Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

"Stealth" Boat Could Revolutionize Naval Warfare
NBC Chicago ^ | Aug 30, 2011 | Greg Wilson

Posted on 08/31/2011 6:06:34 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki

"Stealth" Boat Could Revolutionize Naval Warfare

Designer is working with defense contractor on 150-foot model

By Greg Wilson

A stealth boat that moves through water at high speeds and with near invisibility could revolutionize the Navy's ability to carry out special operations on water.

The craft, called The Ghost, moves by generating a layer of gas around submerged surfaces, greatly reducing friction. It's unique design makes it ideal for special operations, according to DiscoveryNews. The ship can reach speeds of 60 miles per hour and has a shape designed to reduce its visibility to radar, similar to the Navy's "Sea Shadow" project of the 1980s.

Gregory Sancoff, president and chief executive officer of Juliet Marine, said the U.S. government is interested and his company is working with a defense contractor to build a 150-foot model. The friction reducing gas technology, called supercavitation, works by generating a low-pressure zone around the ship's surface.

The Ghost keeps a low radar profile the same way stealth planes do, by making the radar waves bounce off of its surface.

Sancoff said The Ghost is ideal for missions close to coasts, such as getting special operations teams into and out of areas quickly. It could also be deployed against pirates and even used to attack on aircraft carriers and destroyers.

Eric Wertheim, analyst at the U.S. Naval Inst

(Excerpt) Read more at nbcchicago.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: ghost; stealth; supercavitation; usn
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-71 next last

Juliet Marine Systems

The Ghost is designed to move very quickly and stealthily through water by generating a layer of gas around its underwater surfaces. Handout photo provided by Juliet Marine Systems Inc.

1 posted on 08/31/2011 6:06:38 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

I smell someone cooking bacon. Or is that just a big old slab of pork. Why in the hell do you build something there is no real need for.


2 posted on 08/31/2011 6:09:04 AM PDT by org.whodat (What does the Republican party stand for////??? absolutely nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
moves by generating a layer of gas around submerged surfaces, greatly reducing friction.

Think "Squall", the Soviet torpedo.

3 posted on 08/31/2011 6:10:29 AM PDT by 17th Miss Regt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Super cavitation is noisy and shows up on sonar like a beacon.


4 posted on 08/31/2011 6:11:16 AM PDT by taxcontrol
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Does it fold for stowage and launching from larger platforms?

I wonder how it does in ten+ foot steep (”square”) waves. Is this intended for mild sea states only?

Unless it’s built of welded titanium or something totally unbreakable, I see that fugly craft busting to pieces in rough seas.

And I’m a big fan of ocean-going multi-hulls, (cats and tris) so it’s not that I’m against radical designs.

That prototype does not look seaworthy for the open ocean, not in the waves I’ve been in.


5 posted on 08/31/2011 6:11:31 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

I’ve seen stealthier ore carriers on the Great Lakes.


6 posted on 08/31/2011 6:14:25 AM PDT by Eric in the Ozarks (I want a Triple A president for our Triple A country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
Unless it’s built of welded titanium or something totally unbreakable, I see that fugly craft busting to pieces in rough seas.

It's made out of Black Box.

You know, a substance that the only part of an aircraft that seems to make it through a crash.

7 posted on 08/31/2011 6:15:10 AM PDT by Lazamataz (If Hitler had been as lazy as Obama, the 1940's would have been a very nice decade!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

—Super cavitation is noisy and shows up on sonar like a beacon.—

It looks as though they are concerned with radar rather than sonar. And for special ops insertion this could be just the ticket.

That said, though it is stealthy, I could see it in the picture just fine. 8->


8 posted on 08/31/2011 6:17:35 AM PDT by cuban leaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Stuff like this gives the DOD a bad name. Just adds fuel to the fire for more defense cuts.


9 posted on 08/31/2011 6:18:04 AM PDT by Evil Slayer (Onward, Christian soldiers, marching as to war)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee; org.whodat; taxcontrol

Since the designer is studying a 150 foot corvette concept, it’s most likely to be envisaged in the fast attack/missile boat role. That would probably mean that it is not meant as a dedicated blue-water platform.


10 posted on 08/31/2011 6:18:13 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Looks a bit like the Civil War CSS Virginia! Back to the Future?


11 posted on 08/31/2011 6:20:12 AM PDT by bjc (Check the data!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
I think it is more Darth PBR rather than some new kind of Dreadnought. Good for SEAL team delivery or shooting up the enemy coast line, but not something you are going to take into the deep blue. Heck it is so small it isn't going to be able to handle much of a weapons load for killing big ships.
12 posted on 08/31/2011 6:20:12 AM PDT by GonzoGOP (There are millions of paranoid people in the world and they are all out to get me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

“...through water by generating a layer of gas around its underwater surfaces.”


Is this boat for the Mexican Navy? The “gas layer” tends to make me think that it’s for them. I understand the fuel is biodegradable and is BEANS.


13 posted on 08/31/2011 6:20:31 AM PDT by DH ( Rick Perry 2012...Be proud to be an American once again!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Evil Slayer

Is the DOD providing most of the funds for this project? If its the contractor and international partners, you can’t blame the DOD for this. Then, such a concept does have advantages in a specific brown-water role.


14 posted on 08/31/2011 6:21:37 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP

A 45 metre missile boat equipped with 4-8 antiship missiles can make life difficult for a lot of people. It does have lot of potential as an export platform if they get it working.


15 posted on 08/31/2011 6:23:36 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

The US just retired another stealth boat that was a test-bed.


16 posted on 08/31/2011 6:24:39 AM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
"Why in the hell do you build something there is no real need for."

If they can deliver what they claim, there is a huge need for this. It could take away one of the sub's job of force insertion. This could mean we would need less subs since they would have one less job. Again, if it can deliver what it says it does, this would be huge. The ability to create a more stealthy force insertion. But there are many questions, could this be stowed aboard a larger ship or is it capable of operating on the open waters. From the picture, it does not look capable of open waters operation. Could it be used for river patrol? This article gives just a taste and leaves a lot of questions unanswered.
17 posted on 08/31/2011 6:24:46 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP

Riverboats need to run in the dew, like the old jet-drive PBRs. If a boat can’t run in knee-deep water, it’s useless for riverine warfare. At 150’ full size, I don’t think this is for rivers. It’s for bringing specops near a coast in stealth mode. But the sea is unforgiving, and doesn’t care about your training or how much your ride costs. I remember when a stick of ST-6 guys drowned and were never recovered off Greneda. It was a routine linkup, parachuting into the Caribbean to get on a US warship. But the Caribbean really blows, and the waves get a lot bigger than “SEAL DZ” at the mouth of the calm Chesapeake. And superbly trained ST-6 operators died, because the wonks didn’t appreciate King Neptune in their planning.


18 posted on 08/31/2011 6:26:40 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Any 150 foot ship is meant for the ocean. It’s not for lakes and rivers. And any vessel that ventures on the ocean has to be ready for Sea State Ten. Mariners have learned this the hard way for a thousand years. See my above post about the ST-6 guys who drowned off Greneda because Chesapeake Bay training didn’t square with Caribbean wind and waves.

The same is true of this design. If it can’t handle Force Ten, it’s useless. A 150’ vessel on the ocean cannot always choose its sea state. And it can’t go into “Help me Mr. Wizard!” mode and disappear when the waves get big.


19 posted on 08/31/2011 6:29:49 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

The Swedes and Norwegians are so far ahead of us in this area that it’s pathetic. If any exporting is to be done, it should be us buying from them.

And the Norwegians and Swedes only design patrol boats that can take the punishment of the ocean. They don’t take Chesapeake Bay designs, and then try them on the ocean in big waves.


20 posted on 08/31/2011 6:32:03 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol

Sonar could detect it but at 60mph, so what?


21 posted on 08/31/2011 6:34:33 AM PDT by Dick Vomer (democrats are like flies, whatever they don't eat, they sh#t on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

bring back wooden ships and sails for the ultimate in stealth.


22 posted on 08/31/2011 6:35:20 AM PDT by Hammerhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

The Monitor was stealthier.


23 posted on 08/31/2011 6:35:33 AM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: DH

A stealth boat that moves through water at high speeds and with near invisibility could revolutionize the Navy's ability to carry out special operations on water.

Is this boat for the Mexican Navy? The “gas layer” tends to make me think that it’s for them. I understand the fuel is biodegradable and is BEANS.

You might just be right. Apparently, the boat ideal is for supporting special operations, like the crack Mexican Navy Seal shown above.

24 posted on 08/31/2011 6:37:35 AM PDT by Zakeet (If it ain't broke, the Wee Wee will fix it until it is)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

I thought a “stealth boat” was called a submarine.


25 posted on 08/31/2011 6:39:13 AM PDT by Little Ray (FOR the best Conservative in the Primary; AGAINST Obama in the General.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

All of your arguments are good, but I read somewhere in the article, or on their website that it can supercavitate submerged. The huge pontoons could be ballast devices.

I suppose if it were travelling 30’ under the surface the sea state would not matter?


26 posted on 08/31/2011 6:41:52 AM PDT by blackpacific
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

All of your arguments are good, but I read somewhere in the article, or on their website that it can supercavitate submerged. The huge pontoons could be ballast devices.

I suppose if it were travelling 30’ under the surface the sea state would not matter?


27 posted on 08/31/2011 6:42:00 AM PDT by blackpacific
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

What are the missions of this craft? How far can she travel in this supercavitation mode? Does she have another source for propulsion? What is her armament? What is her suborbital altitude? :-)


28 posted on 08/31/2011 6:45:45 AM PDT by Rannug ("God has given it to me, let him who touches it beware.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
The Ghost keeps a low radar profile the same way stealth planes do, by making the radar waves bounce off of its surface.
Ug. Reporters are so dumb.
29 posted on 08/31/2011 6:47:05 AM PDT by TalonDJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
There was a very large stealth warship tied up in Anacostia Creek for all the world to see 5 or 6 years ago.

What is all this bullshiite about? That thing looks more like a stealth cabin cruiser designed for an NBA star.

This all began before WWI, Google the "Hickman Sea Sled Theory!" http://www.boatdesign.net/forums/boat-design/heres-true-sea-sled-story-circa1985-4654.html

30 posted on 08/31/2011 6:52:28 AM PDT by Kenny Bunk (America. Too late to fix. Too early to start the shooting.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki
Awesome.

GO NAVY!

31 posted on 08/31/2011 7:02:06 AM PDT by Hemingway's Ghost (Spirit of '75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

It’s builder claims that it has increased stability at High Sea States-you can’t expect anything different from them. You wouldn’t think of building ship without taking such things into consideration.


32 posted on 08/31/2011 7:02:13 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

A dry picture of the ship-

http://sitelife.aviationweek.com/ver1.0/Content/images/store/10/15/6a577b05-c727-4b24-bf1a-a5fd1c082030.Full.jpg


33 posted on 08/31/2011 7:04:08 AM PDT by sukhoi-30mki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

is that a red carpet leading to the stern? /s


34 posted on 08/31/2011 7:07:13 AM PDT by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Evil Slayer

The same can be said for all the so called scientists ginning up scenarios for algores glowbull warming scam.


35 posted on 08/31/2011 7:20:50 AM PDT by US_MilitaryRules (Where is our military?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
Why in the hell do you build something there is no real need for.

I'm sure they said that about planes, subs, turbines, televisions, and brassieres.

36 posted on 08/31/2011 7:30:22 AM PDT by Lady Lucky (Heavy the head that wears the tiara.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: taxcontrol
Super cavitation is noisy and shows up on sonar like a beacon.

Yeah, but if it's coming at you so fast you have no time to get out of the way...that's worth something! :)

37 posted on 08/31/2011 7:32:54 AM PDT by Lady Lucky (Heavy the head that wears the tiara.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: GonzoGOP; All

Sheesh, you guys have no vision here. Did the first plane look sleek? Did the first carrier? How about the early locomotives and those atrocious first automobiles? Design will evolve.


38 posted on 08/31/2011 7:38:09 AM PDT by Lady Lucky (Heavy the head that wears the tiara.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: bjc
Looks a bit like the Civil War CSS Virginia!

I'd bet the Virginia didn't show up on any Yankee radars...

(8^D)

39 posted on 08/31/2011 7:50:44 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

ROFLOL, we are frigging broke, what part of that do you not understand. Is it the broke part are the frigging part. And no there is no need for it, I do not wish to spend one penny more being the worlds policeman and spending more money the unborn will be FORCED to pay interest on.


40 posted on 08/31/2011 8:02:25 AM PDT by org.whodat (What does the Republican party stand for////??? absolutely nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Lady Lucky

No they said the moon was made out of cheese and the cow jumped over it and I had my doubts. Did you/?????


41 posted on 08/31/2011 8:04:05 AM PDT by org.whodat (What does the Republican party stand for////??? absolutely nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

So many silly replies on this thread. It’s like a playground.


42 posted on 08/31/2011 8:09:40 AM PDT by Lady Lucky (Heavy the head that wears the tiara.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Lady Lucky
So it is a kamikaze craft,” coming at you so fast you cannot get out of the way”. And someone told me the other-day that we could shoot a missile down with a missile wonder if that is true are another cheese story.
43 posted on 08/31/2011 8:12:59 AM PDT by org.whodat (What does the Republican party stand for////??? absolutely nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

Thanks for that dose of common sense.

Our fiscal crisis is problem of national security in my opinion. Scale back the R&D for a few years until we get our feet back under us.


44 posted on 08/31/2011 8:16:11 AM PDT by Claud
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: sukhoi-30mki

Looks pretty interesting to me. I often wonder if our military will respond to Enemies “....... and domestic.”
We will need them to survive as a Republic.


45 posted on 08/31/2011 8:24:06 AM PDT by mcshot (Hey we're turning upside down compliments of career politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
" And no there is no need for it"

I'm glad you can make such a declarative statement. For me, I don't know if we need it. I do know this, the defense budget should not be the one to take the cuts. First off, we are spending at one of the lowest levels as a percent of GDP since the end of WWII. Secondly, we need entitlement reforms to fix our budget deficit problem. If you cut back too much on defense, then you get Jimmy Carter's military and we invite the worlds lunatics to come after us. You want to prevent another 9/11? Keep the military strong.
46 posted on 08/31/2011 8:29:12 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Old Teufel Hunden

BS


47 posted on 08/31/2011 8:32:35 AM PDT by org.whodat (What does the Republican party stand for////??? absolutely nothing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

The stuff about the spending levels of the defense budget as a percent of GDP is a fact. However, I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree.


48 posted on 08/31/2011 8:36:21 AM PDT by Old Teufel Hunden
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat

I had torpedos and small “drive-by” craft in mind. Not recommending kamikaze, I think those days are gone for good, don’t you?
The thing is, speed will always be vital. You can have all the remotes, robotics, all the electronic wonders, AI, nanotech, you name it, but they’re all just means to some end. Speed is going to be a vital factor when (if) even petroleum is obsolete.
Finding a way around the “water barrier” is extremely useful. Ever tried shooting something in the water?
Any technology that helps us get through water like it was air, I’m all for it.


49 posted on 08/31/2011 8:40:57 AM PDT by Lady Lucky (Heavy the head that wears the tiara.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: org.whodat
No they said the moon was made out of cheese

And when locomotives did 30mph, passengers would smother!

50 posted on 08/31/2011 8:44:02 AM PDT by Lady Lucky (Heavy the head that wears the tiara.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-71 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson