prop shrouds

Discussion in 'Boat Design' started by waterwar, Jan 31, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. waterwar

    waterwar Previous Member

    I didn't mean to ignore you sir. I do understand the size issue of the prop is always the bigger the getter. So a bigger bare prop will beat a smaller sized pumpjet ....my wife will love this one

    But practicality demands the prop can only be so large does it not?


    Recreational craft, with limited draft limit the prop can only be so large does it not? You can’t mount 3 foot propellers on most recreational craft. You can put any size you want in large vessels with cowling drag overcome with unlimited power.* http://wn.com/Spearfish_torpedo That’s applicable grapes to watermelons! Please understand the that the parameters change when you add have size limitation, as you do on pleasure craft. That’s applicable grapes to watermelons.

    additional military links dated years old info.
    http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_14/torpedoes.html

    http://www.ussjamesmadison627.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=295
     
    Last edited: Feb 10, 2011
  2. DCockey
    Joined: Oct 2009
    Posts: 4,444
    Likes: 219, Points: 63, Legacy Rep: 1485
    Location: Midcoast Maine

    DCockey Senior Member

    Not what I meant at all, assuming your response was directed at me.
     
  3. waterwar

    waterwar Previous Member

    I see applies to air not water turbines.

    I am glad that you truly are doing the research that I am not qualified to do. I think that there is a lot of research done but behind ' doors'
    Stealth and pumpjet are integrated systems apparently in underwater propulsion it seems.and the military application is obvious
    having a quiet silent electric drive enable modern subs to be super stealth.
    ..
    cheers
    stew

    I am sorry, I see I misunderstood . I'll step aside and let you exchange info with your peers who are more learned and wise than me. I've had enough today
    good nite.
    Stew

    Its rocket science now as the 'cavitation' weapons have arrived.This unfortunate development proves one of my points that noise is no longer inhibiting a very fast weapon from being deployed. The Soviets (Chinese and Irananians) have illustrated so poignantly. The presence of ultra quiet subs with noisy but fast rocket weapons ups the peril in the high sea for all who ply them.
    No vessel avoids this unfortunate scenario; surface or deep below,there is little time for countermeasure deployment at 300 knot plus...incoming.

    stewart loeblich
     
  4. gonzo
    Joined: Aug 2002
    Posts: 13,769
    Likes: 431, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2031
    Location: Milwaukee, WI

    gonzo Senior Member

    Noise never did. For example, bullets.
     
  5. waterwar

    waterwar Previous Member

    Noise certainly does stop many weapon systems depends.

    For example Panzerfaust in WW2 when fired was very loud and left cloud of smoke pinpointing the position of the soldier immediately. the resulting retalitory fire from the rest of the attacking Soviet army made it suicide to fire practically.

    The examples are endless actually.and not the point of this thread...
    What is important is exchange of information that accomplishes a true goal.... not chatteric
    I will keep this thread open for that chance for free useful information exchange as open source for those who might want a shroud system application.

    I do want to thank you for your efforts sir.
    I also wish to thank any of you in advance, who would care to contribute a meaningful post.


    Very astute point that is like my old prop its OE, and been polished by time and nicked. .
     
  6. seeds
    Joined: Aug 2006
    Posts: 36
    Likes: 0, Points: 0, Legacy Rep: 10
    Location: Arkansas, US

    seeds Smartass Member

    This is great stuff! I'm gonna go grab some popcorn and watch the show unfold...lol
     
  7. waterwar

    waterwar Previous Member

    on guard and vigilant

    USS New Mexico is the first picture she is a Los Angeles class attack nuclear submarine
    The second picture is a stingray torpedo (helicopter mounted in this case).
    The third photograph is also a US fleet torpedo Mk50 (I believe no other info was provided)
    The fourth picture is of China's Xia class of nuclear ballistic missile submarine
     

    Attached Files:

    Last edited: Feb 7, 2011
  8. gonzo
    Joined: Aug 2002
    Posts: 13,769
    Likes: 431, Points: 93, Legacy Rep: 2031
    Location: Milwaukee, WI

    gonzo Senior Member

    This turned into a "post pictures and make unrelated comments thread". I would like to see any support for the original proposition. I think Waterwar, using his own word, is "chatteric".
     
  9. waterwar

    waterwar Previous Member

    gonzo

    the name is self explanatory;)

    You are the very reason I coined the term;"chatteric"

    If you have some contribution... that would advance something, other than brash comments, that are the defining feature in counterproductive activity ......go sell a boat to a top dog wannabee or whatever you do
     
  10. Jeremy Harris
    Joined: Jun 2009
    Posts: 978
    Likes: 56, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 711
    Location: Salisbury, UK

    Jeremy Harris Senior Member

    Interestingly, the centre picture is the torpedo (Stingray) that I worked on through it's initial design and development in the late 70's, early 80's. It does have a pump jet, primarily to keep the noise signature down so that its sensors can work effectively. It's not that efficient though, and needs a heck of a lot of battery power to get the weapon up to speed. The pump jet was chosen for this weapon on grounds of low noise and relative ease of control (low torque reaction), not because it was a particularly efficient high speed propulsion option. Getting the high power needed from the sea water battery system to meet the needs of the pump jet was a significant challenge during development.

    We're just going to re-hash old debates from now on, I fear. The facts regarding the physics and hydrodynamics of pump jets are very well understood, most are in the public domain and have been summarised in posts here. There's nothing mysterious about them, they meet the needs of providing fairly quiet high speed propulsion for vessels where this is the most important design criterion well, albeit at the expense of propulsive efficiency at speed. This deficiency isn't really a problem for a nuclear powered boat where there is more than enough power to spare.

    Jeremy
     
  11. hoytedow
    Joined: Sep 2009
    Posts: 5,402
    Likes: 195, Points: 73, Legacy Rep: 2489
    Location: North of Cuba

    hoytedow Wood Butcher

    Attached Files:

  12. waterwar

    waterwar Previous Member

    Thank you very much sir, your expertise in weapons development is admirable and your observations are correct as to identity.
    I thought Ii had a label that would accompany the jpg.'when posted...
    I will end this thread: if the the subject has finally ended and no useful exchange is evident.




    I posted the slow Stingray, as it had been mentioned in a prior post, for illustrative purposes.

    cheers

    Stewart

    ;)

    Yes, Hoyt
    you know the routine,I see very well! The poor hapless Least Killifish is now poised above the gaping house cat's mouth. So the rest of you better behave and stay in your seats,or else I drop the hapless innocent into the very jaws of death...

    Thank you again for the reminder! You are a true sport! and a credit to this fine Board

    Tip of the hat to you sir!

    *Least Killifish smallest of all livebearers,this tiny relative of the guppy' hails from our own shores, and is in great abundance in pristine freshwater environments.
    I get mine from Crystal Springs
     
  13. Jeremy Harris
    Joined: Jun 2009
    Posts: 978
    Likes: 56, Points: 28, Legacy Rep: 711
    Location: Salisbury, UK

    Jeremy Harris Senior Member

    Just one correction. Stingray isn't particularly slow for a lightweight air launched torpedo, but I'm not going to tell you just how fast it is on a public forum. To the best of my knowledge that's still classified but I can confirm that, just as with most weapons still in service, the speeds often quoted from public domain sources are rarely correct.

    I can confirm that it needed more power to reach a given speed than it's predecessor, that was of similar size but used contra rotating open props of greater diameter. Unfortunately, these open props, although very efficient, created a lot of noise, making passive target detection impossible.

    Jeremy
     
  14. waterwar

    waterwar Previous Member

    T thank you very much sir. I am wrong about the Stingray torpedo being slow, sorry. I didn't mean to downplay this fine weapon's speed . I too was hesitant about speeds and posting them.
    However, as it became apparent that the world was shocked by the new 'cavitation' weapons,several years ago and speeds of the free world's weapon systems were 'leaked'
    the new weapons are 300 knot plus almost five times the speed of most propeller driven weapons.
    the Mk 48 has a 120 (knots) more or less.
    As you know that is our heavy torpedo'...I am sure that the Stingray is not slower, than its older brother, so to speak.
    As for speeds of subs i don't see posted, I'll keep mum on that regard respectfully.

    :)cheers To a true professional, I commend you on your personal contribution to underwater propulsion systems.

    thanks
     
    Last edited: Feb 7, 2011

  15. waterwar

    waterwar Previous Member

    Pictures will be ID'ed :)

    I will edit and add identifying labels to all pictures.
    Please bear with me I am busy at present! Thanks for your patience.
    regards
    Stewart

    have to go catch more fish damn cat ate em all
     
Loading...
Forum posts represent the experience, opinion, and view of individual users. Boat Design Net does not necessarily endorse nor share the view of each individual post.
When making potentially dangerous or financial decisions, always employ and consult appropriate professionals. Your circumstances or experience may be different.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.