|
Kafouille posted:Obligatory reference material Freediving has been done to that depth (barely). I agree that drowning will kill before crushing, but it’s still a horrifying way to go. 
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 03:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 09:54 |
|
|
babyeatingpsychopath posted:
Time for this again then. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iBfkbO0JuU8
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 04:02
|
|
|
Fearless posted:Naw, drowning or hypothermia will kill you long before you reach crush depth in a sinking. Unless you're in a submarine but I am given to understand that an implosion is an instantaneous event (I was never a submariner). Wasn't there some analysis posted upthread of the ARA San Juan disaster that indicated implosion occurred in <50 milliseconds?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 04:22
|
|
|
Memento posted:Wasn't there some analysis posted upthread of the ARA San Juan disaster that indicated implosion occurred in <50 milliseconds? I think so. It was by the same sonar analyst that worked on the Scorpion or Thresher events.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 04:33
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:Freediving has been done to that depth (barely). That's with the pressure building up over a period of minutes. When that pressure is applied by the metal hull of the sub happily rushing towards you at a few hundred meters per second to give you a very tight hug, you're a little less likely to drown.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 04:41
|
|
|
Kafouille posted:Obligatory reference material Babies are hella strong
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 04:55
|
|
|
Captain von Trapp posted:That's with the pressure building up over a period of minutes. When that pressure is applied by the metal hull of the sub happily rushing towards you at a few hundred meters per second to give you a very tight hug, you're a little less likely to drown. The human body can survive a lot of pressure since your lungs and sinuses are the only things that can really compress. A big pressure transient will simply rip you apart. In a collapsing sub, the force of the pressure wave shredding your body probably beats out the compression heating in ripping you apart before you have time to cook. E: this is pretty macabre, want to point out that dying from collapse or explosion is infinitely preferable and painless compared to drowning.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 05:58
|
|
|
thatbastardken posted:i did not know about the steel crystal thing, and that is rad From waaay back, but creating those turbine blades is just nextdoor to magic. There is an ongoing Chinese cyber-espionage campaign that has been going on for a long time. One of their main purposes is to find out modern western metallurgy techniques. A lot of people assume that China's government hackers are looking for missile blueprints, launch codes, and battle plans (probably are), but one of the largest areas that it has been directed at is the steelworking/manufacturing R&D sectors. Right now they still have to buy engines from the Russians to get the performance they want out of their fighters, and this is a massive disadvantage should Russia decide to cut them off. (the last thing you want is your best fighters being grounded because they don't have engines). Current Chinese engines are very unreliable, don't develop the same thrust as their Russian or western counterparts, and have to be spooled up much slower so they don't explode (slower acceleration). Also engine hours were reportedly 30 before total overhauls/refurbishments are required. The processes that are used by RR/GE/P&W to make their engines are probably some of the most closely guarded secrets in the world. Blistex fucked around with this message at 07:29 on Dec 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 06:06
|
|
|
Russian engines are also quite far behind the West.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 06:28
|
|
|
With all the history of monkey model tanks/aircraft, I wouldn't put it past the Russians to keep the service life on their engines intentionally low to milk more money out of export operators.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 06:38
|
|
|
Interesting theory. Absolutely no evidence for it, but an interesting theory.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 06:49
|
|
|
The worse engines fundamentally alter design. Russian aircraft are generally way easier to engine swap because they have to do it more often.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 06:50
|
|
|
C.M. Kruger posted:With all the history of monkey model tanks/aircraft, I wouldn't put it past the Russians to keep the service life on their engines intentionally low to milk more money out of export operators. The "monkey model" thing is mostly Russian flim-flam to explain their previous generation weapon systems (which is what they actually exported) getting their poo poo utterly pushed in. Similarly, I doubt they intentionally hosed their engines, keeping client states dependent on Moscow's continued Goodwill for their warfighting capabilities was more of a happy accident.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 07:12
|
|
|
Godholio posted:Russian engines are also quite far behind the West. But comparatively, they're essentially Toyota Hiluxes compared to Chinese attempts like the WS-10A Wikipedia posted:"In 2009, Western media reported that the WS-10A approached the performance of the Saturn AL-31, but took much longer than the AL-31 to develop thrust.[12] Furthermore, reportedly the engine only generated 110–125 kilonewtons (25,000–28,000 lbf) of thrust.[6] In April 2009, Lin Zuoming, head of AVIC, reported that the engine's quality was unsatisfactory.[13] In 2010, it was reported that reliability was also poor; the WS-10A lasted only 30 hours." The Russian equivalent (AL-31) engines had ~400 hours between refurbishment. Blistex fucked around with this message at 07:30 on Dec 19, 2017 |
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 07:28
|
|
|
hypnophant posted:Interesting theory. Absolutely no evidence for it, but an interesting theory. Other than the issues india has.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 07:56
|
|
|
Blistex posted:From waaay back, but creating those turbine blades is just nextdoor to magic. There is an ongoing Chinese cyber-espionage campaign that has been going on for a long time. One of their main purposes is to find out modern western metallurgy techniques. A lot of people assume that China's government hackers are looking for missile blueprints, launch codes, and battle plans (probably are), but one of the largest areas that it has been directed at is the steelworking/manufacturing R&D sectors. https://twitter.com/XHNews/status/819105758482722817
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 10:18
|
|
|
Collateral Damage posted:And just to put into perspective where Chinese steelworking is: China didn't make a 100% domestic ball point pen until January this year and it was a source of great national pride when they did. Previously they had to import the balls and tips because they didn't have the technology to make them with the high tolerances required for a good pen.  為人民的服務Turns out institutional knowledge is very important, and you can't solve every problem by throwing money at it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 10:56
|
|
|
So it's been a couple of months now since Trump ordered a mass pilot recall, how's that going?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 14:05
|
|
|
Gonna show that ballpoint pen tip thing to all my idiot friends that think China is on par or even surpassing us in tech and engineering.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 14:07
|
|
|
My favourite is the airshow where they flew their newest jets that could totally destroy US air power... for five minutes then hid it in a hangar changing its engines the rest of the time. Someone hook me up with a source
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 14:10
|
|
|
Another TBM was shot against KSA out of Yemen. KSA officials claim they intercepted it. https://www.washingtonpost.com/worl...m=.6c7f615e4480
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 14:13
|
|
|
The secret sauce in manufacturing is and has always been getting people to follow the god drat directions. All the stolen process documentation and prints in the world don't matter without an effective quality culture.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 14:20
|
|
|
shame on an IGA posted:The secret sauce in manufacturing is and has always been getting people to follow the god drat directions. All the stolen process documentation and prints in the world don't matter without an effective quality culture. Also having the tools to make the tools to make the tools that make the thing. And ensuring that quality process is present in every step of that process. And then there are the times you get access and permission to make a thing, so you just make it better, such as the Packard Merlin.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 14:30
|
|
|
White House releases its National Security Strategy It is basically the previous NSS interspersed with a bunch of cliches leftover the election. JIHADISTS
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 14:50
|
|
|
bewbies posted:White House releases its National Security Strategy "Dismantle Transnational Criminal Organizations." Mentions Chinese fentanyl traffickers, drug cartels specifically, ~strangely omits mention of Russian mob~.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 14:57
|
|
|
Does it count as a criminal organization if it openly participates in government?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 15:15
|
|
|
I’ve heard the Russian engines can match Western ones for power and longevity, just... not at the same time (you have to pick one). Is that still roughly true?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 16:05
|
|
|
Probably not any more given how Russian military procurement stalled out in the 90's. It looks like the f135 makes about 10,000 pounds more thrust than the al31, per wikipedia
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 16:24
|
|
|
Deptfordx posted:So it's been a couple of months now since Trump ordered a mass pilot recall, how's that going? It was authorized, not directed. The AF backed down after all the publicity and claimed it was never actually the plan.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 16:39
|
|
|
Blistex posted:Also engine hours were reportedly 30 before total overhauls/refurbishments are required. The processes that are used by RR/GE/P&W to make their engines are probably some of the most closely guarded secrets in the world. Jesus. China, I have Nazi Germany on the phone, they heard about your jet engine problems and they want to commiserate
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 16:43
|
|
|
The Russian engine problems are probably the reason why Russian airplanes look better than American ones. Sukhoi can't compromise on aerodynamics the way Lockheed can, because Sukhoi doesn't have excessive power. (Also, a LOL at the F-35, which still needs a more powerful engine to reach threshold aerodynamic performance.) Image how fast / long ranged a Su-35 would be with a US engine. Supercruise from the UK to Moscow and back again! Speaking of airplanes, Boeing has announced their prototype for the USN tanking contract: http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2017-12-19-Boeing-Shares-Sneak-Peek-of-Aerial-Refueler-for-MQ-25-Competition#assets_20295_130095-117
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 17:14
|
|
|
Sperglord posted:Image how fast / long ranged a Su-35 would be with a US engine. Supercruise from the UK to Moscow and back again! 
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 17:17
|
|
|
Boeing has a sneak peak at their unmanned carrier-based tanker. Looking forward to seeing this out and about. http://boeing.mediaroom.com/2017-12-19-Boeing-Shares-Sneak-Peek-of-Aerial-Refueler-for-MQ-25-Competition#assets_20295_130095-117
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 17:37
|
|
|
Sperglord posted:The Russian engine problems are probably the reason why Russian airplanes look better than American ones. Sukhoi can't compromise on aerodynamics the way Lockheed can, because Sukhoi doesn't have excessive power. (Also, a LOL at the F-35, which still needs a more powerful engine to reach threshold aerodynamic performance.) It's the reason their analogs are significantly larger still, at least.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 17:41
|
|
|
So are those going to be flown from stateside like Air Force UAVs, or is the plan for Navy UAV pilots to be located on the carrier itself?
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
Hopefully stateside, which means the Navy will put them on the boat.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 18:39
|
|
|
Craptacular posted:So are those going to be flown from stateside like Air Force UAVs, or is the plan for Navy UAV pilots to be located on the carrier itself? MQ-25 is a carrier plane, its supposed to replace the job the refueling Hornets are currently doing. Although if the Navy really wanted it for refueling and not as a refuel + A2AD ISR or A2AD ISR + fuel + strike platform the Navy should restart the C-2 Line...which is still going today as the E-2 line...and then make the C-2 refueling variants. Have COD and refueling from one aircraft, the sister of which is already in production and and the same model is currently in use.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 19:09
|
|
|
He means flown not based, as in where will the remote pilot be.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 19:14
|
|
|
 Mt. Vesuvius, 1944
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 20:28
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 09:54 |
|
|
CarForumPoster posted:MQ-25 is a carrier plane, its supposed to replace the job the refueling Hornets are currently doing. If we already have a refueling hornet why do we need a new platform to.... loving military industrial complex.
|
|
#
?
Dec 19, 2017 20:34
|
|
