Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
skettles

Trident II

Recommended Posts

guardate questa foto presa da designation-system.net:

 

 

ugm133a1hf8.jpg

 

 

che stanno facendo quei tecnici?? caricano le nuke?? kos'è quel lungo coso che esce fuori dal missile??? :blink:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

perdonate la mia estrema ignoranza ma questi missili, i trident, sn nuke??? se sn nuke i tecnici non dovrebbero portare un abbigliamento speciale???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

non devono indossare un equipaggiamento speciale per caricare le nuke,non emettono radiazioni prima quando sono in magazzino per essere caricate sui missili

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Allora, i missili sono Trident, ovviamente (il più grosso è un Trident II, l'altro un Trident I).

 

Le testate non emettono radiazioni, e possono essere maneggiate (con le precauzioni del caso: il dosimetro che usano i tecnici delle apparecchiature radiografiche è sufficiente).

 

Questa poi è una foto pubblicitaria, quindi i missili potrebbero essere solo dei simulacri o esemplari privi di testate reali, e ovviamente quello che fanno i tecnici è solo posare per la foto, giacchè è ben difficile che un Trident I e un Trident II si trovino fianco a fianco in manutenzione.

 

Quanto al "coso" che fuoriesce, quello è una specie di scudo aerodinamico telescopico.

Esce poco dopo il lancio del missile, e crea un "cono" nell'aria che dimezza la resistenza aerodinamica del missile, a tutto vantaggio di velocità e gittata.

 

EDIT:

 

In questa foto lo vedete bene. Spesso non si nota perchè non ci si fa caso o la foto non è a risoluzione sufficiente, ma c'è sempre.

ssbn_trident_launch2_280px.jpg

Edited by Gianni065

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
non devono indossare un equipaggiamento speciale per caricare le nuke,non emettono radiazioni prima quando sono in magazzino per essere caricate sui missili

 

Le testate non emettono radiazioni, e possono essere maneggiate (con le precauzioni del caso: il dosimetro che usano i tecnici delle apparecchiature radiografiche è sufficiente).

 

Dovete perdonarmi ma proprio non me ne intendo di ste cose :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Questa poi è una foto pubblicitaria, quindi i missili potrebbero essere solo dei simulacri o esemplari privi di testate reali, e ovviamente quello che fanno i tecnici è solo posare per la foto, giacchè è ben difficile che un Trident I e un Trident II si trovino fianco a fianco in manutenzione.

 

Bravissimo!!! Tutto esatto :adorazione:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Allora, i missili sono Trident, ovviamente (il più grosso è un Trident II, l'altro un Trident I).

 

Le testate non emettono radiazioni, e possono essere maneggiate (con le precauzioni del caso: il dosimetro che usano i tecnici delle apparecchiature radiografiche è sufficiente).

 

Questa poi è una foto pubblicitaria, quindi i missili potrebbero essere solo dei simulacri o esemplari privi di testate reali, e ovviamente quello che fanno i tecnici è solo posare per la foto, giacchè è ben difficile che un Trident I e un Trident II si trovino fianco a fianco in manutenzione.

 

Quanto al "coso" che fuoriesce, quello è una specie di scudo aerodinamico telescopico.

Esce poco dopo il lancio del missile, e crea un "cono" nell'aria che dimezza la resistenza aerodinamica del missile, a tutto vantaggio di velocità e gittata.

 

EDIT:

 

In questa foto lo vedete bene. Spesso non si nota perchè non ci si fa caso o la foto non è a risoluzione sufficiente, ma c'è sempre.

:adorazione:

 

Come al solito basta chiedere e "l'esperto risponde" :okok:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
............

 

Quanto al "coso" che fuoriesce, quello è una specie di scudo aerodinamico telescopico.

Esce poco dopo il lancio del missile, e crea un "cono" nell'aria che dimezza la resistenza aerodinamica del missile, a tutto vantaggio di velocità e gittata.

 

qualcosa tipo la cavitazione di certi siluri-missili sperimantali (Barracuda e Shkval)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Assolutamente lì il discorso è un altro.

Ti rimando alla discussione sulla supercavitazione che, se non erro, aprii io in sezione marina qualche tempo fà.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sto guardando in questo momento uno speciale sul trident e sul v2... naturalmente sono messi a confronto come il primo e l'ultimo missile balistico. parlano del trident lo descrivono come il più moderno missile balistico mai costruito... è tuttora così? insomma lo speciale sembra un po vecchiotto. (non tanto per le immagini del 1943 xD ma per quelle riguardanti il trident).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

sto guardando in questo momento uno speciale sul trident e sul v2... naturalmente sono messi a confronto come il primo e l'ultimo missile balistico. parlano del trident lo descrivono come il più moderno missile balistico mai costruito... è tuttora così? insomma lo speciale sembra un po vecchiotto. (non tanto per le immagini del 1943 xD ma per quelle riguardanti il trident).

i trident sono i migliori slbm presenti sul "mercato". Migliori come caratteristiche intrinseche, come efficacia letale e come progetto realizzato rispetto ai missili balistici "mare-terra" degli altri paesi (russia,francia,cina ed india).

I russi dopo anni di crisi, hanno ripreso dal 2004 a sperimentare il bulava, missile simile al trident II, ma che nel corso di quasi 8 anni di test (più tutta la progettazione precente anni 90, partita con quella del missile americano), è incorso in diversi lanci falliti, per problemi tecnici e progettuali, ora forse risolti.

La situazione è questa, il trident II è l'arma più devastante lanciabile da un sottomarino.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

finalmente qualcuno ha risposto, tutto chiaro grazie

Edited by vorthex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Referendum on Separation for Scotland: Terminating Trident -- Days or Decades?

 

the UK Parliament’s Scottish Affairs Committee says that Scottish Separation creates the prospect of unilateral nuclear disarmament being imposed upon the Royal Navy and UK government for an indeterminate period, and says that the UK and Scottish government must fully detail the consequences of the removal of Trident as part of the whole secession agreement as soon as is practical.

No vote on separation should go ahead without the Scottish people fully understanding the consequences of separation for defence and the UK's nuclear deterrent.

 

 

Scottish Affairs publishes Report into the implications of terminating Trident

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trident: Nick Clegg warns against 'jumping the gun' on decision

 

The Lib Dem leader said the coalition agreement was "crystal clear" that no decision would be taken until 2016.

It followed Defence Secretary Philip Hammond, a Conservative, announcing £350m was to be spent on design work.

The coalition is split, with the Tories backing a like-for-like replacement for Trident, and the Lib Dems opposing it.

 

 

Philip Hammond fuels row with Nick Clegg on Trident

 

Philip Hammond, the defence secretary, on Thursdayintensified his dispute with the Liberal Democrat leadership over the future of Britain's nuclear weapons by saying that any alternative to the Trident submarine ballistic missile system was unlikely to be cheaper.

Speaking days after Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister, accused him of "jumping the gun" on Trident, Hammond told a defence conference in London: "As it is well known, our Liberal Democrat coalition partners want to look at the alternatives that would still deliver a credible strategic nuclear deterrent."

But he added: "I think the problem in doing that is, if we were looking at a whole new system, maybe that's a question. But given that we have the warheads, we have the missiles, and we are only talking about replacing the submarine, it is difficult to envisage a new complete system which you have to design everything, warheads, missiles, carriers, platforms from scratch, could ever be a more economic proposition."

Hammond later insisted Britain could afford a Trident replacement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trident II D5 missile achieves 143 successful test flights

 

The U.S. Navy supported the Oct. 23 launch of a U.K. Royal Navy Trident II D5 Fleet Ballistic Missile (FBM) built by Lockheed Martin (NYSE: LMT). The unarmed missile was launched from the submerged Royal Navy submarine HMS Vigilant in the Atlantic Ocean. The test marked the 143rd successful test flight of the Trident II D5 missile since design completion in 1989 – a reliability record unmatched by any other large ballistic missile or space launch vehicle.

 

“The Royal Navy and the U.S. Navy continue to demonstrate the readiness and reliability of this highly capable system, whose mission is to discourage aggression,” said Melanie A. Sloane, vice president of Fleet Ballistic Missile programs, Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company, the Trident missile prime contractor.

 

“The cooperation of both governments, supported by industry, provides a credible submarine-based strategic deterrent.”

 

The test, which was part of a Demonstration and Shakedown Operation that verified the integrity of the strategic weapon system following an overhaul of the submarine, was the 10th consecutive successful Trident II D5 missile test flight by the U.K. since 1994.

 

The missile was converted into a test configuration using a test missile kit produced by Lockheed Martin that contains range safety devices, tracking systems and flight telemetry instrumentation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trident II D5 Missile: Keeping Up with Changing Times

 

Dec 17/12: Excelis Inc., Colorado Springs, Colo., is being awarded a $15.7 million cost-plus-fixed-fee contract to provide professional, technical, programmatic, and operational engineering services to September 2016. $4,371,011 will be obligated at the time of award, and this contract contains options which could extend performance to March 31/16, and raise its value to $44.4 million. Their work will support of Navy Reentry Systems programs, including:

 

Reentry Body (RB) systems assessment, vulnerability, and nuclear safety and surety support

RB Life extension studies and analysis

Support for the development of refurbished reentry systems

Support for Strategic Systems Program’s declassification review program

support for Nuclear Weapons System Safety

Support to weapons facilities manager.

 

Work will be performed in Colorado Springs, CO (95%); College Park, MD (2%); and various locations throughout the continental USA (3%). This contract was not competitively procured in accordance with 10 U.S.C. 2304c1 by the Strategic Systems Program, in Washington, DC (N00030-13-C-0016).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/article-view/release/141541/uk-urged-to-plan-for-trident-transfer.html

 

UK Government Urged to Make Trident Plans

 

 

The UK Government has been urged to reveal details of any contingency plans ministers might have for moving the Trident nuclear submarines if Scotland votes in favour of independence.

Ian Davidson, the chairman of Westminster's Scottish Affairs Committee, made the plea after the Government said it was "not planning for Scottish independence or to move the strategic nuclear deterrent" from its base at Faslane. The UK's Trident nuclear weapons are entirely based and serviced in Scotland, and the SNP has committed to their removal if the country votes "Yes" in the referendum next year.

Today, the UK Government insisted it "does not intend to conduct any review on the future of the UK nuclear deterrent". In response to a report by the committee, it said: "The UK Government's position on the referendum on Scottish independence is clear - Scotland benefits from being part of the UK and the UK benefits from having Scotland within it.

"We are confident that the people of Scotland will choose to remain part of the UK and are not planning for Scottish independence or to move the strategic nuclear deterrent from Her Majesty's Naval Base Clyde."

It also warned moving the submarines from HMNB Clyde would involve a "huge cost". The response said: "It would be an enormous exercise to reproduce the facilities elsewhere. It would cost billions of pounds and take many years."

The UK Government challenged the Scottish Government to explain how the "quality and quantity" of employment in the region would be reproduced if the submarines left the base. It said the 6,700 military and civilian staff at HMNB Clyde was expected to increase to 8,200 by 2022, describing it as a "major source of employment for highly skilled workers and a significant contributor to the local economy".

Mr Davidson told BBC Radio Scotland he did not think the UK Government was "being entirely open" about its plans. "I think that they quite clearly are making contingency plans, that's just simply prudent management," he said. "But they understandably do not wish to be drawn into dialogue too soon before the referendum."

Mr Davidson, speaking on the Good Morning Scotland programme, added: "We don't agree with that. "We want the UK Government and the Scottish Government both to be open as much as possible on this and other subjects in order that the people of Scotland can make the best possible choice."

The Labour MP said the UK Government had "spelled out quite clearly" that if the nuclear submarines were moved from the Clyde, then all other submarines based there would also go.

The Ministry of Defence is "quite clearly saying it's one out, all out", Mr Davidson said, adding this would have "considerable consequences for Faslane because at the moment it's the largest employment site in Scotland".

In its report, published last October, the committee warned an "indeterminate period" of unilateral nuclear disarmament could be imposed on the UK if Scotland became independent. The committee heard that while nuclear weapons in Scotland could be disarmed within days and removed within months, constructing alternative facilities elsewhere in the UK could take upwards of 20 years. Mr Davidson said at the time that that meant the UK would "lose the ability to operate its nuclear deterrent and effectively be forced into unilateral disarmament for an indeterminate period".

SNP defence spokesman Angus Robertson branded the UK Government's response "another scare story from the anti-independence parties". He said: "Answers obtained from the Westminster Government either through parliamentary questions or freedom of information make quite clear that Plymouth actually has more capacity for the nuclear submarines than the Clyde - and that the jobs dependent on Trident are around 500 - not 8,000 as they have claimed today."

The Nationalist MP went on: "The reality is that Trident is a jobs destroyer. "The Scottish Trades Union Congress have themselves noted that the huge financial outlay in renewing Trident will actually cost Scotland jobs - rather than safeguard them - with vital resources diverted from elsewhere in the economy." He also said that Faslane would have a "bright future in an independent Scotland as the home of Scotland's conventional naval force".

Mr Robertson said: "Trident is not wanted by either Scotland's Parliament or Scotland's people. If they want to fight a positive campaign this year, perhaps the anti-independence parties could begin by acknowledging this."

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Raggiunta quota 148 ....

 

Dissuasion : le missile Trident toujours au top ....

 

Le missile mer-sol balistique Trident II D5 compte 148 tirs réussis à son actif.

 

Pas moins de quatre missiles balistiques tirés en deux jours : lorsqu'il veut vérifier le bon fonctionnement d'une composante de sa dissuasion, le Pentagone n'hésite pas à mettre le paquet.

Du 10 au 12 septembre dernier, quatre Trident II D5 ont ainsi été lancés depuis un sous-marin nucléaire lanceur d'engins (SNLE) américain de classe "Ohio".

Les missiles étaient évidemment dépourvus de leurs têtes nucléaires.

 

Fonte .... http://www.air-cosmos.com/defense/dissuasion-le-missile-trident-toujours-au-top.html

 

Lockheed Martin .... http://www.lockheedmartin.com/us/news/press-releases/2013/september/924-ss-FBM.html

 

 

Evoluzione ....

 

287n9ls.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

il Trident II è la miglior arma imbarcata su di un sottomarino.

Direi,per ora, la perfezione assoluta come deterrente. Questo scende a mach 24, chiedetevi come si potrebbe fermare!

Gli States puntano su queste armi per avere la supremazia mondiale.

Su internet cii sono i video degli ultimi lanci di questa estate.

Edited by Guglielmo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×