedo to accomplish what they claim it does would be astronomical. It would most likely cost tens of millions for each torpedo - and that is only if they somehow managed to mass produce them to spread the massive R&D & overhead over a large number of torpedoes.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next