They can't turn at speed during supercavitation. But prior to supercavitating (or after), they can turn.
The force of the water on the side of a torpedo is too great during a turn (or dive or ascent) at 220mph, though.
Posted on 04/02/2006 11:49:29 AM PDT by Flavius
That's not a cartoon of Muhammad, is it? ;-)
There was an article about these torpedoes in Scientific American quite a few years ago. They are not violating the laws of physics. They are not pushing aside anywhere near as much water as a submarine, though of course they move faster. The "bubble" is mainly formed through cavitation that begins at the narrow nose of the torpedo, although some designs also involve recirculation of rocket exhaust.
This torpedo technology has been around so long that I heard some time ago that the Russians were marketing their 1st generation designs to other countries.
As I understand it some of the rocket motor's exhaust is directed through small perforations that essentially allow the missile to operate in a bubble while underwater. Quite ingenious and as I recall it was technology initially developed by the Russians. D@mn dangerous weapon in my opinion. Don't know what their range is but I'd bet they could launch from underground near the Strait of Hormuz provided a nest/base was built for them. I bet you could hear it 500 miles away.
Great info very good job.
All right let's see here. The world has known for some time the superiority of our Navy. Second to none. We're the big kid on the block, we're the king on the mountain to knock off.
So, what do we do? We just sit back and let Iran in cahoots with Russia (and China?) Get their ducks all lined up. Refining new super weapons. Meanwhile, confident in our superiority, we do nothing.
Sounds familiar. Germany did the same prior to WW2. They were fully aware that the Royal Navy had Germany outgunned. Germany evened the score with their U-boats. While the Brits twiddled their thumbs...and very nearly won the battle of the Atlantic.
Is history going to repeat itself?
correction
While the Brits twiddled their thumbs...and very nearly LOST the battle of the Atlantic.
Seems to me that it was around 7000 feet or perhaps meters. I don't think they could get that close
Do some Googling for supercavitation
The Iranians had lots of help pulling this off if indeed they did pull it off. A supercavitating weapon is not only difficult to design, it is difficult to manufacture and the likes of the Russians (who have been most advanced in this area) and the Chinese have been trying to develop them with the express interest of sinking US carriers with them.
I wonder how the Iranians got their hands of the technology? Hmmm? [/sarcasm]
They can't turn at speed during supercavitation. But prior to supercavitating (or after), they can turn.
The force of the water on the side of a torpedo is too great during a turn (or dive or ascent) at 220mph, though.
The Russians had a Squall on display at an arms show in Dubai a few years ago. The Russians consider it a defensive weapon...useful as a counter-attack against an other-wise undetected sub (e.g. what U.S. subs are famous for)...because it shoots back along the path that the incoming hostile torpedo made to the Russian sub (default targeting program).
The theory is that the Squall can backtrack to the launch point of the hostile missile...which will generally (but not always) be where the U.S. sub is located. Thus, the launch of a torpedo gives the Russians a brief moment of seeing the U.S. sub.
The Squall has numerous weaknesses (type of propellant being one, lack of guidance at speed being another, lack of manueverability at speed, etc.) which have received some attention as later versions were rolled out.
The Squall's mile and a half range is a major such weakness, as is the whole theory that the U.S. sub (capable of 40+mph underwater) will be in the same location by the time the 220mph Squall is launched, activated, supercavitates on track, etc.
But...the Russians did field it as a way of showing that U.S. subs would reveal their position and be vulnerable if they (directly) launched a torpedo.
It purely in economic terms since the highly volatile geostrategic region of the Persian Gulf contains liquid gold, and those fanatics know they could triggering panic buying of energy related contracts soaring the price of oil between $100 & $200 a barrel.
There are a lot of "if's". If the Mahdi worshiping Iranian tyrants are not overthrown quickly. If Iran's naval, coastal and land-based (nuclear?), chemical & biological tipped missiles are not neutralized or destroyed. If supertankers loaded with departing energy products are not attacked by Iran or Iran's terrorist proxies, and if the largest oil & natural gas field in the world, Arabia's Gahwar (large in green below), remains safe from terrorist attacks, the world will not tremble, but the financial world shall continue to be very nervous of the global economic potentials.
Homegrown Saudi Wahhabist terrorist have already twice attempting to blow up the Abqaiq petroleum compound near the Persian Gulf, through which two-thirds of Saudi oil exports passes to overseas customers.
Iranian & Syrian instigated jihadist sabotage attacks on Iraq's oil pipelines have significantly downgraded Iraqi oil production and export, thus the sudden impact of Saudi oil/natural gas being reduced due to supply disrupting terrorist attacks, coupled with Iranian oil being taken off the market when the final attack is order against the Mullahs is ordered, or if Iran's vast energy infrastructure is deliberately sabotaged by Iran's madmen would jolt the markets into a pandemonium buying and selling frenzy effecting all market segments.
Certainly not, that's a picture of his grandmother and her fan club :)
Jeff, the Iranians will actually design and build something like this when the Irish quit applying for police and fire jobs in Boston.
This whole thing sounds fishy... no pun intended. As a torpedo, the system is essentially useless. If they miss, their launch platform is going to be destroyed, and to hit, they need to know exactly where a sub is.
Plus, this whole thing looks more like an anti-torpedo weapon than a torpedo replacement.
It strikes me as a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. Torpedoes aren't exactly ineffective weapons. We don't have any way to intercept them, and neither does anyone else, so why bother with a fancy new torpedo replacement?
The IRGC control the short-range ballistics in Iran. The video footage released by the Iranians shows a mixture of Shahab 3s and earlier SCUD developments. The Chinese have been using cluster muntions on their SRBMs for a couple of years now. It makes sense for any nation with SRBMs to develop cluster munition warheads. The press are simply jumping on the 'MIRV' bandwagon!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.