RE: The great military genius

Join Our Community

Collarchat.com

Home Login Search

RE: The great military genius

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The great military genius

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The great military genius - 4/21/2017 2:09:20 PM

LTE

Posts: 461
Joined: 1/17/2017
Status: offline

Oh, I even remember a report the Japanese self defense navy was joining in. That is unlikely, probably the report is to further confuse the Koreans and their allies by having them search for Japanese destroyers also. More smoke to cover our actions. The President is to be praised for not endangering the Navy for political purposes when the purpose is to prevent L.A. and San Francisco from paying for Obama neglecting he growing problem.

(in reply to LTE)

RE: The great military genius - 4/21/2017 2:16:00 PM

Posts: 9362
Joined: 11/4/2015
Status: offline

the time is nigh

(in reply to LTE)

RE: The great military genius - 4/21/2017 2:19:10 PM

LTE

Posts: 461
Joined: 1/17/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: LTE

When I practiced for war part of that was practicing deception. Hiding myself. Traveling blacked out at night. Blending in using camouflage.
During WWII we spent a lot of time and effort pretending to be somewhere we were not. It is "miscommunication" for a purpose.

The world knows how many aircraft carriers amerika has. it knows which ones are laid up for refit and repair and how many are at sea and where they are.
You seem to be very interested in making excuses for dumb don and the deplorables. Why is that?

You are wrong. As I said, nobody has satellite coverage of the entire world. It's why countries still have spy ships and aircraft designed to search out enemy combatants.
Also, knowing what we are supposed to have and where they suppose to be and where they are going to be are two very different things, I'm sure you will agree.
It's good we had this talk so now you can feel safer that the professionals know what they are doing. You will not know where or how many ships we have so discussing it and condemning the President for not telling you the truth about where they are is an interesting way to contribute to our nation's safety or the world for that matter. Perhaps you don't care for our safety. You care only for Hillary. She lost. Get over it.

(in reply to thompsonx)

RE: The great military genius - 4/21/2017 2:31:48 PM

Posts: 471
Joined: 2/20/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: InfoMan
ORIGINAL: thompsonx

You have a rather wordy fashion of saying you do not know what you are taking about.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

odd - The way i read what i wrote was 'You don't listen, look it up yourself...'

Your claim your responsibility to validate it.
In the 1930's the French 'fantasque' class destroyer would do 45 kts.
The formula for hull speed in knots equals 1.34 times the square root of the waterline length in feet (HS = 1.34 x √LWL).
Carriers are somewhat longer than destroyers.

It is actually a lot more complicated then that... Speed/Length ratio you used (1.34) is a standard for measuring small class ships (sail boats and yachts) Deep Draft Ships with extremely high displacement have a very different value, often closer to 1, while shallow draft ships with lower displacement have a much higher SL Ratio, pushing towards 2.

This would of been painfully apparent if you plugged in the ship which you just mentioned in the equation you just parroted, as it has a waterline length of 434 feet.

c = 1.34 x √LWL
c = 1.34 x √434
c = 1.34 x 20.83
c = 27.91 knots.

So the class of destroyer which you stated having a speed of 45 knots has a hull speed of less then 30 using the equation you presented...

(in reply to thompsonx)

RE: The great military genius - 4/21/2017 2:41:00 PM

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: LTE
]ORIGINAL: thompsonx

How, exactly, does one hide a carrier battle group from a satellite? Do you really think n.k. does not know where the amerikan navy is?
Who is that stupid?

Nice try. Nobody has satellite coverage over the entire Pacific. Not even us. So you don't make it easy for someone to divert one to where you actually are by telling them where you are. You are not stupid. Just miss-informed.

Believe what you will.

(in reply to LTE)

RE: The great military genius - 4/21/2017 2:57:01 PM

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: LTE
ORIGINAL: thompsonx

You are wrong

That would be your ignorant unsubstantiated opinion which at current market rates is worth a little less than used shit paper.

. As I said, nobody has satellite coverage of the entire world.

Thus far you have said a lot of ignorant shit.

It's why countries still have spy ships and aircraft designed to search out enemy combatants.
Also, knowing what we are supposed to have and where they suppose to be and where they are going to be are two very different things

believe what you will.

, I'm sure you will agree.

What you are sure of is none of my concern.

It's good we had this talk so now you can feel safer that the professionals know what they are doing.

Sweet cheeks the one thing I am sure of is that the professionals have their head so far up their asses they cannot see daylight.

You will not know where or how many ships we have

Try reading janes and disabuse yourself of your ignorance.

so discussing it and condemning the President for not telling you the truth about where they are is an interesting way to contribute to our
nation's safety or the world for that matter

Sending the military to deal with shit that is none of our business does nothing to make amerika safer.

. Perhaps you don't care for our safety.

Perhaps you could tell us just which countries n.k. has invaded? Perhaps you could tell us how many countries amerika has invaded in the past 200+ years.

You care only for Hillary. She lost. Get over it.

Why would I care what happens to bill's wife?

(in reply to LTE)

RE: The great military genius - 4/21/2017 3:04:20 PM

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: InfoMan
ORIGINAL: thompsonx

You have a rather wordy fashion of saying you do not know what you are taking about.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

odd - The way i read what i wrote was 'You don't listen, look it up yourself...'

Your claim your responsibility to validate it.
In the 1930's the French 'fantasque' class destroyer would do 45 kts.
The formula for hull speed in knots equals 1.34 times the square root of the waterline length in feet (HS = 1.34 x √LWL).
Carriers are somewhat longer than destroyers.

It is actually a lot more complicated then that...

I am pretty sure I have already mentioned that.

Speed/Length ratio you used (1.34) is a standard for measuring small class ships (sail boats and yachts) Deep Draft Ships with extremely
high displacement have a very different value, often closer to 1, while shallow draft ships with lower displacement have a much higher SL Ratio,
pushing towards 2.

Cite please

This would of been painfully apparent if you plugged in the ship which you just mentioned in the equation you just parroted, as it has a waterline length of 434 feet.

c = 1.34 x √LWL
c = 1.34 x √434
c = 1.34 x 20.83
c = 27.91 knots.

So the class of destroyer which you stated having a speed of 45 knots has a hull speed of less then 30 using the equation you presented...

Imagine that...just as I said previously. So at issue is that either hull speed is not the final arbiter of speed or the 'fantasque' class destroyer never existed.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid

(in reply to InfoMan)

RE: The great military genius - 4/21/2017 4:01:53 PM

Posts: 471
Joined: 2/20/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Imagine that...just as I said previously. So at issue is that either hull speed is not the final arbiter of speed or the 'fantasque' class destroyer never existed.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid

Hey look at that - you got proven wrong, and rather then accepting that you are wrong, you instead twist it around and some how present it as if it is proof that you're right!

You don't listen, you're wrong, if you want to know why - look it up yourself.
there is no point in wasting time in explaining how hull speed works or how speed/length ratios are calculated or what it entails if you're just going to be retarded about it in the end and learn nothing while continuing to present nothing but ignorance.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

How, exactly, does one hide a carrier battle group from a satellite? Do you really think n.k. does not know where the amerikan navy is?
Who is that stupid?

What satellite are you talking about?
North Korea has launched only 2 satellites into orbit successfully... and experts believe neither of them work.

(in reply to thompsonx)

RE: The great military genius - 4/21/2017 4:27:12 PM

Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kdsub

Trump is calling it a miscommunication. You miscommunicate on what you want for dinner... you miscommunicate over what time does the movie start.... but you don't miscommunicate over where you send a multibillion dollar aircraft carrier.

Butch

One mans miscommunication is another mans lie.

Whatever happened to Trumps claim he never shows his hand ?

The man is a lying shit and everything is everyone else`s fault

(in reply to kdsub)

RE: The great military genius - 4/21/2017 5:37:53 PM

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: InfoMan
ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Imagine that...just as I said previously. So at issue is that either hull speed is not the final arbiter of speed or the 'fantasque' class destroyer never existed.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid

Hey look at that - you got proven wrong,

Roflmfao...when asked to show your work you were full of excuses as to why you could not do it. We are still waiting. You just
proved that the french destroyers of the 1930's could not go as fast as they have been clocked. By the same metric you now claim that
amerikan aircraft nuclear carriers can't even go as fast as 80 year old diesel powered boats.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

(in reply to InfoMan)

RE: The great military genius - 4/21/2017 5:42:43 PM

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: InfoMan
ORIGINAL: thompsonx

How, exactly, does one hide a carrier battle group from a satellite? Do you really think n.k. does not know where the amerikan navy is?
Who is that stupid?

What satellite are you talking about?
North Korea has launched only 2 satellites into orbit successfully... and experts believe neither of them work.

How is it that you believe that n.k. can only access data from n.k. satellites?
Jesus you are phoquing stupid

(in reply to InfoMan)

RE: The great military genius - 4/21/2017 6:26:57 PM

Posts: 471
Joined: 2/20/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: InfoMan
ORIGINAL: thompsonx

Imagine that...just as I said previously. So at issue is that either hull speed is not the final arbiter of speed or the 'fantasque' class destroyer never existed.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid

Hey look at that - you got proven wrong,

Roflmfao...when asked to show your work you were full of excuses as to why you could not do it. We are still waiting. You just
proved that the french destroyers of the 1930's could not go as fast as they have been clocked. By the same metric you now claim that
amerikan aircraft nuclear carriers can't even go as fast as 80 year old diesel powered boats.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

See - you are twisting words to prove your own ignorant statement right...

The truth is this:

The French Destroyer was a Semi-Displacement hull and thus the Speed/Length Ratio is NOT 1.34...
The fact that you used 1.34 without understanding why you're using it just shows your ignorance on the subject.

As a semi-Displacement Hull, the SL Ratio can be double the value you presented - and matehmatically i believe the upper SL Ratio limit for a Semi-Displacement Hull is ~3.1.

This means that the equation could very well be:
c = 3.1 x √434
producing a Hull Speed for that vessel of 64.5 knots.

An Aircraft Carrier on the other hand is Not 'Semi-Displacement'
what's more - it is intentionally manufactured to prevent it from cutting or planing which is what allows semi-displacement or shallow draft ships to go as fast as they do - this is achieved with a large bulbous bow node, which produces more drag keeping the bow of the ship firmly under the waves (most the time)... but because of that, it's SL Ratio is lower - Many large scale ships can only achieve a 1.1 SL Ratio.

so despite having an extremely long hull, the equation would be:
c = ~1.1 x √1040
for vessels like the CVN-70 Aircraft carrier - with it's Hull Speed being only 35 knots.

You see - and this is what's going to happen.
Despite being presented with information that proves you wrong... you're going to say either 'Cite' or twist a single aspect of the above information into something which you think proves you right, then claim that you're correct and that those that are arguing against you are wrong.

You're going to move the goal posts, branch the argument, and keep digging that rabbit hole because you can't ever let yourself be wrongn

(in reply to thompsonx)

RE: The great military genius - 4/21/2017 6:28:21 PM

Posts: 471
Joined: 2/20/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: InfoMan
ORIGINAL: thompsonx

How, exactly, does one hide a carrier battle group from a satellite? Do you really think n.k. does not know where the amerikan navy is?
Who is that stupid?

What satellite are you talking about?
North Korea has launched only 2 satellites into orbit successfully... and experts believe neither of them work.

How is it that you believe that n.k. can only access data from n.k. satellites?
Jesus you are phoquing stupid

The only nation which can reliably track ships in the Pacific is the United States...
And you think NK can read OUR satellite data?

(in reply to thompsonx)

RE: The great military genius - 4/21/2017 6:32:55 PM

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

Wow...imagine that...You can't prove your point so it is my fault.
You cannot cite validation for your opinions so it is my fault.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

(in reply to InfoMan)

RE: The great military genius - 4/21/2017 6:47:57 PM

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: InfoMan
ORIGINAL: thompsonx

How, exactly, does one hide a carrier battle group from a satellite? Do you really think n.k. does not know where the amerikan navy is?
Who is that stupid?

What satellite are you talking about?
North Korea has launched only 2 satellites into orbit successfully... and experts believe neither of them work.

How is it that you believe that n.k. can only access data from n.k. satellites?
Jesus you are phoquing stupid

The only nation which can reliably track ships in the Pacific is the United States...

Cite please

And you think NK can read OUR satellite data?

I really don't know how to break this to you sweet cheeks but there are a dozen countries with satellites.
Some of those countries have a relationship with n.k.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

(in reply to InfoMan)

RE: The great military genius - 4/21/2017 6:57:49 PM

Posts: 471
Joined: 2/20/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

Wow...imagine that...You can't prove your point so it is my fault.
You cannot cite validation for your opinions so it is my fault.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

What's the point of providing a citation if you simply deny the citation as not good enough?
allow me to elaborate:

FMN Le Terrible was a semi-displacement ship:

Proof.

(in reply to thompsonx)

RE: The great military genius - 4/21/2017 8:12:00 PM

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

Proof.

Proof of what? A picture of a boat. Lets see your math.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

(in reply to InfoMan)

RE: The great military genius - 4/22/2017 5:35:52 AM

Posts: 471
Joined: 2/20/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

I really don't know how to break this to you sweet cheeks but there are a dozen countries with satellites.
Some of those countries have a relationship with n.k.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

I know you're just going to ignore this, but not every satellite is capable of taking pictures of the planet. In fact, a majority of satellites up there are just signal relays for communication, not Earth Observation Stations capable of taking pictures of the planet. Furthermore - it doesn't matter what nations have satellite's or even if they share that information with North Korea... A Recon Satellites do not record and transmit video... they take stills of locations... and from their altitude, the size of the picture encompasses several hundred thousand square miles.

Sure, China or Russia could technically track US Ships at sea... but even if you had a Satellite that took a picture of the South China Sea every 2 minutes - you're trying to find a literal needle in a hay stack.

(in reply to thompsonx)

RE: The great military genius - 4/22/2017 5:37:56 AM

Posts: 471
Joined: 2/20/2017
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

ORIGINAL: InfoMan

Proof.

Proof of what? A picture of a boat. Lets see your math.
Jesus you are phoquing stupid.

It is a picture of the French Destroyer you mentioned... it is proof that the destroyer doesn't have a displacement hull and thus doesn't use the 1.34 SL ratio you used. It also proves my statement that it uses a different SL Ratio.

And because you just blow it off, it also proves exactly what i said about you - you'll just ignore proof and continue to be ignorant.

(in reply to thompsonx)

RE: The great military genius - 4/22/2017 1:11:28 PM

Posts: 1534
Joined: 11/13/2010
Status: offline

Don't tell me the US Navy had no means of knowing where their carrier flotilla was?

(in reply to InfoMan)

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The great military genius

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.209