Re: [OT] Navy releases photos of U.S.S. San Francisco
From: Pat Flannery (flanner_at_daktel.com)
Date: 01/30/05
- Next message: Andre Lieven: "Re: ATTN: Scott Grissom - four specific questions"
- Previous message: Andre Lieven: "Re: ATTN: Scott Grissom - four specific questions"
- In reply to: Mr Jim: "Re: [OT] Navy releases photos of U.S.S. San Francisco"
- Next in thread: Neil Gerace: "Re: [OT] Navy releases photos of U.S.S. San Francisco"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sat, 29 Jan 2005 23:53:40 -0600
Mr Jim wrote:
>The sonar sphere is located beneath the blue tarp. It is about 15 feet in
>diameter, normally unmanned, but part of the pressure envelope, and extends
>forward from the elliptical bulkhead on a "stalk", a meter-wide tube through
>which people roll themselves along a little rope-towed trolley.
>
Shades of the B-36 bomber.
> A
>normally-closed hatch at the elliptical bulkhead serves to protect from
>flooding. The sphere is directly behind the ogival bow dome, suspended in
>that flooded volume far enough from the noisy main hull to "hear" external
>noises (via a huge number of transducers studding the sphere's surface)
>through the acoustically-transparent done over a very wide aspect. If the
>sphere was breached, crushed or simply knocked too far out of dimensional
>tolerances, then the scope of the repair job will be vastly increased.
>Obscuring the extent of this damage is probably the principal reason for the
>tarp.
>
>
Looking at the photos, I'd say the sphere is toast.
>When running on the surface at any speed over a few knots in very calm seas
>the main deck is not habitable; the bow wave flows down the forward hull,
>often a couple feet deep, past the sail and down the length of the boat.
>
>The feasibility of repair may be controlled by the damage to the torpedo
>tubes and the torpedo room. If the dimensional tolerances of that room, or
>the tubes, have been altered too much, it may not be economical to retain
>the ship in commission.
>
>
>
The thing I'd be concerned about is that no matter how well you repaired
it, and what assurances that you gave everyone that it was as good as
new, no none serving on it would ever completely trust it again,
thinking that there was some damage that didn't get noticed, and which
was going to manifest itself at around 1000 feet underwater.
Pat
- Next message: Andre Lieven: "Re: ATTN: Scott Grissom - four specific questions"
- Previous message: Andre Lieven: "Re: ATTN: Scott Grissom - four specific questions"
- In reply to: Mr Jim: "Re: [OT] Navy releases photos of U.S.S. San Francisco"
- Next in thread: Neil Gerace: "Re: [OT] Navy releases photos of U.S.S. San Francisco"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|