Jimmy Carter in Aug. Pop. Sci. - The submarine, not the president!

[tom dougherty]

The August issue of Popular Science has a two page fold out with some details of the USS Jimmy Carter (SSN-23). Includes the Multi-Mission Module, but don't expect any detail. Actually, it has a nice cut through section of the pumpjet.

The magazine also shows vertical missile tubes in the bow to launch drones. Now, I managed to get within 10 feet of the bow of the Carter during the Commissioning at the New London sub base in February (pictures I took will be in the Sept SCR). I saw absolutely nothing that looked like any vertical missile tube hatches in the bow. Either 1.) It's another Pop Sci error, 2.) they haven't been installed yet, or 3.) The Navy has been reading the SCR, and carefully filled and blended the hatch covers into the hull using automotive putty.

I kinda like #3......



Edited By Tom Dougherty on 1121385071

[gerwalk]

or]http://www.subcommittee.com/forum/icon_biggrin.gif http://www.subcommittee.com/forum/icon_biggrin.gif

or]http://www.subcommittee.com/forum/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

[tom dougherty]

Now there's a scary thought,

Now there's a scary thought, Dragon doing another one of their freeform model kits.

As for Pop Sci, if I believed everything I saw in Pop Sci since I was a kid, we would be colonizing Mars, have flying cars, be vacationing on the moon or the bottom of the sea and everything would be solar powered.

[anonymous]

Now there's a scary thought,

Now there's a scary thought, Dragon doing another one of their freeform model kits.

As for Pop Sci, if I believed everything I saw in Pop Sci since I was a kid, we would be colonizing Mars, have flying cars, be vacationing on the moon or the bottom of the sea and everything would be solar powered.

Tom,

That would all have happened if our priorities were in order. We've wasted years on bad ones. Or they have is more like it. You know. They. Our government. The public.

The technology is up to it. It's the people behind it that aren't. Plain and simple.

Don't know about the solar thing though. But we could be much further into space if people cared about it more.

If there was a threat from outer space we'd be on Alpha Centauri by now.

Steve

[PaulC]

Supply and demand.

Supply and demand.

[anonymous]

Not much demand for space

Not much demand for space travel. To me it's top priority. We don't learn how to get our space legs and no matter what problems people think we have to fix down here first and we'll lose the whole thing.

One big rock hits us and we are all gone. Doesn't matter what you believe the gig is up.

Not to mention the jobs and industry it would create.

Much better to through good money and brain power away on another war.

Steve

[gerwalk]

If there was a threat

If there was a threat from outer space we'd be on Alpha Centauri by now.

Steve

Not a threat]http://www.subcommittee.com/forum/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

[anonymous]

LMAO! So true!

Steve

LMAO! So true!

Steve

[tom dougherty]

Which is why the most

Which is why the most important thing I listed above would be cheap, practical solar power.

[novagator]

http://img.timeinc.net/popsci/images/tech/tech0805carter_485x237.jpg

http://www.popsci.com/popsci....00.html



http://www.popsci.com/popsci....00.html

[tom dougherty]

Yep, that's the small image

Yep, that's the small image of the fold out, without the details of the pumpjet, etc. Again, I saw no signs at all of any vertical launch system at the Commissioning ceremony, and I was very close to the Carter's bow. Pictures in the next SCR.

[anonymous]

The comment about no terrorists

The comment about no terrorists under water was naive at best. More than anything in our military subs are the peace keepers.

Before an enemy can even fuel up their birds their facility would be a burned out sinder before they could even launch.

Our sub fleet should be the last thing to go if ever.

Steve

[tom dougherty]

Uuuhhh, no. While I think

Uuuhhh, no. While I think we all agree on the value of the submarine force, the policy of the US is not to launch a preemptive first nuclear strike. The Ohio SSBNs are a deterrant force, not a first strike weapon system. The intent is to survive an initial attack on the US, and launch a massive retaliation. Also, most missiles today use storable propellants, there is no fueling up period.

[seadragon021]

Tom...

Referring to your original post

Tom...

Referring to your original post to start this thread, go with option #1. Don't forget that JC started life as a Seawolf and still has the basic features forward and aft.