Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



Awesome OP. Prose, content and artwork are fire.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015









Project Ithacus rocked.

Dante80 fucked around with this message at 00:59 on Jan 13, 2020

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtcBKQ9ealA#t=11s

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIzXI-mlJjs

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



BAVARIAN DIVERSITY

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



Cyrano4747 posted:

You're not wrong, but what I saw in Germany post-Fukishima wasn't "oh, this isn't really economically feasible because we don't have the native industry spooled up." I mean, sure, probably a few policy wonks were going off about that but at the level of what you saw the media reporting and the protesters doing and the politicians saying it was 100% about mushroom clouds blotting out the sun. The better end of it talked about Chernobyl and the worst-case predictions in the immediate aftermath of Fukishima.

IIRC Germany at the time actually had some nuclear plants which were immediately brought offline in the aftermath, kind of ignoring that, unlike the Japanese plants, they weren't located on the coast in a very seismically active part of the world. I'm sure they were old and probably needed retiring anyway, but it wasn't like they had zero experience.

IIRC, Germans have had a pretty huge anti-nuclear movement during the cold war. I think that it still informs their psyche as far as peaceful use of nuclear power is concerned. It is almost a taboo subject for them. They don't see plants, but bombs ticking.
Fukushima was indeed a catalyst for pushing Merkel over the top on this, and closing the plants early. But I think that nuclear energy for that country was going to die, one way or the other.

Which is pretty bad. Because in general, there is no way to speed up humanity's move away from fossil fuels if we don't scale up nuclear production. A mix of 30-35% hydro and nuclear with the rest going to renewables is touted by many as the only technically realistic option for doing this without the planet cooking up in the meanwhile. While technically realistic, this option sadly seems to be politically impossible, at least for now.

Dante80 fucked around with this message at 14:37 on Jan 13, 2020

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



mlmp08 posted:

People seem pretty decent at comprehending a big, very rare nuclear disaster but less so at understanding cumulative deaths and climate impact from extracting and burning fossil fuels.

This is par for the course though. Unless said people live near a coal plant. Here is a lovely view from my country.

Dante80 fucked around with this message at 14:53 on Jan 13, 2020

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



Cyrano4747 posted:

It’s that way with all kinds of things. People can comprehend the inherent risk in driving a motorcycle but they’ll stay 30 lbs overweight for decades.

you gotta lick it before we kick it

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



I have had Hanford described like that too, from some colleagues of my uncle (I have two living in the US, the one I'm writing about used to work in a NPP there - IPEC).
I wonder how would anyone begin to describe something like Mayak.

Dante80 fucked around with this message at 19:09 on Jan 13, 2020

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



Btw...one of my uncles' colleagues I was talking about described Hanford something like the "Aristocrats joke equivalent of nuclear sites". I remember that vividly, since I had no idea what the joke was about, and I even ended up downloading a movie about it - the joke, that is.

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



Hedenius posted:

Very cold war feeling news from Sweden. SÄPO (Swedish Security Service) found a network of about ten people who where collecting information about swedish military facilities. Taking pictures and making lists of installations. So of course they were Russian spies right? Or Chinese perhaps?

Well, no. Turns out they were all Swedish nerds who were just too obsessed with military poo poo. One of them was just sentenced to a year in prison. But it'll be interesting to see what happens now. Basically all the information was already freely availble and they apparently didn't take any pictures of any particularly important stuff and got most of it from the internet. First time something like this has happened. Reading the law (skimming it late at night so I'm not 100% sure here) doing this type of stuff will get you a fine at best and two years in prison at worst. And the judges basically said: "this never happened, we have no idea so let's say a year".

During interrogations he was asked why he was taking pictures of a radio masts.

His answer: "a mast can be beautiful".

This reminds me of the time we arrested a couple of guys photographing one of our readiness airports in the Greek islands (Lemnos) for espionage, and they turned out to be ArmA III game developers..XD

Dante80 fucked around with this message at 07:39 on Jan 16, 2020

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



Stravag posted:

Not having a carrier Saratoga is an inexcusable crime regardless of everything else

Or Lexington.

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



Btw..what is wrong with the name HMS Happy Entrance? That was dope.

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



...annd Sprint.

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



For starters, who taped over the inevitable Swedish air attack?

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



In this case, Denmark takes the prize..

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



Memento posted:

If India and Pakistan had a limited-only-by-their-technology nuclear exchange tomorrow, I would be bitterly disappointed, but I wouldn't necessarily be surprised.

Given the specifics, nothing regarding a India-Pakistan nuclear war would be "limited". They've got enough ordnance and delivery vehicles between them to gently caress SE Asia for a millennium.

a noob, unrelated question. What is that "zimmerit" like looking coating on top of the Mk41 cell covers?



I don't see this in other applications, like the Chinese UVLS for example.

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



Which a reason btw for ABM and small-yield nukes being a pretty major destabilization factor as far as deterrence is concerned.

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



The "funny" thing is that we won't really have to imagine that for much longer..in the following decades the number of people that will be displaced due to environmental reasons alone is absolutely ludicrous. T_T

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



Mazz posted:

My guess is some kind of heat resistant coating; they do get blasted by the rocket/booster exhaust of the other tubes on launch. Metal lids might’ve deformed a bit after awhile in testing.

Ooh, that would make sense. Twould also explain why the coating doesn't cover the whole lid; the sides are thicker/reinforced.

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



EvilMerlin posted:

The CEP for the Chinese stuff is over 1KM,

I have some trouble believing this, given the day and age we are living in, as well as the specifics in Chinas' LV, BDS and Space programs.

Dante80 fucked around with this message at 17:08 on Jan 24, 2020

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



EvilMerlin posted:

They haven't updated a lot of their older systems yet. Remember most of the early stuff is based on Russia's older stuff.

The newer weapon systems however are even more accurate than the US's current lineup.

I think that this applies mostly to the liquid fueled stuff (DF-4/first DF-5 variants), as well as the solid fuelled JL-1. My understanding is that most of those have been either replaced or upgraded by now. Of course, I may be wrong in this.

Dante80 fucked around with this message at 19:34 on Jan 24, 2020

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



So..space force.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1220821545746141187

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015




Thanks for posting this.

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



Wait, what's wrong with Lindybeige? (either than him being an enormous dork)

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



It can be argued that the US would enter WWII anyway. Like in WWI, Germany was conducting unrestricted submarine warfare, twas just a matter of time before the interventionists won the public opinion. Lend-lease, the destroyers-for-bases deal and the Burke–Wadsworth Act were partly designed to make that happen. Re-armament was in high gear and Roosevelt and Churchill were almost coordinating in secret.

Dante80 fucked around with this message at 03:30 on Jan 26, 2020

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



If you've got a bismuth-lead reactor, wouldn't it make more sense to simply design your sub for easy removal and substitution, instead of refueling? Get the core out, get another in, 15 more years.

Yeah, of course it is far more complicated than that, bit still. The Alphas were designed with no easy way to either re-fuel or remove the reactor.

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



Rob Rockley posted:

“Designed to go thousands of feet underwater” and “has a big removable plug in the hull” are extremely at odds with each other as design goals. Pretty sure titanium is one of those real hard to weld metals so making hull cuts and repairs probably doesn’t work well. A big enough difficulty on regular hulls made of steel that new US designs are supposed to never be refueled.

Yeah I can get that. The thought originally came from our experience here in Greece with the 209 boats. We essentially cut one in half (S118 Oceanos), added a 6m AIP section in the middle and then re-assembled the sub.

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015




I mean, if you can successfully weld a Hip fuselage to a Kamaz, why can't you simply swap a bismuth lead reactor?

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



hobbesmaster posted:

Ok, I'm going to post a political horse race tweet but PLEASE IGNORE THAT PART.

https://twitter.com/TheAtlantic/status/1221827357276807169

When was the last time "a ruthless modern army armed with cluster bombs and napalm" beat partisans?

I'm really having trouble coming up with an example in the 20th century. Spanish civil war?

https://twitter.com/JugheadJinsoul/...genumber%3D1532

https://twitter.com/dinosaurthe3rd/...genumber%3D1532

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



You can always try to feed a marine engine with unheated bunker fuel. As long as you are willing to wait.

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



Undersecretary of Defense for Policy John Rood even told reporters that the W76-2 would be “very stabilizing” and in no way supports U.S. early use of nuclear weapons, even though the Nuclear Posture Review explicitly stated the warhead was needed for “prompt response” strike options against Russian early use of nuclear weapons.

“Prompt response” means that strategic Trident submarines in a W76-2 scenario would be used as tactical nuclear weapons, potentially in a first use scenario or immediately after Russia escalated, thus forming the United States’ own “escalate-to-deescalate” capability. The United States has refused to rule out first use of nuclear weapons.

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015




"even if he was a spy/informant he was still a great grandpa to me though"

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



Raenir Salazar posted:

I appear to be thinking of the DF-21D (CSS-5 Mod-4) Anti-ship ballistic missile.

DF-21 and DF-26 are not ICBMs. And in their ASBM role they have been emphatically called by the Chinese to not possess nuclear warheads. That is done on purpose.

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



Yes, pretty much. Which is a pretty big reason for most countries NOT wanting Iran to have nukes in the first place.
If Iran has them, S.Arabia will get them and then Turkey will want some of those too.

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



Well, assassinating the odd scientist..or twelve tends to help keeping things somewhat controlled. With a sprinkle of air strikes, for good measure.

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015





Some first renders for the B-21 came out today.

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



Our late father made us watch "The Exorcist" and "Celui qui doit mourir" back in the 80's, because he was an orthodox christian and thought that the movies had a good religious message. Me and my brother were 7 and 6, respectively.

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



Some more info about the FFG(X).

a) There were two frigates (FREMM and F-100) in the final competition and two light frigates. (LCS-2 and HII). The sinking of the Helge Ingstad pretty much blew F-100 out of the water. HII's secrecy did their proposal in. So, it was going to be FREMM or LCS-2.

b) In the end, the Navy went for the larger and more conventional ship...pretty much killing what little residual impact Cebrowski and Hughes had.

c) FREMM is a good ship. It's a pity Type 26 didn't get a strong enough look.

d) From my contact, number block assigned to these ships is FFG-62 to FFG-80. This may be extended since the class may well not stop at 20.

e) Word on street is that Fincantieri sales office had a massive celebration and still comatose about it. This is one hell of a coup for them. The French must be furious.

f) Why are the French furious one may ask?

FREMM was originally a Franco-Italian project. One thing is that there was originally an agreement that if either of the partners made a sale, the profits and workload would be split sixty-forty between the partners (the big share being for the partner who landed the contract.

The French sold a FREMM to Egypt and when the Italians asked for their share, the French told them that they were fulfilling the contract by supplying a FREMM that had just been completed for the French Navy and building another FREMM to replace it. Therefore the agreement didn't apply. The Italians complained and got the "we just changed the agreement, pray we do not change it further" line.

So the French scrapped the profit share agreement over one ship and now Fincantieri went and landed an order for twenty.

Just to rub salt into the wound, the French refused to bid on FFG(X) because "everybody knows the Americans never order ships from foreign suppliers". (That isn't quite true by the way)

The Italians went in, worked hard, played the game well and got the order.

There really is a reason why people don't like the French sometimes :P

g) There will be minimum changes to FREMM current design....aided by a lot of the equipment already being NATO-standard American. The primary changes are the EW system and the main search radar, both of which are plug and play. The missile launch system is Mk.41 not Sylver (again pretty much plug and play). FREMM already has provision for a 5 inch Mk.45 mod 4.

There was a deliberate effort made to keep the customization to a minimum..an example of an area Fincantieri played the game well. They looked through the list of likely equipment changes and worked out how it could be done before the specs were released. So they had answers as soon as the questions were asked. The rest of the ship is pretty much 'walk on board and you know where you are".

Most other pitfalls and likely escalations won't be just the FREMM design, but something relevant to all...so it mattered a lot fincantieri working to get a leg in better wherever it could.

h) On the subject of integrating different equipment, apparently any cost over the amount specified in the contract will be carried by the manufacturer. The other difference between the Italian and US versions is that the hull of the US ship has been strengthened and 300 tons of protection has been worked in. That's a lot of protection for a frigate.

i) Apparently the Norwegians killed off the Navantia bid. They sent the US Navy a copy of their report on the sinking of the Helge Ingstad with the hand-written note saying "You really want to buy this?" It is said that the Norwegian Navy and Navantia are not on speaking terms right now.

=====
A few more details:

Replacing CODLAG with IFEP (trading gearing to generator on turbine + bigger electric motor) was considered.
But consensus was that it was too much change. Fincantieri worked out agreement with GE there would be no added cost to switching to american made GE LM2500 over the (licensed GE) Italian LM2500 made by Fiat.

Regarding different sizes for the Italian and French (FREMM) ships. The Italian ships have some internal differences and are built more toughly than the French ships. Had the French offered their ship seriously, that would have counted in favor of the Italian ship and against the French. It was lack of structural strength that did for the Navantia offer of F-100. Especially watertight integrity in the machinery spaces.

Costs w.r.t DDG51:

You get about 3 FFG-X for 2 DDG (construction cost)
You get about 2 FFG-X for 1 DDG (life cycle cost)

=====

Of course more finalized details will only be known in about 2 years time for lead ship final design package.

BTW, the French have done well with their Gowind light frigate exports and they have formed a joint venture with Fincantieri to upgrade older designs. That's another reason why this FFG(X) deal is so important, it enormously strengthens the Italian's hand in dealings within that joint venture.

French are also getting lot of attention over the pricing for Aussie Attack class sub. In fairness to the French, the reason why the Australian deal costs so much is that the Australians have bought a customized design that is basically a nuclear submarine with a diesel-electric power train. Think of it that they are paying nuclear costs for diesel-electric performance. That's a customer decision.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Dante80
Mar 23, 2015



Mazz posted:

2. Where do you get figures of 3:2 for the FFG(X)? Most places I’ve seen have it at 780-900M vs 1.8B of a Burke. It might be skewed for the first couple ships though.

It is where I personally think this one is going to settle. Two thirds the production cost, half the running cost.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply