<![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device - io9 Comments]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device - io9 Comments]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> Great, just what we need... Another Philadelphia Experiment... The government just can't get enough seamen welded to its walls, can it?
Anyone see what I did there?

~Y

Upsilon

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> More Visby info from the manufacturer:

[www.kockums.se]

ccb

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> @Daveinva: Massive props for using "littoral" in a sentence. I love that word.

Pouncer

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> @corpore-metal:

Actually, AIP submarines are theoretically more stealthy than the nuke-boats.

Subs can't project power like a CV, and other surface ships are for protecting the CVs. Subs also aren't terribly good at a lot of the less-flashy naval missions, like anti-pircay, smuggling protection, rendering assistance at sea, humanitarian work, etc. Surface ships are also a lot cheaper per-capability, so you can have more of them.
-Kle.

Klebert L. Hall

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> I thought nuclear-powered submarines were already as stealthy as it gets. The US Navy's arguments for surface ships always seemed a little weak to me.

corpore-metal

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> @DocGratis: I applaud the return of dazzle paint. Those old Q-ships from pre-radar WWII looked like Italian Futurist design. Combining it with the Smart Paint Annalee reported on Tuesday will make for some very stylish death on the high seas.

Grey_Area

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> 29. ?????
30. Profit!!!!

Whyaduck

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> Who needs those ships nowadays? They are already invincible!

kurwinsky

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> @CyberKender:

That was Sea Shadow: [en.wikipedia.org] It looks like most or all of the USN ships under development currently have some IR/Radar signature reduction involved, even the next CVN. Makes it harder for weapon seekers.
-Kle.

Klebert L. Hall

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> A radar-invisible ship is all fine and dandy. The US built one years ago, that looks a lot like an F-117. They scrapped it because even though radar didn't reveal the ship, it revealed the big arrow of it's wake pointing at the ship just fine.

CyberKender

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> That's what it reminds me of, The Man From Atlantis!
-who is it...Rodney?

strider_mt2k

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> @Annalee Newitz: I miss Roy Scheider... and to a lesser extent Jonathan Brandis.

Grrsn Dn

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> I miss Seaquest . . .

Annalee Newitz

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> "Sir I believe we may be under attack!"

"There is nothing on radar you fool!"

"no, but there is a giant white boat headed straight for us!"

"ensign, if it ain't on radar, it don't exisist. You've got a lot to lea.."
KABLAM!!!

Grrsn Dn

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> @mitchel_stevens: Ahahaha. If that one quote doesn't say it all.

PVIII

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> now really, in the wide open sea from miles away you're going to be able to spot a wake, especially on the choppy open water? Not to mention that you wouldn't see anything on radar so you wouldn't even know to be looking for a wake in the first place.

toopersent

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> @PVIII:
sweet christmas, i forgot about that show.
enough to wiki it and find:

"In the series' final installment Miles Hawkins meets his death disposing of an invisible, prehistoric dinosaur."

mitchel_stevens

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> Its a corvette as the article says. Mainly used for anti-submarine patrol. The Swedes did sink at least one nosy Soviet sub. The US Navy is trying to design the next destroyer the same way but boy will it cost. Cost does not increase linearly with size. And invisible is with radar. When do ships and airplanes ever shoot at each other when they can physically see each other anymore?

mikelotus

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> @mitchel_stevens: Haha, I was thinking more M.A.N.T.I.S.

PVIII

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> so, who else immediately thought Thunder in Paradise ?

mitchel_stevens

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> While eyeballs on the open sea aren't as useful anymore, dazzle paint is still useful for ships used in the littoral-- makes spotting ships from shore difficult, not a small concern when confronted with direct-fire land-based anti-ship missiles.

Plus, it looks cool. Never underestimate looking cool.

As for invisibility in visible light, I think it's probably pointless for a naval ship, for the same point made above-- you can still spot *the wake*.

Daveinva

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> oopsy.

X: The Eliminator

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> It's a large patrol boat, or tiny corvette. Visbys displace 650 tons; some corvettes as much as 2500.

The US Zumwalt(s), if they ever get built, will be in the 10,000 ton range - yeah, I'm pretty sure they'll cost more, for some reason. This is more like the LCS concepts, but even smaller.

I do wish people wouldn't use 'battleship' and 'tank' so freely - if you don't want to be specific, you could always use 'warship' and 'armored vehicle'...
-Kle.

Klebert L. Hall

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> say hi to the boys on the eldridge for us.

btw, i hope the enemy doesn't aim for the giant part in the water made by your invisible boat.

X: The Eliminator

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> hmm, invisible boat in the water.

this "invisible to the naked eye" is a dumb idea. remember street fight: the movie? invisible boat in a river...maybe we should aim our giant weapons at the part in the water?

btw, say hi to the boys on the eldridge for us.

X: The Eliminator

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> Invisible? HA! I'll believe it when don't I see it...

deckard97

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> The words "you can't see me" need not apply.

botanicidal

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> Didn't they use this boat in the Street Fighter movie? Either that, or its the boat that Hulk Hogan tooled around in from the show about Thunbder Bay.

zenpoet

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> @PVIII: according to this, closer to 15x more :)

zerofritz

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> plans for the stealth ship were scraped when it was discovered that a giant white arrow pointed directly at the stern of the ship and followed it wherever it went...

tetracycloide

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> If it's like the ones I'm familiar with it'll be so energy intensive that they won't be able to fire weapons while it's active.

-what?

strider_mt2k

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> Sweet. Looks like the DDX (?) cruiser the U.S. Navy is building. I'm sure our ship will cost 10 X as much. Thanks no bid contracts!

PVIII

]]> <![CDATA[Navy Battleship with a Cloaking Device]]> A cloaked ship with dazzle paint... right....

I didn't know anyone bothered with dazzle paint anymore...

also this isn't a battleship. More like a light cruiser or a really big patrol boat..

DocGratis

]]>