|
Maptech Offshore Navigator
I've got this Maptech marine navigation program - have had it for years http://www.maptechnavigation.com/wat...ator/index.cfm And, I've got tons of charts, aerial photos etc. It's all installed on my laptop but my laptop doesn't have built-in GPS so I bought a USB GPS that works great so now my laptop is a fancy chart/plotter. Maptech charts are available for all over the world but one must pay dearly for them. (more on this later) This is the USB GPS that I bought: http://www.amazon.com/GlobalSat-BU-3.../dp/B008200LHW It initializes very fast and wasn't any trouble to install the drivers and configure the com port info so the Offshore Navigator software can recognize and utilize it. Now for my question. Does anybody know what, if any, other charts besides Maptech charts the Offshore Navigator software can use? Preferably free charts like the one's NOAA offers. -- Sir Gregory |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 17:08:15 -0400, " Sir Gregory Hall, Esq·"
åke wrote: I've got this Maptech marine navigation program - have had it for years http://www.maptechnavigation.com/wat...ator/index.cfm And, I've got tons of charts, aerial photos etc. It's all installed on my laptop but my laptop doesn't have built-in GPS so I bought a USB GPS that works great so now my laptop is a fancy chart/plotter. Maptech charts are available for all over the world but one must pay dearly for them. (more on this later) This is the USB GPS that I bought: http://www.amazon.com/GlobalSat-BU-3.../dp/B008200LHW It initializes very fast and wasn't any trouble to install the drivers and configure the com port info so the Offshore Navigator software can recognize and utilize it. Now for my question. Does anybody know what, if any, other charts besides Maptech charts the Offshore Navigator software can use? Preferably free charts like the one's NOAA offers. === Check out the OpenCPN web site. There is a lot of information there on electronic charts. You might also decide that you like OpenCPN (free). It is much more up to date than the older Maptech OSN versions - tide and current info for example, plus a very decent AIS implementation. http://opencpn.org/ocpn/ |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
"Wayne.B" wrote in message
... On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 17:08:15 -0400, " Sir Gregory Hall, Esq·" åke wrote: I've got this Maptech marine navigation program - have had it for years http://www.maptechnavigation.com/wat...ator/index.cfm And, I've got tons of charts, aerial photos etc. It's all installed on my laptop but my laptop doesn't have built-in GPS so I bought a USB GPS that works great so now my laptop is a fancy chart/plotter. Maptech charts are available for all over the world but one must pay dearly for them. (more on this later) This is the USB GPS that I bought: http://www.amazon.com/GlobalSat-BU-3.../dp/B008200LHW It initializes very fast and wasn't any trouble to install the drivers and configure the com port info so the Offshore Navigator software can recognize and utilize it. Now for my question. Does anybody know what, if any, other charts besides Maptech charts the Offshore Navigator software can use? Preferably free charts like the one's NOAA offers. === Check out the OpenCPN web site. There is a lot of information there on electronic charts. You might also decide that you like OpenCPN (free). It is much more up to date than the older Maptech OSN versions - tide and current info for example, plus a very decent AIS implementation. http://opencpn.org/ocpn/ Thanks, I'll check it out! |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
" Sir Gregory Hall, Esq·" åke wrote in message
... "Wayne.B" wrote in message ... On Tue, 24 Sep 2013 17:08:15 -0400, " Sir Gregory Hall, Esq·" åke wrote: I've got this Maptech marine navigation program - have had it for years http://www.maptechnavigation.com/wat...ator/index.cfm And, I've got tons of charts, aerial photos etc. It's all installed on my laptop but my laptop doesn't have built-in GPS so I bought a USB GPS that works great so now my laptop is a fancy chart/plotter. Maptech charts are available for all over the world but one must pay dearly for them. (more on this later) This is the USB GPS that I bought: http://www.amazon.com/GlobalSat-BU-3.../dp/B008200LHW It initializes very fast and wasn't any trouble to install the drivers and configure the com port info so the Offshore Navigator software can recognize and utilize it. Now for my question. Does anybody know what, if any, other charts besides Maptech charts the Offshore Navigator software can use? Preferably free charts like the one's NOAA offers. === Check out the OpenCPN web site. There is a lot of information there on electronic charts. You might also decide that you like OpenCPN (free). It is much more up to date than the older Maptech OSN versions - tide and current info for example, plus a very decent AIS implementation. http://opencpn.org/ocpn/ Thanks, I'll check it out! Update. I've downloaded and installed it and it's pretty cool. I also downloaded ALL the free NOAA Vector charts for Florida. I like the fact that they are updated weekly. So now I have all the Raster charts for Florida and all the updated Vector charts. They even show in night time colors. There is a row of boxes on the bottom probably 15 or so of them and each one displays a different chart. The green ones are the Vector official navigation charts and the gray ones are the older Raster Charts. I might have delete all those older Raster charts out of the designated folder and download all the updated Raster charts from NOAA. The help files indicate that the program can use quite a few different electronic chart formats so I'll be searching for all charts for areas I might sail to. There are even up to date pilot charts of blue water sailing that I've got to download and place in the designated folder. It was easy to configure the GPS com port so I've even got it set up with the USB GPS already. Kewl! Thanks again. Do you use it yourself when cruising? -- Sir Gregory |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 15:00:53 -0400, " Sir Gregory Hall, Esq·"
åke wrote: Update. I've downloaded and installed it and it's pretty cool. I also downloaded ALL the free NOAA Vector charts for Florida. I like the fact that they are updated weekly. So now I have all the Raster charts for Florida and all the updated Vector charts. They even show in night time colors. There is a row of boxes on the bottom probably 15 or so of them and each one displays a different chart. The green ones are the Vector official navigation charts and the gray ones are the older Raster Charts. I might have delete all those older Raster charts out of the designated folder and download all the updated Raster charts from NOAA. The help files indicate that the program can use quite a few different electronic chart formats so I'll be searching for all charts for areas I might sail to. There are even up to date pilot charts of blue water sailing that I've got to download and place in the designated folder. It was easy to configure the GPS com port so I've even got it set up with the USB GPS already. Kewl! Thanks again. Do you use it yourself when cruising. === I'll be using it more now that I have a new AIS capable VHF radio. The abilty to track commercial traffic by name and call letters (not to mention course, speed, CPA, etc.) will be useful at times, especially when coming back into the Keys from the Bahamas. We usually end up doing that at night and the amount of large ship traffic out there is astounding. Up until recently I've been using Maptech OSN and it has served us well. I have almost 40,000 nautical miles of saved track lines for all of our cruises since we bought the trawler 9 years ago. |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
"Wayne.B" wrote in message
... On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 15:00:53 -0400, " Sir Gregory Hall, Esq·" åke wrote: Update. I've downloaded and installed it and it's pretty cool. I also downloaded ALL the free NOAA Vector charts for Florida. I like the fact that they are updated weekly. So now I have all the Raster charts for Florida and all the updated Vector charts. They even show in night time colors. There is a row of boxes on the bottom probably 15 or so of them and each one displays a different chart. The green ones are the Vector official navigation charts and the gray ones are the older Raster Charts. I might have delete all those older Raster charts out of the designated folder and download all the updated Raster charts from NOAA. The help files indicate that the program can use quite a few different electronic chart formats so I'll be searching for all charts for areas I might sail to. There are even up to date pilot charts of blue water sailing that I've got to download and place in the designated folder. It was easy to configure the GPS com port so I've even got it set up with the USB GPS already. Kewl! Thanks again. Do you use it yourself when cruising. === I'll be using it more now that I have a new AIS capable VHF radio. The abilty to track commercial traffic by name and call letters (not to mention course, speed, CPA, etc.) will be useful at times, especially when coming back into the Keys from the Bahamas. We usually end up doing that at night and the amount of large ship traffic out there is astounding. Up until recently I've been using Maptech OSN and it has served us well. I have almost 40,000 nautical miles of saved track lines for all of our cruises since we bought the trawler 9 years ago. The two programs seem to be similar so the learning curve for the open source program is not steep. I don't care for that AIS nonsense, myself. I've ridden motorcycles and bicycles my whole life and I've survived intact mostly because my philosophy is that nobody ever sees me so I have to take full responsibility for avoiding all the idiots. I can't rely on them to even be aware of me. AIS is like that. It won't work unless the shipping sees me and they don't pay attention to something so small that it represents no danger to them. One time, crossing to the Bahamas at night, I ran into a flotilla of blacked out Navy ships doing some kind of a training exercise. There were dozens of them. One destroyer was on a collision course so I luffed up and it passed a couple hundred yards off my bow. I used the VHF to try to contact them and lo and behold they actually replied. I enquired if it was safe to pass directly astern (thinking they could be dragging some anti-submarine apparatus) but they said that would present no problems. WOW they do make quite the wake. -- Sir Gregory |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 15:39:30 -0400, " Sir Gregory Hall, Esq·"
åke wrote: I don't care for that AIS nonsense, myself. I've ridden motorcycles and bicycles my whole life and I've survived intact mostly because my philosophy is that nobody ever sees me so I have to take full responsibility for avoiding all the idiots. I can't rely on them to even be aware of me. AIS is like that. It won't work unless the shipping sees me and they don't pay attention to something so small that it represents no danger to them. === The price on AIS equipment keeps coming down and will no doubt go even lower. My new VHF cost only a tad over $300 and West Marine is now offering a class B transponder for $560. http://www.westmarine.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?productId=795855#.UkM-kxDpyl8 http://www.boatersland.com/standard-matrix-ais-gx2150.html |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
"Wayne.B" wrote in message
... On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 15:39:30 -0400, " Sir Gregory Hall, Esq·" åke wrote: I don't care for that AIS nonsense, myself. I've ridden motorcycles and bicycles my whole life and I've survived intact mostly because my philosophy is that nobody ever sees me so I have to take full responsibility for avoiding all the idiots. I can't rely on them to even be aware of me. AIS is like that. It won't work unless the shipping sees me and they don't pay attention to something so small that it represents no danger to them. === The price on AIS equipment keeps coming down and will no doubt go even lower. My new VHF cost only a tad over $300 and West Marine is now offering a class B transponder for $560. http://www.westmarine.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?productId=795855#.UkM-kxDpyl8 http://www.boatersland.com/standard-matrix-ais-gx2150.html Too dear for me! I'll stick to using my expensive Fujinon binoculars which see real well in the dark and I'll take the responsibility upon myself to avoid shipping. Even though I'm a sailboat and I'm supposed to be the stand-on vessel, I'd rather not interfere with the big boys. It's a lot easier for me to alter course than for them to do so. -- Sir Gregory |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
On 25/09/2013 10:39 PM, Sir Gregory Hall, Esq· wrote:
"Wayne.B" wrote in message ... On Wed, 25 Sep 2013 15:00:53 -0400, " Sir Gregory Hall, Esq·" åke wrote: Update. I've downloaded and installed it and it's pretty cool. I also downloaded ALL the free NOAA Vector charts for Florida. I like the fact that they are updated weekly. So now I have all the Raster charts for Florida and all the updated Vector charts. They even show in night time colors. There is a row of boxes on the bottom probably 15 or so of them and each one displays a different chart. The green ones are the Vector official navigation charts and the gray ones are the older Raster Charts. I might have delete all those older Raster charts out of the designated folder and download all the updated Raster charts from NOAA. The help files indicate that the program can use quite a few different electronic chart formats so I'll be searching for all charts for areas I might sail to. There are even up to date pilot charts of blue water sailing that I've got to download and place in the designated folder. It was easy to configure the GPS com port so I've even got it set up with the USB GPS already. Kewl! Thanks again. Do you use it yourself when cruising. === I'll be using it more now that I have a new AIS capable VHF radio. The abilty to track commercial traffic by name and call letters (not to mention course, speed, CPA, etc.) will be useful at times, especially when coming back into the Keys from the Bahamas. We usually end up doing that at night and the amount of large ship traffic out there is astounding. Up until recently I've been using Maptech OSN and it has served us well. I have almost 40,000 nautical miles of saved track lines for all of our cruises since we bought the trawler 9 years ago. The two programs seem to be similar so the learning curve for the open source program is not steep. I don't care for that AIS nonsense, myself. I've ridden motorcycles and bicycles my whole life and I've survived intact mostly because my philosophy is that nobody ever sees me so I have to take full responsibility for avoiding all the idiots. I can't rely on them to even be aware of me. AIS is like that. It won't work unless the shipping sees me and they don't pay attention to something so small that it represents no danger to them. One time, crossing to the Bahamas at night, I ran into a flotilla of blacked out Navy ships doing some kind of a training exercise. There were dozens of them. One destroyer was on a collision course so I luffed up and it passed a couple hundred yards off my bow. I used the VHF to try to contact them and lo and behold they actually replied. I enquired if it was safe to pass directly astern (thinking they could be dragging some anti-submarine apparatus) but they said that would present no problems. WOW they do make quite the wake. Back when I was in white and gold, I watched, with a group of others, a US CGN leave our little port (military) He had to join up with a commercial dredged channel, not very wide. He wandered slowly to the ENE to link up and turned. The area is occasionally prone to Anti-Nuke nutsos and he didn't want to get hampered in the channel. He was headed now WNW. If you have a reactor as a power plant, you use it. So he put the pedal to the metal and let it rip. Not a wake, a rooster tail fully 50' high off the stern. We could see it from 2 miles away. They do move some water when they go by. |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:56:31 +0300, injipoint
wrote this crap: Back when I was in white and gold, I watched, with a group of others, a US CGN leave our little port (military) He had to join up with a commercial dredged channel, not very wide. He wandered slowly to the ENE to link up and turned. The area is occasionally prone to Anti-Nuke nutsos and he didn't want to get hampered in the channel. He was headed now WNW. If you have a reactor as a power plant, you use it. So he put the pedal to the metal and let it rip. Not a wake, a rooster tail fully 50' high off the stern. We could see it from 2 miles away. They do move some water when they go by. Just curious, how did it take the nuke to go from slow to go? However, he could have powering up the reactor as he was leaving the channel and then just powered up the engines when he got clear sailing. At nuclear electrical power plants it takes days to get to full power. Don't drink and drive. Unless you have a good cup holder. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 17:25:37 +0300, injipoint
wrote: On 26/09/2013 7:05 PM, wrote: On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:56:31 +0300, injipoint wrote this crap: Back when I was in white and gold, I watched, with a group of others, a US CGN leave our little port (military) He had to join up with a commercial dredged channel, not very wide. He wandered slowly to the ENE to link up and turned. The area is occasionally prone to Anti-Nuke nutsos and he didn't want to get hampered in the channel. He was headed now WNW. If you have a reactor as a power plant, you use it. So he put the pedal to the metal and let it rip. Not a wake, a rooster tail fully 50' high off the stern. We could see it from 2 miles away. They do move some water when they go by. Just curious, how did it take the nuke to go from slow to go? However, he could have powering up the reactor as he was leaving the channel and then just powered up the engines when he got clear sailing. At nuclear electrical power plants it takes days to get to full power. Don't drink and drive. Unless you have a good cup holder. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- Been powering up the reactors for a day probably. They'd never say. Just switched the power to the engines when he turned. The N-subs do the same thing, but no rooster tail. They just go hell for leather so any dickhead on a surfboard or in a canoe etc who wants to "stop" one for a photo-shoot has to deal with something that's already doing 20knots "Sorry, couldn't stop in time" === One of the biggest wakes I've ever seen was from a nuclear sub running fast on the surface. It's a strange sight from a distance, sort of like a fast moving hill of water. |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 17:25:37 +0300, injipoint
wrote this crap: Not a wake, a rooster tail fully 50' high off the stern. We could see it from 2 miles away. They do move some water when they go by. Just curious, how did it take the nuke to go from slow to go? However, he could have powering up the reactor as he was leaving the channel and then just powered up the engines when he got clear sailing. At nuclear electrical power plants it takes days to get to full power. Been powering up the reactors for a day probably. They'd never say. Just switched the power to the engines when he turned. That must give off one hell of a heat signature. Easily seen by a satellite for sure. The N-subs do the same thing, but no rooster tail. Obviously, that's called cavitation and is easily heard under water. Subs are made for silence. They just go hell for leather so any dickhead on a surfboard or in a canoe etc who wants to "stop" one for a photo-shoot has to deal with something that's already doing 20knots "Sorry, couldn't stop in time" "Scottie, give me full reverse, some dickhead wants a picture." :) Don't drink and drive. Unless you have a good cup holder. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
"injipoint" wrote in message
... On 26/09/2013 7:05 PM, wrote: On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:56:31 +0300, injipoint wrote this crap: Back when I was in white and gold, I watched, with a group of others, a US CGN leave our little port (military) He had to join up with a commercial dredged channel, not very wide. He wandered slowly to the ENE to link up and turned. The area is occasionally prone to Anti-Nuke nutsos and he didn't want to get hampered in the channel. He was headed now WNW. If you have a reactor as a power plant, you use it. So he put the pedal to the metal and let it rip. Not a wake, a rooster tail fully 50' high off the stern. We could see it from 2 miles away. They do move some water when they go by. Just curious, how did it take the nuke to go from slow to go? However, he could have powering up the reactor as he was leaving the channel and then just powered up the engines when he got clear sailing. At nuclear electrical power plants it takes days to get to full power. Don't drink and drive. Unless you have a good cup holder. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- Been powering up the reactors for a day probably. They'd never say. Just switched the power to the engines when he turned. The N-subs do the same thing, but no rooster tail. They just go hell for leather so any dickhead on a surfboard or in a canoe etc who wants to "stop" one for a photo-shoot has to deal with something that's already doing 20knots "Sorry, couldn't stop in time" It's my understanding that nuclear subs are powered by steam turbines which generate electricity for the electric motors that run the propellers. The steam for the turbines comes from the heat of the fission reactor. Lower a few more fuel rods and it doesn't take but a few minutes for the core to heat up and the cooling water temperature rises along with it. -- Sir Gregory |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
On 27/09/2013 7:06 PM, Sir Gregory Hall, Esq· wrote:
"injipoint" wrote in message ... On 26/09/2013 7:05 PM, wrote: On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:56:31 +0300, injipoint wrote this crap: Back when I was in white and gold, I watched, with a group of others, a US CGN leave our little port (military) He had to join up with a commercial dredged channel, not very wide. He wandered slowly to the ENE to link up and turned. The area is occasionally prone to Anti-Nuke nutsos and he didn't want to get hampered in the channel. He was headed now WNW. If you have a reactor as a power plant, you use it. So he put the pedal to the metal and let it rip. Not a wake, a rooster tail fully 50' high off the stern. We could see it from 2 miles away. They do move some water when they go by. Just curious, how did it take the nuke to go from slow to go? However, he could have powering up the reactor as he was leaving the channel and then just powered up the engines when he got clear sailing. At nuclear electrical power plants it takes days to get to full power. Don't drink and drive. Unless you have a good cup holder. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- Been powering up the reactors for a day probably. They'd never say. Just switched the power to the engines when he turned. The N-subs do the same thing, but no rooster tail. They just go hell for leather so any dickhead on a surfboard or in a canoe etc who wants to "stop" one for a photo-shoot has to deal with something that's already doing 20knots "Sorry, couldn't stop in time" It's my understanding that nuclear subs are powered by steam turbines which generate electricity for the electric motors that run the propellers. The steam for the turbines comes from the heat of the fission reactor. Lower a few more fuel rods and it doesn't take but a few minutes for the core to heat up and the cooling water temperature rises along with it. Not sure but I think it might take longer. I know they take time to lower the power, like a day or about that but I don't know enough about the process to know the start up bit. |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
injipoint wrote:
On 26/09/2013 7:05 PM, wrote: On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:56:31 +0300, injipoint wrote this crap: Back when I was in white and gold, I watched, with a group of others, a US CGN leave our little port (military) He had to join up with a commercial dredged channel, not very wide. He wandered slowly to the ENE to link up and turned. The area is occasionally prone to Anti-Nuke nutsos and he didn't want to get hampered in the channel. He was headed now WNW. If you have a reactor as a power plant, you use it. So he put the pedal to the metal and let it rip. Not a wake, a rooster tail fully 50' high off the stern. We could see it from 2 miles away. They do move some water when they go by. Just curious, how did it take the nuke to go from slow to go? However, he could have powering up the reactor as he was leaving the channel and then just powered up the engines when he got clear sailing. At nuclear electrical power plants it takes days to get to full power. Don't drink and drive. Unless you have a good cup holder. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- Been powering up the reactors for a day probably. They'd never say. Just switched the power to the engines when he turned. The N-subs do the same thing, but no rooster tail. They just go hell for leather so any dickhead on a surfboard or in a canoe etc who wants to "stop" one for a photo-shoot has to deal with something that's already doing 20knots "Sorry, couldn't stop in time" I did not think the USCG had any conventional ships nuclear powered. Talk of nuke icebreakers being built by the US. |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 12:06:22 -0400, " Sir Gregory Hall, Esq·"
åke wrote this crap: Just curious, how did it take the nuke to go from slow to go? However, he could have powering up the reactor as he was leaving the channel and then just powered up the engines when he got clear sailing. At nuclear electrical power plants it takes days to get to full power. Been powering up the reactors for a day probably. They'd never say. Just switched the power to the engines when he turned. The N-subs do the same thing, but no rooster tail. They just go hell for leather so any dickhead on a surfboard or in a canoe etc who wants to "stop" one for a photo-shoot has to deal with something that's already doing 20knots "Sorry, couldn't stop in time" It's my understanding that nuclear subs are powered by steam turbines which generate electricity for the electric motors that run the propellers. That's correct. The steam for the turbines comes from the heat of the fission reactor. Lower a few more fuel rods and it doesn't take but a few minutes for the core to heat up and the cooling water temperature rises along with it. That's not correct. The control rods absorb the radiation. You pull out the control rods to increase the power. Lowering the control rods shuts off the reactor. Don't drink and drive. Unless you have a good cup holder. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
wrote in message
... On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 12:06:22 -0400, " Sir Gregory Hall, Esq·" åke wrote this crap: Just curious, how did it take the nuke to go from slow to go? However, he could have powering up the reactor as he was leaving the channel and then just powered up the engines when he got clear sailing. At nuclear electrical power plants it takes days to get to full power. Been powering up the reactors for a day probably. They'd never say. Just switched the power to the engines when he turned. The N-subs do the same thing, but no rooster tail. They just go hell for leather so any dickhead on a surfboard or in a canoe etc who wants to "stop" one for a photo-shoot has to deal with something that's already doing 20knots "Sorry, couldn't stop in time. It's my understanding that nuclear subs are powered by steam turbines which generate electricity for the electric motors that run the propellers. That's correct. The steam for the turbines comes from the heat of the fission reactor. Lower a few more fuel rods and it doesn't take but a few minutes for the core to heat up and the cooling water temperature rises along with it. That's not correct. The control rods absorb the radiation. You pull out the control rods to increase the power. Lowering the control rods shuts off the reactor. Right. I should have said control rods instead of fuel rods because the fuel is actually pellets. This explains it pretty well. http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/s...g/reactor.html -- Sir Gregory |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
"Califbill" wrote in message ... injipoint wrote: On 26/09/2013 7:05 PM, wrote: On Thu, 26 Sep 2013 08:56:31 +0300, injipoint wrote this crap: Back when I was in white and gold, I watched, with a group of others, a US CGN leave our little port (military) He had to join up with a commercial dredged channel, not very wide. He wandered slowly to the ENE to link up and turned. The area is occasionally prone to Anti-Nuke nutsos and he didn't want to get hampered in the channel. He was headed now WNW. If you have a reactor as a power plant, you use it. So he put the pedal to the metal and let it rip. Not a wake, a rooster tail fully 50' high off the stern. We could see it from 2 miles away. They do move some water when they go by. Just curious, how did it take the nuke to go from slow to go? However, he could have powering up the reactor as he was leaving the channel and then just powered up the engines when he got clear sailing. At nuclear electrical power plants it takes days to get to full power. Don't drink and drive. Unless you have a good cup holder. --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: --- Been powering up the reactors for a day probably. They'd never say. Just switched the power to the engines when he turned. The N-subs do the same thing, but no rooster tail. They just go hell for leather so any dickhead on a surfboard or in a canoe etc who wants to "stop" one for a photo-shoot has to deal with something that's already doing 20knots "Sorry, couldn't stop in time" I did not think the USCG had any conventional ships nuclear powered. Talk of nuke icebreakers being built by the US. ----------------------- Bill, I think he was referring to US Navy nuclear-powered guided missile cruisers (CGNs). |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 21:06:13 +0300, injipoint
wrote: It's my understanding that nuclear subs are powered by steam turbines which generate electricity for the electric motors that run the propellers. The steam for the turbines comes from the heat of the fission reactor. Lower a few more fuel rods and it doesn't take but a few minutes for the core to heat up and the cooling water temperature rises along with it. Not sure but I think it might take longer. I know they take time to lower the power, like a day or about that but I don't know enough about the process to know the start up bit. I was a USN boilerman on a DDG. Some years ago, but here's how it worked than. Nuke or oil-fired is the means to generate steam in boilers. Whether nuke or oil, steam is steam. Boilers is where it all starts. Steam powers turbines. For main propulsion, generators, and auxiliaries like pumps and forced draft blowers feeding the boilers. Steam also powers evaporators to produce fresh water. Lighting off a cold boiler is the only lengthy process. Took about 2-3 hours on my ship, but since boilers were only "cold iron" in a safe port like Norfolk, Va, they are normally hot and ready and powering the ship even in port. Not much steam demand when not propelling the ship, so they are basically idling. When cold iron in a "safe" port, electric cables and fresh water lines are hooked up to the ship. You need electricity to go from cold iron to a hot boiler. We could probably go from cold iron to "full hot" in less than an hour, but it's better to bring up heat/pressure slowly to avoid heat and expansion shock, so we always took a measured pace, firing only one of the boiler 5 burners. Nowadays steam is dead - except for nukes. As far as I know non-nukes are now all gas turbine, diesel, turbo-diesel, etc. Here's how it works with a steam-powered ships like injipoint observed. I'll use my DDG as an example, but there won't be much variance. Just replace rod movement for "burners." In port a forward and aft boiler are hot and running on one burner each. Each fireroom has 2 boilers, but normally only one is hot. Running all boilers at full power gains very little extra speed. Boilers have scheduled maintenance even underway, and often the idle boiler is open and not operational for this reason. The forward fireroom feeds steam to the forward engineroom main turbines. That runs the starboard shaft. Aft runs aft and port shaft. Even on my ship built in 1961 most boiler controls were automatic. Feed water, oil pressure, etc. The main "humans" operating the boilers were the burner man and the console operator. Operating pressure was 1275 psi. Others on various fireroom watch stations monitored temps and pressures, and were ready to take action for "casualties." When steam demand began dropping pressure, the burnerman manually pushed in another burner, and lit it by pulling down the oil control valve. Oil on a burner was either shut or wide open. The console operator had little to do except adjust oil pressure when demand was low, and adjust "excess" air, to avoid stack smoke. But the console also provided an overview of many systems. So you leave port on maybe 2 of the 5 burners, with low oil pressure. Say you're doing 4 knots. The skipper wants to avoid a bottom structure by backing one screw. Not sure about how the ship is actually controlled, but I've seen this many times. He sends a telegraph command to the engineroom powering that shaft. Can't remember if that comes to the fireroom simultaneously, or the engineroom repeats it. Full astern. The engineroom cranks opens their main throttle, and starts pulling steam. In the fireroom a full astern bell means the burnerman pushes in and light all burners as fast as he can, because all hell will break loose. As steam pressure drops, everything winds up to maintain pressure, It's like banshees screaming. Forced draft blowers, feed pumps, oil pumps, air flow, burners burning, steam flowing. There are limits. The engineroom throttleman isn't supposed to take pressure below 1120 psi. That's the prescribed pressure for boiler shutdown. At sea there's no electricity except that provided by steam. You need the steam to run the pumps to restart the boilers. I've seen it get close, and a couple times warned the throttlemen I was going to shut it down. They listened. My ship was designed for ASW, so we spent a lot of time chasing Soviet subs. We were armed with nuke ASROC missiles. Top speed was 27 knots. We were 4500 tons. But she was geared for ASW, so she would squat and gain speed pretty quickly when you opened the throttles. No roostertail, but a pretty massive stern hump. http://www.navsource.org/archives/05/01003.htm That says top speed 33 knots. Maybe with 4 boilers and overload burner tips. Never did that when I was aboard for 3 1/2 years. 1964-67. Flank speed was 27 knots. We would usually measure speed by screw shaft "turns," not knots. I never heard more than 27 knots mentioned, and can't remember the turns, maybe 40-50 max. Going from 1/3 ahead to full to flank is the usual speed progression of ships. If not done abruptly, there's no real excitement. From dead to flank is a lot of action and noise. From flank to full astern or vice versa is hectic, but only done in open sea during "exercises." It's been a long time, but my memory says port maneuvers were the "scariest." From full astern to full ahead repeatedly. Of course I couldn't see what was happening from the fireroom, but my imagination always said we about to run something down or hit a dock. Sorry if this is "too much information." |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
On 9/27/13 5:57 PM, Vic Smith wrote:
On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 21:06:13 +0300, injipoint wrote: It's my understanding that nuclear subs are powered by steam turbines which generate electricity for the electric motors that run the propellers. The steam for the turbines comes from the heat of the fission reactor. Lower a few more fuel rods and it doesn't take but a few minutes for the core to heat up and the cooling water temperature rises along with it. Not sure but I think it might take longer. I know they take time to lower the power, like a day or about that but I don't know enough about the process to know the start up bit. I was a USN boilerman on a DDG. Some years ago, but here's how it worked than. Nuke or oil-fired is the means to generate steam in boilers. Whether nuke or oil, steam is steam. Boilers is where it all starts. Steam powers turbines. For main propulsion, generators, and auxiliaries like pumps and forced draft blowers feeding the boilers. Steam also powers evaporators to produce fresh water. Lighting off a cold boiler is the only lengthy process. Took about 2-3 hours on my ship, but since boilers were only "cold iron" in a safe port like Norfolk, Va, they are normally hot and ready and powering the ship even in port. Not much steam demand when not propelling the ship, so they are basically idling. When cold iron in a "safe" port, electric cables and fresh water lines are hooked up to the ship. You need electricity to go from cold iron to a hot boiler. We could probably go from cold iron to "full hot" in less than an hour, but it's better to bring up heat/pressure slowly to avoid heat and expansion shock, so we always took a measured pace, firing only one of the boiler 5 burners. Nowadays steam is dead - except for nukes. As far as I know non-nukes are now all gas turbine, diesel, turbo-diesel, etc. Here's how it works with a steam-powered ships like injipoint observed. I'll use my DDG as an example, but there won't be much variance. Just replace rod movement for "burners." In port a forward and aft boiler are hot and running on one burner each. Each fireroom has 2 boilers, but normally only one is hot. Running all boilers at full power gains very little extra speed. Boilers have scheduled maintenance even underway, and often the idle boiler is open and not operational for this reason. The forward fireroom feeds steam to the forward engineroom main turbines. That runs the starboard shaft. Aft runs aft and port shaft. Even on my ship built in 1961 most boiler controls were automatic. Feed water, oil pressure, etc. The main "humans" operating the boilers were the burner man and the console operator. Operating pressure was 1275 psi. Others on various fireroom watch stations monitored temps and pressures, and were ready to take action for "casualties." When steam demand began dropping pressure, the burnerman manually pushed in another burner, and lit it by pulling down the oil control valve. Oil on a burner was either shut or wide open. The console operator had little to do except adjust oil pressure when demand was low, and adjust "excess" air, to avoid stack smoke. But the console also provided an overview of many systems. So you leave port on maybe 2 of the 5 burners, with low oil pressure. Say you're doing 4 knots. The skipper wants to avoid a bottom structure by backing one screw. Not sure about how the ship is actually controlled, but I've seen this many times. He sends a telegraph command to the engineroom powering that shaft. Can't remember if that comes to the fireroom simultaneously, or the engineroom repeats it. Full astern. The engineroom cranks opens their main throttle, and starts pulling steam. In the fireroom a full astern bell means the burnerman pushes in and light all burners as fast as he can, because all hell will break loose. As steam pressure drops, everything winds up to maintain pressure, It's like banshees screaming. Forced draft blowers, feed pumps, oil pumps, air flow, burners burning, steam flowing. There are limits. The engineroom throttleman isn't supposed to take pressure below 1120 psi. That's the prescribed pressure for boiler shutdown. At sea there's no electricity except that provided by steam. You need the steam to run the pumps to restart the boilers. I've seen it get close, and a couple times warned the throttlemen I was going to shut it down. They listened. My ship was designed for ASW, so we spent a lot of time chasing Soviet subs. We were armed with nuke ASROC missiles. Top speed was 27 knots. We were 4500 tons. But she was geared for ASW, so she would squat and gain speed pretty quickly when you opened the throttles. No roostertail, but a pretty massive stern hump. http://www.navsource.org/archives/05/01003.htm That says top speed 33 knots. Maybe with 4 boilers and overload burner tips. Never did that when I was aboard for 3 1/2 years. 1964-67. Flank speed was 27 knots. We would usually measure speed by screw shaft "turns," not knots. I never heard more than 27 knots mentioned, and can't remember the turns, maybe 40-50 max. Going from 1/3 ahead to full to flank is the usual speed progression of ships. If not done abruptly, there's no real excitement. From dead to flank is a lot of action and noise. From flank to full astern or vice versa is hectic, but only done in open sea during "exercises." It's been a long time, but my memory says port maneuvers were the "scariest." From full astern to full ahead repeatedly. Of course I couldn't see what was happening from the fireroom, but my imagination always said we about to run something down or hit a dock. Sorry if this is "too much information." Wow...terrific post. Thanks. |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
Hi Vic,
I am curious as to the origin of "flank speed". ,, I have never heard of it before and though Wikipedia defines it, there is no reference to the origin o the tem. Cheers Peter |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
On 28/09/2013 12:57 AM, Vic Smith wrote:
On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 21:06:13 +0300, injipoint wrote: It's my understanding that nuclear subs are powered by steam turbines which generate electricity for the electric motors that run the propellers. The steam for the turbines comes from the heat of the fission reactor. Lower a few more fuel rods and it doesn't take but a few minutes for the core to heat up and the cooling water temperature rises along with it. Not sure but I think it might take longer. I know they take time to lower the power, like a day or about that but I don't know enough about the process to know the start up bit. I was a USN boilerman on a DDG. Some years ago, but here's how it worked than. Nuke or oil-fired is the means to generate steam in boilers. Whether nuke or oil, steam is steam. Boilers is where it all starts. Steam powers turbines. For main propulsion, generators, and auxiliaries like pumps and forced draft blowers feeding the boilers. Steam also powers evaporators to produce fresh water. Lighting off a cold boiler is the only lengthy process. Took about 2-3 hours on my ship, but since boilers were only "cold iron" in a safe port like Norfolk, Va, they are normally hot and ready and powering the ship even in port. Not much steam demand when not propelling the ship, so they are basically idling. When cold iron in a "safe" port, electric cables and fresh water lines are hooked up to the ship. You need electricity to go from cold iron to a hot boiler. We could probably go from cold iron to "full hot" in less than an hour, but it's better to bring up heat/pressure slowly to avoid heat and expansion shock, so we always took a measured pace, firing only one of the boiler 5 burners. Nowadays steam is dead - except for nukes. As far as I know non-nukes are now all gas turbine, diesel, turbo-diesel, etc. Here's how it works with a steam-powered ships like injipoint observed. I'll use my DDG as an example, but there won't be much variance. Just replace rod movement for "burners." In port a forward and aft boiler are hot and running on one burner each. Each fireroom has 2 boilers, but normally only one is hot. Running all boilers at full power gains very little extra speed. Boilers have scheduled maintenance even underway, and often the idle boiler is open and not operational for this reason. The forward fireroom feeds steam to the forward engineroom main turbines. That runs the starboard shaft. Aft runs aft and port shaft. Even on my ship built in 1961 most boiler controls were automatic. Feed water, oil pressure, etc. The main "humans" operating the boilers were the burner man and the console operator. Operating pressure was 1275 psi. Others on various fireroom watch stations monitored temps and pressures, and were ready to take action for "casualties." When steam demand began dropping pressure, the burnerman manually pushed in another burner, and lit it by pulling down the oil control valve. Oil on a burner was either shut or wide open. The console operator had little to do except adjust oil pressure when demand was low, and adjust "excess" air, to avoid stack smoke. But the console also provided an overview of many systems. So you leave port on maybe 2 of the 5 burners, with low oil pressure. Say you're doing 4 knots. The skipper wants to avoid a bottom structure by backing one screw. Not sure about how the ship is actually controlled, but I've seen this many times. He sends a telegraph command to the engineroom powering that shaft. Can't remember if that comes to the fireroom simultaneously, or the engineroom repeats it. Full astern. The engineroom cranks opens their main throttle, and starts pulling steam. In the fireroom a full astern bell means the burnerman pushes in and light all burners as fast as he can, because all hell will break loose. As steam pressure drops, everything winds up to maintain pressure, It's like banshees screaming. Forced draft blowers, feed pumps, oil pumps, air flow, burners burning, steam flowing. There are limits. The engineroom throttleman isn't supposed to take pressure below 1120 psi. That's the prescribed pressure for boiler shutdown. At sea there's no electricity except that provided by steam. You need the steam to run the pumps to restart the boilers. I've seen it get close, and a couple times warned the throttlemen I was going to shut it down. They listened. My ship was designed for ASW, so we spent a lot of time chasing Soviet subs. We were armed with nuke ASROC missiles. Top speed was 27 knots. We were 4500 tons. But she was geared for ASW, so she would squat and gain speed pretty quickly when you opened the throttles. No roostertail, but a pretty massive stern hump. http://www.navsource.org/archives/05/01003.htm That says top speed 33 knots. Maybe with 4 boilers and overload burner tips. Never did that when I was aboard for 3 1/2 years. 1964-67. Flank speed was 27 knots. We would usually measure speed by screw shaft "turns," not knots. I never heard more than 27 knots mentioned, and can't remember the turns, maybe 40-50 max. Going from 1/3 ahead to full to flank is the usual speed progression of ships. If not done abruptly, there's no real excitement. From dead to flank is a lot of action and noise. From flank to full astern or vice versa is hectic, but only done in open sea during "exercises." It's been a long time, but my memory says port maneuvers were the "scariest." From full astern to full ahead repeatedly. Of course I couldn't see what was happening from the fireroom, but my imagination always said we about to run something down or hit a dock. Sorry if this is "too much information." No way is that "too much"! That's excellent. I hope you have this stuff written down for your family etc. I never tire of hearing tales of how things actually ran and what happened in the workplace. You get more than enough of the political history - we should hear more of the stories of the people who did the jobs. Thanks for taking the time. |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
|
Maptech Offshore Navigator
On Fri, 27 Sep 2013 23:15:23 -0700 (PDT),
wrote: Hi Vic, I am curious as to the origin of "flank speed". ,, I have never heard of it before and though Wikipedia defines it, there is no reference to the origin o the tem. Cheers Peter From www.history.navy.mil Flank Speed One quarter more than standard speed except for cruisers, destroyers, light mine layers and fast aircraft carriers. In cruisers, destroyers, light mine layers and fast aircraft carriers it is ten knots more than standard speed. This is certainly a U.S. term but I don't know whether the royal navy uses the term or not.... so you have an excuse :-) -- Cheers, Bruce in Bangkok |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
Thanks gentlemen; very much appreciated.
I had recently bought and watched the DVD "Convoy, War for the Atlantic", a serious lengthy documentary series produced in England. I'd reccommend it t anyobe both the archive film footage an the information. Although not mentioned in this documentary, a little known fact is that Malaysia's Penang Island was home to a fleet of long range German submarines that preyed upon Allied shipping during WWII. They shared a Japanese submarine base. Apparently the submariners of both countries despsed each other, inly due to the Germans' arrogance and sense of racial superiority. A private outfit has cleared the overgrown jungle that has hidden most of the site and it is now open to visitore. Ciao Peter |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
On Sat, 28 Sep 2013 12:31:30 +0300, injipoint
wrote: On 28/09/2013 9:15 AM, wrote: Hi Vic, I am curious as to the origin of "flank speed". ,, I have never heard of it before and though Wikipedia defines it, there is no reference to the origin o the tem. Cheers Peter It's a USN term afaik. If you are protecting a convoy and they turn to avoid a sub, you, the destroyer or frigate, needs to make up considerable ground to get between them, the targets, and the bad guys. You needed to maintain a flank position between the two. I think your sub guys used it in WW2 to move as fast as they could to get to their target positions. Although, in those days, almost anything could outrun a sub. But they sure were hard to find :) Sounds right. I can only say for my DDG it wasn't an "emergency" speed as suggested by a Wiki I read. More "tactical." And when sea conditions allowed, all my skippers would use it sometimes for hours on end while in transit, say from the Med back to the U.S. Sure, fuel efficiency suffers, but if you have enough and some to spare to make it to port, or an oiler to rendezvous with, it didn't matter. Warship skippers - at least in the days of cheap oil - were probably no different than the typical power boater in that regard. "Let's get this baby moving!" |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
|
Maptech Offshore Navigator
On Sat, 28 Sep 2013 09:17:27 +0300, injipoint
wrote: I hope you have this stuff written down for your family etc. I never tire of hearing tales of how things actually ran and what happened in the workplace. You get more than enough of the political history - we should hear more of the stories of the people who did the jobs. No, I'm not a diarist. That's Skip. Most people would find it all boring and inconsequential. You kinda "have to be there." I failed to mention something about operating a boiler during maneuvers. The opposite of steam demand. When the skipper is sending full astern and flank speed demands, demanding all the steam the boilers can produce, and heating all the refractory materials, tubes, headers and drums to the extreme, he might suddenly telegraph stop. If the burnerman isn't very fast in cutting out all but one burner, you can pop a safety. On my ship, the first one popped at 1320 psi. Never saw that happen on my ship, but some close calls. The results of that are consequential, because it requires some safety valve maintenance, and blows many clumps of soot from the stack, scattering it topside, and royally ****ing off the deck apes, who have to clean it up. I've popped safety valves as part of testing them, and the sound is deafening in the fireroom, but the fireroom is very noisy anyway. Once you get to steaming with 4 burners it's all shouting. One time I was coming back from liberty and a ship similar to mine popped a safety at D&S piers in Norfolk as I walked by, maybe a few hundred yards away. Don't know why. It was the most horrendous sound I ever heard. I'd wager that my mates have forgotten most all of it. Many took no interest in steam, and just did as they were told. I consider all that a bit differently, and remember all the jobs I've done, however lowly, their purpose, their high and low points. I've felt satisfaction at sweeping a floor well. And utter boredom in tedious jobs. Sometimes I've felt humbled by standing on the shoulders of "great men" whose combined work could assemble something like that ship I served on. And proud to be an important part of its operation. And sometimes I've witnessed utter stupidity. For example, I had a damage control assignment where my task was practiced by finding the obvious chalk markings put on the ASROC deck by the Weapons officer. Those chalk markings represented something I was to pick up, put in normal water bucket, and dump over the side. My only garb besides my skivvies, shoes,socks, dungarees and white hat was a pair a rubber gloves. What was I to pick up and carry in a bucket to toss over the side? Plutonium. The scary thing is I probably would have done it. I think many here have their own good tales. And of an age to tell tales that just don't occur any more. Time moves on. And the most interesting tales to me are the ones that no longer can happen. Old steam machinery is an example. I'll relate later when I was a Lilliputian in U.S. Steel, dealing with an 800 pound slugging wrench, using a 2000 pound hammer. I do believe I'm now the only man alive who can tell that tale. And the only one to write it down. |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
|
Maptech Offshore Navigator
On 28/09/2013 5:46 PM, Vic Smith wrote:
On Sat, 28 Sep 2013 09:17:27 +0300, injipoint wrote: I hope you have this stuff written down for your family etc. I never tire of hearing tales of how things actually ran and what happened in the workplace. You get more than enough of the political history - we should hear more of the stories of the people who did the jobs. No, I'm not a diarist. That's Skip. Most people would find it all boring and inconsequential. You kinda "have to be there." I failed to mention something about operating a boiler during maneuvers. The opposite of steam demand. When the skipper is sending full astern and flank speed demands, demanding all the steam the boilers can produce, and heating all the refractory materials, tubes, headers and drums to the extreme, he might suddenly telegraph stop. If the burnerman isn't very fast in cutting out all but one burner, you can pop a safety. On my ship, the first one popped at 1320 psi. Never saw that happen on my ship, but some close calls. The results of that are consequential, because it requires some safety valve maintenance, and blows many clumps of soot from the stack, scattering it topside, and royally ****ing off the deck apes, who have to clean it up. I've popped safety valves as part of testing them, and the sound is deafening in the fireroom, but the fireroom is very noisy anyway. Once you get to steaming with 4 burners it's all shouting. One time I was coming back from liberty and a ship similar to mine popped a safety at D&S piers in Norfolk as I walked by, maybe a few hundred yards away. Don't know why. It was the most horrendous sound I ever heard. I'd wager that my mates have forgotten most all of it. Many took no interest in steam, and just did as they were told. I consider all that a bit differently, and remember all the jobs I've done, however lowly, their purpose, their high and low points. I've felt satisfaction at sweeping a floor well. And utter boredom in tedious jobs. Sometimes I've felt humbled by standing on the shoulders of "great men" whose combined work could assemble something like that ship I served on. And proud to be an important part of its operation. And sometimes I've witnessed utter stupidity. For example, I had a damage control assignment where my task was practiced by finding the obvious chalk markings put on the ASROC deck by the Weapons officer. Those chalk markings represented something I was to pick up, put in normal water bucket, and dump over the side. My only garb besides my skivvies, shoes,socks, dungarees and white hat was a pair a rubber gloves. What was I to pick up and carry in a bucket to toss over the side? Plutonium. The scary thing is I probably would have done it. I think many here have their own good tales. And of an age to tell tales that just don't occur any more. Time moves on. And the most interesting tales to me are the ones that no longer can happen. Old steam machinery is an example. I'll relate later when I was a Lilliputian in U.S. Steel, dealing with an 800 pound slugging wrench, using a 2000 pound hammer. I do believe I'm now the only man alive who can tell that tale. And the only one to write it down. I still maintain that it's important that these things are recorded from the "doer's" point of view. In my day job, I travelled extensively to relieve manager's on leave. Whenever I went to a new town, I went on day one or two to the local newsagent to find books on local history written, usually, by the children of older citizens who related the tales verbatim or close to. I found them fascinating and still do. You don't need to be a diarist, just a teller of tales! I have a friend who used to frequent this group who lives on the east coast, perhaps SC or NC. He has wonderful tales of his exploits in the Navy and he only worked in support ships. They were interesting times for sure. You could get away with a lot more **** that you'd get sued for today. |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
On Saturday, September 28, 2013 8:41:17 PM UTC+8, wrote:
Thanks gentlemen; very much appreciated. Although not mentioned in this documentary, a little known fact is that Malaysia's Penang Island was home to a fleet of long range German submarines that preyed upon Allied shipping during WWII. They shared a Japanese submarine base. Apparently the submariners of both countries despsed each other, inly due to the Germans' arrogance and sense of racial superiority. A private outfit has cleared the overgrown jungle that has hidden most of the site and it is now open to visitore. Hmm ... German subs used a few parts of Penang for ports. The main port was a few pens on Pulau Jerejak (aka Pulau Jerjak). Those pens were subsequently converted into a shipyard. And the shipyard still exists, owned and operated I think now by Boustead, a government-linked company that among other things does contract work for the Malaysian navy. The other areas were Sweetenham Pier (the main port) and a couple of temporary pens on the northern coast. The U-boots involved were the Monson Gruppe [Monsoon group] working the Indian Ocean and, occasionally, the Pacific. Wikipedia has a page about the Monson Gruppe. Just N of Penang, one of the Monson Gruppe was sunk in 1945 as she was carrying a load of mercury to Penang, to deliver the mercury to the Japanese. The U-boot went down in 13 m of water. Twenty of the crew got out alive. One wrote a book about it (look for U-858 by Baudzus). Most of the mercury was retrieved in 1972 (a small legal suit was run: Malaysia recognised that Federal Germany owned the mercury). The wreck is still there and is marked on charts (and surrounded, when I last sailed past it by a dozen bamboo stakes driven into the seabed so trawlers don't snag their nets). So ... (1) the facts are not little known. They're well documented including on the internet and books; (2) the pretense that the so-called Penang War Museum at Batu Maung ("a private outfit has now cleared the overgrown jungle") is just that - a pretense for commercial reasons to suck in the gulls).. Bil Penang |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
On Saturday, September 28, 2013 2:15:23 PM UTC+8, wrote:
Hi Vic, I am curious as to the origin of "flank speed". The concept of 'flank' in that usage dates back to the US Civil War and is recorded as an 'Americanism' or 'US slang' from 1872. During the Civil War, journalists, civilians and soldiers all picked up the use of flank with its strategic meanings to outflank and attack the flanks, and to defend the flanks. As not used by the generals, 'flank' gained the additional meaning in US English of 'to dodge, to slip by'. Hence the usage recorded in 1872 of: "When the men wished to escape the attention of pickets and guards by slipping past them, they said they flanked them; drill and detail and every irksome duty was flanked, when it could be avoided by some cunning trick. Soon‥the poor farmer was flanked out of his pig and his poultry." (from Schele de Vere, Americanisms.) And 'flank speed' became a defined USN term - which Bruce nailed correctly - as one quarter more than standard speed or +10 knots. The speed necessary to protect the flanks of a convoy, the speed necessary to outflank a convoy, etc. Bil |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
Greetings,
Was that friend who used to frequent this post one "Larry"? I have been wondering what has happened to him a I haven't seen his name and he was a frequent poster. I much appreciated his very useful and practical advice. Ciao Peter |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
Thanks Bill for the info,
I only recently heard about the German subs from a Japanese friend, an old flatmate from university days. His uncle was based in Penang for a while during the war. When I get back home to Penang, I'll check it all out. On my short trips home by plane, I get little time for myself and am usually busy with my kids, work and friends. Are you living there or just passing through? Cao Peter |
Maptech Offshore Navigator
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 04:09 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com