New US underwater drone
Discussion
Here is a definition from the NOAA.
"Flotsam and jetsam are terms that describe two types of marine debris associated with vessels. Flotsam is defined as debris in the water that was not deliberately thrown overboard, often as a result from a shipwreck or accident. Jetsam describes debris that was deliberately thrown overboard by a crew of a ship in distress, most often to lighten the ship's load.
Under maritime law the distinction is important. Flotsam may be claimed by the original owner, whereas jetsam may be claimed as property of whoever discovers it. If the jetsam is valuable, the discoverer may collect proceeds received though the sale of the salvaged objects."
"Flotsam and jetsam are terms that describe two types of marine debris associated with vessels. Flotsam is defined as debris in the water that was not deliberately thrown overboard, often as a result from a shipwreck or accident. Jetsam describes debris that was deliberately thrown overboard by a crew of a ship in distress, most often to lighten the ship's load.
Under maritime law the distinction is important. Flotsam may be claimed by the original owner, whereas jetsam may be claimed as property of whoever discovers it. If the jetsam is valuable, the discoverer may collect proceeds received though the sale of the salvaged objects."
otolith said:
The original post making the point about navigation problems if it hits jetsam on the beach was eharding's.
But it was you quoted the definition and highlighted 'washed ashore'. My point was that it didn't necessarily have to be washed ashore. As to what e Harding's point was, we can only conjecture.Edited by Super Sonic on Friday 3rd May 17:25
GliderRider said:
I'm curious how it is controlled (receiving commands) and will communicate back. As soon as it transmits its findings it opens itself up for detection. Preumably transmissions will be by very short bursts at low frequencies?
Yes, lots of interesting questions surrounding this. I'm a bit behind on all things comms but is it possible to communicate from a surfaced vessel by laser directly to a satellite? I know starlink satellites network with each other via laser but is this possible through the atmosphere from something on the surface? AnotherClarkey said:
GliderRider said:
I'm curious how it is controlled (receiving commands) and will communicate back. As soon as it transmits its findings it opens itself up for detection. Preumably transmissions will be by very short bursts at low frequencies?
Yes, lots of interesting questions surrounding this. I'm a bit behind on all things comms but is it possible to communicate from a surfaced vessel by laser directly to a satellite? I know starlink satellites network with each other via laser but is this possible through the atmosphere from something on the surface? Im sure you could pack quite a big extendable ariel into the craft somewhere so only thats poking out above the water line.
Way before the enemy has triangulated your position you have finished you transmissions and dived again
Super Sonic said:
otolith said:
Pretty sure that was the point he was making.
I'm confused. What exactly do you think e Harding's point was?Move on.
sherman said:
Its cheaper.
No sailors to implode
A patrol can be indefinite. No need to resupply until it runs out of fuel and that can probably be done at sea.
I think one of the aims of the project is to investigate energy harvest from the ocean - if it is going up and down in the water column could it exploit temperature differences like the old OTEC system to generate power? No sailors to implode
A patrol can be indefinite. No need to resupply until it runs out of fuel and that can probably be done at sea.
Super Sonic said:
otolith said:
Pretty sure that was the point he was making.
I'm confused. What exactly do you think e Harding's point was?Simpo Two said:
That a sooper-clever drone should be able to avoid floating debris automatically, witness 'having a word with the team that developed the guidance system'.
Move on.
Wrong.Move on.
e harding said:
" The point he was making was that jetsam is commonly accepted to be stuff washed up on a beach, and if the bat-sub had a problem with that then it also had bigger problems in the "not being on a beach" department, /quote]
Which is incorrect anyway, re my NOAA quote earlier
Which is incorrect anyway, re my NOAA quote earlier
Edited by Super Sonic on Friday 3rd May 22:16
AnotherClarkey said:
sherman said:
Its cheaper.
No sailors to implode
A patrol can be indefinite. No need to resupply until it runs out of fuel and that can probably be done at sea.
I think one of the aims of the project is to investigate energy harvest from the ocean - if it is going up and down in the water column could it exploit temperature differences like the old OTEC system to generate power? No sailors to implode
A patrol can be indefinite. No need to resupply until it runs out of fuel and that can probably be done at sea.
Super Sonic said:
Simpo Two said:
That a sooper-clever drone should be able to avoid floating debris automatically, witness 'having a word with the team that developed the guidance system'.
Move on.
Wrong.Move on.
e harding said:
" The point he was making was that jetsam is commonly accepted to be stuff washed up on a beach"
Which is incorrect anyway, re my NOAA quote earlier 
s anyway.Besides, if you're querying the ability of a submersible to cope with floating debris, why would you be concerned to distinguish as to whether it ended up in the water deliberately or inadvertently? - or is this bat-sub supposed to generate autonomous salvage claims as well?
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff