Egon
Epic Contributor
Yes, a real bargain. For what has been spent on this fleet of ancient antique underwater boats a nice new UP TO DATE version could be out and about.
Now we'll probably be paying for the disposal.
Missing 777
- Thread starter Tomtint
- Start date
- Views: 66406
Yes, a real bargain. For what has been spent on this fleet of ancient antique underwater boats a nice new UP TO DATE version could be out and about.
Now we'll probably be paying for the disposal.
MossRoad
Super Moderator
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 66,103
- Location
- South Bend, Indiana (near)
- Tractor
- Power Trac PT425 2001 Model Year
The boat towing it.
farmgirl19
Super Member
That should get you within a couple of miles. With the cable for the receiver, it is hard to tell exactly where it is located, because it won't be straight down.
CobyRupert
Super Member
What's the going odds that as they detract us for a few days/week with "We've detected pinging and are closing in"; shifts to "We need to bring in special sonar/ submersibles to look closer, that's going to take a while"; shifts to "Aw dang it!, the black box batteries must be dead, we can't find anything!" ? - 50/50?
robbyr
Elite Member
Maybe 100/50? 
dmccarty
Super Star Member
Not an expert at all but I read history books, funny that the Cold War is now History which is a good thing but it seems like yesterday...
I have been reading the US Naval Institute's Proceedings for over 30 years. Someone brought old copies of the magazine to the barber shop when I was a kid and I have been a subscriber ever since. The Proceedings is the professional magazine for the USN and USMC but mostly USN. For years I have read a couple of websites that cover military issues and one is very Navy based. The information is out there in public sources if one is interested. I am interested.
:laughing: We do not watch much TV, in fact the TV has not been turned on since Sunday and likely will not get watched until Friday. Even if I am watching something, I usually read while watching. I read constantly which is a habit I picked up years ago in elementary school... :confused3: The Chinese are spending some serious money to modernize their armed forces. They have a long way to go but they are willing to work long term to achieve their goals. Their subs stink. For now. They have problems with nuke reactors and I am sure other things as well. Their ships are better and they are deploying them farther from China and for longer periods of time. They are starting to build decent aircraft. Their biggest problem is building long lasting, reliable jet engines. The Russians can't do it and the Chinese are starting with stolen Russian technology. They certainly are after US and EU technology but so far they have not been able to build first class engines but eventually they will. The Chinese are building a large "Coast Guard" which actually are a few different agencies. They are using these "civilian" ships to harass regional governments and the USN over disputes in the South China Sea and up to Japan. It is a Cold War tactic the Russians used to some extent but the Chinese are really turning it up. It is bullying to the regional powers but effective yet it is really dangerous to be doing this to the Japanese and the US. It easily could get out of hand...
It looks a bit like the Cold War...
Later,
Dan
dmccarty
Super Star Member
From what I read, the boxes do not send out an continuous sound but a ping. Continuous sound would really drain a battery fast. The pings are being heard infrequently and at different levels. This could be because of bottom conditions, battery conditions and/or sea conditions.
It SOUNDS like, no pun intended, that there is a good enough fix that EVENTUALLY the plane would be found even if the batteries go dead. It just will take much longer to find the plane.
Later,
Dan
It SOUNDS like, no pun intended, that there is a good enough fix that EVENTUALLY the plane would be found even if the batteries go dead. It just will take much longer to find the plane.
Later,
Dan
MossRoad
Super Moderator
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2001
- Messages
- 66,103
- Location
- South Bend, Indiana (near)
- Tractor
- Power Trac PT425 2001 Model Year
You can pretty much bet that the ship towing it has a computer monitoring surface speed, direction, drag on the tow cable, length of line out, angle, etc... that puts it all into a calculator that spits out the exact location of the towed antenna to within a few feet of accuracy.
Soundguy
Old Timer
- Joined
- Mar 11, 2002
- Messages
- 52,424
- Location
- Central florida
- Tractor
- RK 55HC,ym1700, NH7610S, Ford 8N, 2N, NAA, 660, 850 x2, 541, 950, 941D, 951, 2000, 3000, 4000, 4600, 5000, 740, IH 'C' 'H', CUB, John Deere 'B', allis 'G', case VAC
one would hope so..
PILOON
Super Star Member
Having done a bit of SCUBA I can tell you that underwater sound does not travel like airborne.
With airborne you simply turn from side to side and soon know the direction.
Not that way under water. Just ask any diver how he feels when he hears an outboard motor.
I dive deeper until I no longer hear it!
You do know if it is coming or going (fades or increases) but direction is impossible to determine.
Very much like the old aviation ADF system however whereby you flew in a straight line to determine if you are closer or farther and then return to determined 1/2 way or center, make a 90 deg turn and repeat to try to find where X marks the spot.
On that 2nd pass you also needed to fly from faded signal to strongest onto faded and then return to 1/2 way.
Problem with towing a 2 mile deep receiver on probably a 3 mile cable and a big ship that has no brakes means BIG turn and long time lapse.
In a plane that procedure is a mere 10-15 mins while a ship it possibly is measured in hours.
Count all the turns and add the turn radii lapsed time doing it at mere knots.
The modern advantage is that can all be done with GPS accuracy so as long as the locator transmits they will locate that beeper.
One problem that will affect accuracy will be underwater currents as at that depth there possibly could be a mile or 2 error with surface position.
Very similar with winds aloft when flying whereby difference at surface can be as far off as 90 deg and 30-40 mph at 40,000 ft.with all kinds of variances in between.
There is so much air travel that all that data is readily updated and easily available.
Not, however a whole lot of submarine travel to justify accurate data nor availability.
With airborne you simply turn from side to side and soon know the direction.
Not that way under water. Just ask any diver how he feels when he hears an outboard motor.
I dive deeper until I no longer hear it!
You do know if it is coming or going (fades or increases) but direction is impossible to determine.
Very much like the old aviation ADF system however whereby you flew in a straight line to determine if you are closer or farther and then return to determined 1/2 way or center, make a 90 deg turn and repeat to try to find where X marks the spot.
On that 2nd pass you also needed to fly from faded signal to strongest onto faded and then return to 1/2 way.
Problem with towing a 2 mile deep receiver on probably a 3 mile cable and a big ship that has no brakes means BIG turn and long time lapse.
In a plane that procedure is a mere 10-15 mins while a ship it possibly is measured in hours.
Count all the turns and add the turn radii lapsed time doing it at mere knots.
The modern advantage is that can all be done with GPS accuracy so as long as the locator transmits they will locate that beeper.
One problem that will affect accuracy will be underwater currents as at that depth there possibly could be a mile or 2 error with surface position.
Very similar with winds aloft when flying whereby difference at surface can be as far off as 90 deg and 30-40 mph at 40,000 ft.with all kinds of variances in between.
There is so much air travel that all that data is readily updated and easily available.
Not, however a whole lot of submarine travel to justify accurate data nor availability.
I've done quite a bit of seismic using towed eels. It is very very difficult to know what the fish is doing and where it is in the water. I could not imagine having one on a 6 KM cable. It would probably take half the day just to get it to depth and flying properly.
RobertBrown
Elite Member
I flew a kite once....it wasn't that hard at all....but I didn't fly it underwater... soooo.
Egon
Epic Contributor
You gota pick a place with a nice current. Neat thing here is you can fly it above or below yourself!
Egon
Epic Contributor
The chances of the US Navy being able to follow a vessel of interest without the use of a submarine is very feasible.p:thumbsup:
Egon
Epic Contributor
buickanddeere
Super Member
Does that mean submarines are lost as soon as they submerge?
Those inertial gyros are spinning for a reason.
farmgirl19
Super Member
We navigated before the days of GPS. Didn't matter if in the sky, on or under water. All GPS has done is make mental cripples of most.
texasjohn
Super Member
100%
I don't believe it's a detraction, or even a distraction. I believe it's a fact.
First you search for pings..done...almost a miracle any were found at all
then you seek to locate the pinger on the seabed using the pings...in progress
This requires narrowing the search area...in progress, down from 30,000 square miles at one point to 500 square miles at present
At 3 miles deep in wild ocean waters, given the way sound happens in water, given thermoclines, etc...this isn't an easy task
When the pings stop, and they will soon because batteries DO give out after a while, a radar/visual search is the only thing left
This search is not only 3 miles deep but the bottom there is covered in silt, sometimes over 30 feet deep.
then, let's assume you know exactly where the plane is and that it's not broken open...now how do you get in there and remove two pingers and bring them back to the surface using robots...in the dark with silt obscuring everything. That's hard to do remotely by robot control, even if it were simply in the bottom of the Mississippi river.
You know, if we get over the ineptness of the initial way this was handled, perhaps there is no conspiracy involved in reporting that this task is going to take a while and be expensive...
I don't believe it's a detraction, or even a distraction. I believe it's a fact.
First you search for pings..done...almost a miracle any were found at all
then you seek to locate the pinger on the seabed using the pings...in progress
This requires narrowing the search area...in progress, down from 30,000 square miles at one point to 500 square miles at present
At 3 miles deep in wild ocean waters, given the way sound happens in water, given thermoclines, etc...this isn't an easy task
When the pings stop, and they will soon because batteries DO give out after a while, a radar/visual search is the only thing left
This search is not only 3 miles deep but the bottom there is covered in silt, sometimes over 30 feet deep.
then, let's assume you know exactly where the plane is and that it's not broken open...now how do you get in there and remove two pingers and bring them back to the surface using robots...in the dark with silt obscuring everything. That's hard to do remotely by robot control, even if it were simply in the bottom of the Mississippi river.
You know, if we get over the ineptness of the initial way this was handled, perhaps there is no conspiracy involved in reporting that this task is going to take a while and be expensive...
dave1949
Super Star Member
The recovery wouldn't be that tough to do in Hollywood. They are probably passing the first draft script around right now.
Here are some similar links:
