Modern Carrier Battle Group..Strategies and Tactics

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Engineer said:

Nope. A conductor such as a copper pipe contacting both electronics and liquid is sufficed to transfer the heat efficiently. The reason why your computer's CPU needs a heat sink is because the chip's surface area is too small for the heat to be transferred to air effectively. The mechanism for cooling your PC is different than how satellites/warheads cool their electronics. Stop making invalid comparison.


No need to move the liquid. Once activated, instant cold pack is naturally cold. The temperature difference between the liquid and the electronics would cause heat to move away from electronics and into the liquid. This occurs because of

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

. This is Thermal Dynamics 101.


The liquid doesn't need to be moved around, hence no pump or plumbing is required.

Click to expand...

thats passive cooling, not sufficient for chips reach 90c and generate alot heat. current microchip thats powerful enough to process large data in real time require active cooling(air flow or liquid flow through heatsink that connect to chips heatspread). its the flow of liquid or air that transfer the heat more efficiently. if you put a cold iron block on your hand, you notice the surface contact your hand is warmer compare to the top of iron block.

also in a compact system all pcb board are stack against each other(with gap between PCB board less than an inch), similar to Backplane design but more compact. its not possible to fit a sizeble heatsink or put a cold pack directly on top of the chip. best way to cool it is using some fan, blow air into the gap between each pcbs or seal the system and spray cool it with non-conductive liquid(done in airplane and UAV such as globalhawk, haven't heard done in a live warhead travel at extreme speed, also require reservior and pump)

anyway any liquid cooling system in an missile/warhead is not ideal, too many potential issues.

ok i'm outta here, its thanksgiving, i have to do my black friday shopping. happy thanksgiving everyone

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

s002wjh said:

thats passive cooling, not sufficient for chips reach 90c and generate alot heat. current microchip thats powerful enough to process large data in real time require active cooling(air flow or liquid flow through heatsink that connect to chips heatspread).

Click to expand...

This is purely your presumption, and this is where you are wrong. There is no such thing as air in space, so active cooling with air is not possible. Once again, your example involving PC cooling hardware as comparison is invalid.

All satellites utilize passive cooling for their electronics. They do not have any problem doing so. Micro-satellites also have to passively cool their electronics, and they do not have any problem doing so either. What happens on satellite carry over to the warhead(s) that we are discussing about.

s002wjh said:

its the flow of liquid or air that transfer the heat more efficiently. if you put a cold iron block on your hand, you notice the surface contact your hand is warmer compare to the top of iron block.

Click to expand...

It's the conductivity that determines the effectiveness of heat transfer. Air has low conductivity, hence a chip on your PC requires a heat sink. An iron block in your example, has high conductivity and draws heat from your hand and transfers the heat into air, which is why it feels cold. A copper tubing in contact with both electronics and coolant is sufficed in transferring the heat from electronics into the coolant.

s002wjh said:

also in a compact system all pcb board are stack against each other(with gap between PCB board less than an inch), similar to Backplane design but more compact. its not possible to fit a sizeble heatsink or put a cold pack directly on top of the chip. best way to cool it is using some fan, blow air into the gap between each pcbs or seal the system and spray cool it with non-conductive liquid(done in airplane and UAV such as globalhawk, haven't heard done in a live warhead travel at extreme speed, also require reservior and pump)

Click to expand...

False! There is no need of bulky heat sinks like those found in a PC. There is no need to blow air into gaps between PCBs or spray cool the electronics with non-conductive liquid. In fact, solution found in a PC cannot be applied in an vacuum environment.

These ever more absurd requirements of yours with pumps, plumbing, bulky heat sink and fan (Seriously? In space?!) is nothing more than poor attempts at .

are nothing more than copper sheets (on top of chips), connected to solid tubes that conduct away heat. They are routinely used in cramp space such as the inside of your laptop, and on satellites since there is no air for air-circulation in space. Just because you don't know about these techniques, that doesn't make them impossible.

An instant cold pack is a heat sink, but works by absorbing the heat rather than transferring the heat into air. It does not work indefinitely, but it would work long enough to absorb the heat in the amount of time that the warhead is active. The liquid doesn't need to be circulated anywhere, hence no need for pumps or plumbing system. No one have to set up elaborated plumbing when he/she uses one. You focusing on one type of liquid cooling system for a PC does not support your belief that liquid cooling would not work.

s002wjh said:

anyway any liquid cooling system in an missile/warhead is not ideal, too many potential issues.

Click to expand...

Not through the use of chemical reactions like that found in instant cold pack. Once again, with a cold pack no plumbing is required.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Obi Wan Russell said:

Aircraft carriers become obsolete the day aircraft become obsolete, and that isn't going to happen anytime soon.

That's the short version. Jeff's already done the long version for me!

Or to put it another way, as the 'Dreadnought' argument has resurfaced, Dreadnoughts were the optimum means of deploying big guns against the enemy at sea. Big guns were replaced as the primary naval strike weapons by aircraft operating from carriers. Those aircraft have now been replaced by?

Click to expand...

Very well said, Obi Wan.

Even though guided missiles are on the scene, and some with great range, they are not nearly as flexible, powerful (short of nuclear missiles) are able to alter course, targeting, approaches, etc. as a squadron of fully armed strike aircraft and their accompanying ECM support.

And being able to carry several squardrons around anywhere in those big oceans, or park them of hostile or potentially belligerent shores when the threat calls for it...just can;t be beat to this day.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

What about EMP space weapons? Could that render the CV group enough to be obsolete?

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Equation said:

What about EMP space weapons? Could that render the CV group enough to be obsolete?

Click to expand...

Carriers and other military assets are hardened against EMP.

A nuclear EMP event would be viewed as a nuclear attack and invite retaliation.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Equation said:

What about EMP space weapons? Could that render the CV group enough to be obsolete?

Click to expand...

Military warships are EMP hardened.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Hendrik_2000 said:

The same reasoning why they keep building dreadnought at the onset of WW II

Click to expand...

Indeed HMS Vanguard was commissioned in 1946 and the French battleship Jean Bart was commissioned in 1949 but completed in 1952.
)
)

As a matter of fact I think aircraft carriers will remain important for the next twenty years and more, but their role will be different from what it was, just as carriers before and after WWII were used differently and their role has developed since.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

A nuclear EMP event would be viewed as a nuclear attack and invite retaliation.

Click to expand...

You seem to be implying nuclear retaliation. I'm pretty sure the U.S. would not nuke China, because then China would return fire and wipe out a lot of U.S. cities. Conventional retaliation, no doubt, probably enforce a maritime embargo on Chinese ships which would hugely lower the standard of living in China. Then a lot of cruise missiles and air raids on the thousands of military and political facilities in China.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

A certain game changer in carrier operations will be the X-47B which is scheduled to begin testing off Nimitz class carriers in 2013. Fleets of stealthy drones operating as an extension of the battlegroup will complicate the task of any potential enemy greatly. These UCAVs can penetrate enemy defenses at will and provide the battlegroup with a complete picture of enemy capabilities without the enemy defenses ever knowing they were under survelliance.

Re: The End of the Carrier Age?

Geographer said:

You seem to be implying nuclear retaliation. I'm pretty sure the U.S. would not nuke China, because then China would return fire and wipe out a lot of U.S. cities. Conventional retaliation, no doubt, probably enforce a maritime embargo on Chinese ships which would hugely lower the standard of living in China. Then a lot of cruise missiles and air raids on the thousands of military and political facilities in China.

Click to expand...

If a nuclear weapon were detonated to produce an EMP against the US, then the US would consider it a nuclear attack and would respond. That response would very likely not be convetional. At the very least it would involve EMP detonations against the enemy conducting said operations. First use of nuclear weapons in the current environment would play to an absolute US strength both qualitatively and quantitatively (in all cases outside of Rusia on the quantitative side) and I do not believe any nation (outside of someone who is truly insane, like Iran or potentially N. Korea) would consider it.