Most of the research the US Navy did on cavitation had to do with nuclear
submarine propellers. I isn't just classified, it's HIGHLY classified. The US
subs have the quietest props. You can understand a noisy propeller would not
be a good thing on a submarine.
I was stationed at a Navy shipyard for a year. As a Navy safety officer, I had
access to all areas of the shipyard. All areas EXCEPT the propeller shop when
a nuke sub prop was being worked on. The prop was always kept behind screens.
There was always 1 or 2 armed Marines outside the screen. They didn't even
like me approaching them to chat. They always politely asked me to move away.
Dennis C.
Touche' 35-1 #83
Mandeville, LA
>________________________________
> From: Steve Thomas <sthom...@sympatico.ca>
>To: cnc-list@cnc-list.com
>Sent: Tuesday, September 24, 2013 4:44 PM
>Subject: Re: Stus-List America's Cup.
>
>
>
>
>The
Canadian navy once had a hydrofoil ship which would do better than 60
knots, as did the Norwiegans. The U.S. navy had armed and
operational hydrofoil patrol vessels rated at 48 knots, just under the 50
knot limit you mentioned. There must exist a body(s) of engineering
data on how to deal with cavitation issues. It can't all be classified. Can it?
>Did
the designers of the current AC boats just decide not to deal with the
cavitation issue, and deliberately choose to depend on rules limits for
safety?
>
>Steve
Thomas
>C&C27 MKIII
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
This List is provided by the C&C Photo Album
http://www.cncphotoalbum.com
CnC-List@cnc-list.com
