What ever happened to Stealth Ships?

[@FoundAndExplained]

Download World Of Warships here: wo.ws/3QYgPLh to receive 300 doubloons, one million Credits, a free ship, 3 Santa crates, many in-game cosmetics to deck out your ships, and 7 days premium account time when you use code HPPYNWYR2024 .

[@MarquisDeSang]

What about the USS Eldridge? Ho yeah, it dissapeared.

[@mileswilson1776]

Could you do a vid on the new flraa helicopter and it’s status?

[@montobo_beerus]

Weather efects should not be a selling point in this day and age of gaming

[@Werrf1]

The _Zumwalt_ -class failed mostly because it relied on way too many new, untested technologies all at once. Meanwhile other ships, like the Type 45 destroyer of the Royal Navy, have also incorporated stealth lessons from the _Sea Shadow_ quite successfully.

[@jacobbrassard2776]

It’s cause it had a stupid gun and they didn’t build enough of them to even make the Amo worth buying

[@Werrf1]

@@jacobbrassard2776 The ships cost $8 billion each. If the only problem was the cocked-up gun, they would've refit them with cheaper guns. They had multiple problems, not just a bad gun.

[@jiaweizhang4166]

The Zumwalt class is unfortunately built for a purpose that never quite made much sense. She could have been wildly successful if the USN used the same basic design for an AEGIS cruiser to replace the aging Ticonderoga.

[@tonamg53]

Imagine when they were building the first nuclear powered aircraft carrier and didn’t failed….

[@Wannes_]

@@jiaweizhang4166 They're removing one of the radars, and will rip out the guns for a lot of VLS cells The original purpose isn't even talked about any longer ... Could have been useful in Yemen now

[@andyelliott3198]

The James Bond movie "Tomorrow Never Dies" features an exact replica Sea Shadow Stealth Ship which the villain uses to launch ridiculous drill head torpedoes at Navy ships in the South China Sea.

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

Makes you wonder about the darkstar in Top gun maverick don't it?

[@soccerguy2433]

Exact replica. Oh okay buddy

[@Peizxcv]

The original was sunk as seen in the movie by the Royal Navy

[@B0tch0]

​@@GreenBlueWalkthroughindeed but we already kinda know what those designs would look like. The B2 and B21 are rather similar to earlier designs (including the German design) because it's the best design for a bomber. The potential SR72 and upcoming fighters will follow similar "tends". The prototype from top gun movie matches that kind of evolution but the devil is in the details.

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

@@B0tch0 Yep and it could be the aurora or an concept for the NGAD that was aged back... Or it could be the US Gov just messing with us... We won't know till 20 or so years from now if every. Edit: Assuming OfCourse it's not pure fiction which it very much can be.

[@martinkasper197]

Pentagon: Where is our stealth ship? Navy: we can't find it anymore...🤣

[@MP-vc4nu]

That is why you don’t allow AIs to be available in public, ChatGPT took over it 😤

[@sebastien3351]

It turns out the RCS of the Sea Shadow was "to low" Its RCS was much lower than the sea scatter caused by the waves. So a radar could not detect Sea Shadow but because the waves reflection was much higher than the Sea Shadow. The Sea Shadow appeared as a slow moving hole in the water in the middle of sea clutter! To much of a good thing.

[@markderonde6226]

almost like a shadow

[@jonnda]

​@@markderonde6226Yeah like a shadow on the sea.

[@PaulTomblin]

They could have electronically added in some noise.

[@katherineberger6329]

Any documentation on that? That sounds like the idea that the Ohio can be tracked by looking for an area of water that's "too quiet" - maybe theoretically possible but even IF you could do it, it's far too dependent on local conditions.

[@sebastien3351]

YES, but where I don't remember. This information is many years old.

[@CRAZYHORSE19682003]

The Sea Shadow was just a technology demonstrator. It was never intended to be a in service ship.

[@Scorpio.1989]

February 2005, I was on a week long field trip to San Diego, and as I was taking a tour of the USS Nimitz we saw the Sea Shadow go past... really cool...

[@phiksit]

When I was working at National Steel and Shipbuilding in the late 90's I remember seeing it in one of their drydocks.

[@tibrokillen111]

I believe the Swedish Navy got some stealth ships, the Visby-class should be a stealth ship

[@tibrokillen111]

@@YellowLab-bg3os who doesn't love a curvy boat?

[@user-McGiver]

the French Frigate Belharra too...

[@vodl123456]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/r5CcmqmthbyWldksi=xkxPpOG90537UgB7 Norway have the fastest warship in the world 🙂

[@zeberto1986]

The inspiration for the stealth boat from Tomorrow Never Dies

[@christiannoble5549]

Just wanted to comment that. 🎉

[@fuckyomamafuckyosisterfuck6136]

Wrong, the inspiration for tomorrow never dies, was the stealth ship..

[@taitano12]

I thought they used the Sea Shadow as the Sea Dolphin II in that movie. Just looked, and I guess not. It's a good look-alike though.

[@aardque]

So cool to see so many shots of the thing in the San Francisco Bay, I grew up there and in those days it was in the "secret" hangar over by Treasure Island. Later after I moved to the Gorge on the Oregon Washington border, they brought a different one up here for "stealth testing," because the Gorge is so deep we often can't even get Sirius radio. This one was semi submergible and super fast. I managed to see the thing from up on Underwood Mountain, on the highway between White Salmon and Willard. It threw up the biggest rooster tail I'd even seen.

[@jonnda]

The zumwalt was also made of aluminum in such a way that they are facing issues with corrosion, and the main weapon they were designed to use was to expensive to fire. It's one thing to have custom ammo for 30 ships, it's entirely another thing to have custom ammo made for two or three ships.

[@capnthepeafarmer]

The Hughes barge was actually used to transfer the submarine capture vehicle into the moon pool of the Hughes Glomar Explorer. It didn't do any sub capture itself. It was merely used as a secretive transfer barge.

[@bernieeod57]

The barge was originally built for Clementine, the UAV Claw used to covertly rise the Soviet sub. It is now a floating drydock used by a private shipyard

[@1slotmech]

Bay Ship & Yacht Co, Alameda CA USA. (Right next to the Main Street Ferry terminal. You can see it any day you take the ferry. :) )

[@martinbose7163]

I worked at Bay Ship during that period. Part of the purchase agreement for the barge was that they had to demolish the Sea Shadow (which was inside of the barge) before they could take delivery, which they did.

[@yxmichaelxyyxmichaelxy3074]

No Soviet sub has ever been raised by a foreign foe. Who gave you this lie?

[@martinbose7163]

@@yxmichaelxyyxmichaelxy3074 Technically you are correct. The Hughes mining ship did get the grapple on one, but it broke apart as they tried to raise it, so they only got a small piece of it.

[@bernieeod57]

@@yxmichaelxyyxmichaelxy3074 Glomar Explorer. www.google.com/search?q=glomar+explorer&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&hl=en-us&client=safari#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:f81913a3,vid:iZzvnPnCTqM,st:0

[@TomFynn]

"So, how stealthy is our new ship?" "I'll tell you when we've found the damn thing."

[@donovanchau3483]

So they only ever built one? Cause there’s a ship that looks very similar next to the USS Albacore submarine museum that for years was just sitting by itself across the river from the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.

[@ebrann]

I have a friend who did helicopter testing with this ship out of San Diego. It so long ago I don't recall much other than he said his SH-60B flew missions with it for a week or so and then it was hard to find on radar, but the bravo radar was not great to begin with so...

[@GuitarGunner]

I took a San Diego harbor tour back '04 and part of the tour was passing by the Sea Shadow's dock. Not sure how it is nowadays but back then they'd leave the front door open so you could get a good look at it. Super cool to see in person.

[@boy_ka84]

Surprisingly, the stealth bomber made it through till to today while the stealth ship doesn't.

[@robertw1800]

Probably has to do with the fact that Airplanes only need to deal with Radar coming from below the plane. While a ship needs to deal with Sonar, and Radar coming from two different directions. Sounds like it's 3x harder, and a ship is much slower.

[@santaboy4818]

Plus submarines ARE stealth boats and have been doing a good job at it

[@uku4171]

​@robertw1800 There's also AWACS and other planes with radars.

[@SnowmanTF2]

@@robertw1800 There is also hydro acoustics, unless the stealth ship is traveling relatively slow for a military surface ship, it's propellers moving can be heard for way outside of radar or active sonar range anyway. The US has had a network off it's coast that could detect/track ships/subs near Europe since the 50s. So unless there is a lot of other traffic in the area, kind of hard to not at least give away the general area operating in.

[@Wannes_]

The Sea Shadow was an experimental ship Have Blue testbeds aren't flying anymore either ...

[@michaelhowell2326]

To have come out in 1985, it really does look like brand new tech, at least to the untrained eye. But was it just a proof-of-concept or could do anything besides stealth?

[@brettbuck7362]

BTW the intro was quite false, it was built for a very reasonable cost, which is what the Skunk Works was noted for.

[@MarcosElMalo2]

@@brettbuck7362 Worth noting that prototype cost can be much different (upward or downward) of production cost.

[@brettbuck7362]

@@MarcosElMalo2 Point being, they didn't have "an unlimited budget", it was very modest for a ship of this size, and would have been even less had the Navy not pestered them to death with nit-picking (Kelly's unwritten rule).

[@richardpaquette8352]

The Skunk Works had almost nothing to do with the Sea Shadow. It was built by Lockheed Sunnyvale at their Redwood City facility. And no - the Skunk Works is absolutely not know for reasonable cost..@@brettbuck7362

[@williamzk9083]

The WW2 Germans used an anti sonar coating on their submarines called “Albrecht”. Tested on 1942 it suffered from poor adhesion but this was fixed in 1944. A u-boat called the “black panther” caused the allies problems but it hit a mine. The Germans also used an anti radar coating called schornsteinfehger on their mast heads. Late 1944 tech so too late to make a difference.

[@Sherwoody]

The German submarine U-480 had the stealth coating. I think it was destroyed by a mine.

[@deepbludreams]

Big doubt, Sonar and Radar are two different things and no evidence exists to prove any of the German WW2 Stealth paint or coatings ever worked, when the HO229 was taken apart and studied (often called a stealth bomber by idiots), no evidence of the so called "stealth coating" existed. Sonar works by bouncing sound off the sea floor or whatever is in the water (subs, ships, fish, whatever) unless this WW2 German wonder project made a U-boat somehow have zero mass to allow sound waves to go though it, it did not work, *real* sonar protected stealth ships are stealthy to sonar by having very little of their hull in the water, sonar returns incorrect data. Radar works by bouncing fast as light energy waves off objects and measuring return samples, "stealth" aircraft avoid this by deflection or energy absorption and not allowing a return sample to the radar, this does not work on sonar.

[@williamzk9083]

​@@deepbludreams The German Anti Radar Coatings and Anti Sonar Coatings were extensively investigated after WW2. I will link to the reports but if you google . " The Schornsteinfeger Project C.I.O.S Report XXVI-24 May 1945. " We have many reports and were found to work very. Don't call anyone an idiot because often the bit of an idiot may turn out to be you. The anti Radar Coating was a German Navy Project arising from Doesnitz's 1943 anti radar conference and had nothing to do with the Luftwaffe. Never trust Natgeo, Discovery or the History Channel even if Northrop Grumann is involved. -Schornsteinfeger was a Jaumann absorber used on snorkels with hundreds of subs subs were equipped. It absorbed 96% of radar and reduced detection range to only 15% for 9cm radar in calm seas. Worked also with 3cm radar and was more effective in rough seas due to the reduced signal to noise ratio It had 9 layers of cardboard impregnated with graphite to make it semiconducting. This was impregnated with plastic to make it water proof. The density of the graphite increased exponentially to absorb the radar. For a metal surface Think of a wave hitting a vertical harbor wall and a wave reflecting perfectly. The Jaumann absorber is like a gently slopped beach, the wave does not reflect immediately but is absorbed in pebbles and rocks as it surges up the slope. What little reflects cancels with the incoming wave. -The other absorber was the Wesh Absorber also used on u-boats. -This worked using ferrite (iron oxide) materials with crystal structures tailored to different wavelengths. Wheras the Jaumann absorber absorbed 96% at its optimal wavelength the 80% at 1/3d wavelength 3 wavelengths the Wesh worked at 90% but spread over about 10 times the range. -Wesh was only 2mm to 4mm thick and made of corrugated rubber. It was used on the curved pats of the snorkel and periscope where the jaumann absorber was harder to fit. -The two methods Jaumann absorber and Ferrite could be combined to achieve 99% absorption across a wide band. This was not used in service due to the end of the war. -Proof the Germans had effective radar absorbers.

[@williamzk9083]

@@deepbludreams - I have posted above on German anti radar coatings used on their submarine snorkels and periscopes. I have given declassified Government sources. -Now I will post on the Albrecht anti sonar coating applied to u-boat hulls. -Albrecht consisted of metal mesh punched out with two or more sizes of holes. The holes were filled with rubber and the mesh covered in thin rubber. -The hole diameter determine a resonant frequency. Absorption of sonar and sound waves was at its p0eak at these resonant frequencies but also worked to either side creating a broad band absorber. -Albrecht seemed to reduce detection range against passive hydrophone sonar by about 15% which implies about 70% absorption of sound (power of 4 law) . It's effects against active sonar were to similar degree. In general a 50% absorption achieved only a 15% reduction in range (power of 4 law) but its usually 2-3 times more due to S/N ratio reduction.

[@ConanDuke]

8:18 Pontoon?

[@CheeseDanish85]

There was a Micro Machines model of this ship. I have one. It has a door along the top that flips open to reveal round missiles of some kind, ready to launch.

[@ThatChillWeirdGuy]

Imagine using these stealth ships today as drone carriers. 👽

[@mobilemarshall]

You just brought a memory I had forgotten back to the surface, these were so cool to me when I was younger.

[@erasmus_locke]

As usual it was the high cost and lack of necessity. In a fully fledged war with a neat peer opponent like China or Russia I expect we'd see a lot of stealth ships suddenly pop into existence.

[@aslamnurfikri7640]

And these ships would be unmanned

[@timeshark8727]

Calling Russia "near peer" at this point is just silly, especially in terms of naval power. Actually, in terms of naval power, calling China "near peer" is silly too. China's total fleet has similar combat power to a single US carrier group... the US has 11 carriers.

[@mynamejef7963]

Russia stinks at war lmaoooo

[@NACLGames]

​@@timeshark8727 OK chest-thumper, calm down. Russia's navy has seen better days, but it would be unwise to dismiss China's navy. It doesn't need to be as large or as "powerful" in total, it only has to exert power where it's needed, which currently remains the South China Sea, and in case of a hot war, the Sea of Japan. In terms of technology and applied power within a region, China is comfortably "near-peer", and the USA having to work hard to ensure they stay ahead. Both countries has technologies and advantages the other lacks. That kind of hubris is the kind that led Russia to lose a modern battlecruiser. Fortunately for the USA, it's top military officers aren't as myopic as you are.

[@artemplatov1982]

​@@timeshark8727 then why Ukraine ain't winning

[@phenomagator]

Maybe they got so stealthy we can't find them anymore.

[@charlesolinger9735]

Easy answer is. The sun comes up every day. Stealth goes away. Kinda lame.

[@mirthenary]

Then explain stealth aircraft🤔

[@protogenxl]

Flat black dot on a already dark colored north sea ocean in a shape to readily recognized as a ship

[@sandsandwich9217]

​​@@mirthenarysimple, stealth aircraft have the speed advantage and could outrun and outmanuever missiles and other aircraft, while a stealth ship has the disadvantage of not being able to hide in the clouds like a jet fighter does, also Stealth Submarines have the advantage of outmanuevering and counter enemy fire by diving or deploying dummy submersible's to confuse enemy torpedoes. Generally Stealth Ships have the disadvantage of not being able to hide their radar cross section efficiently and not being able to outrun their enemies without depleting their weapons and other assets, once that ship is spotted enemy aircraft will be sent for support and destroy it, all in all stealth technology is only highly feasable on submersibles and aircraft.

[@Dumbrarere]

That's not how it works. Stealth in the modern day means a military aircraft or warship is invisible to radar and (to some extent) infrared scanning. This makes it difficult, if not impossible, for missiles to effectively track them. While we have mitigated thermal signatures in ships and aircraft somewhat, it's not enough for optical stealth to really work.

[@theradlad5615]

​@mirthenary Three words, sky high clouds.

[@PaulTomblin]

My brother (who was in the Canadian navy) claims he was on the bridge of his ship (City class DDE) when the Sea Shadow passed within less than a mile of them, but the radar screen was showing it 20+ miles away.

[@Johnthedagger]

Sea Shadow operated out of NASNI while I was stationed at Deep Submergence Unit. It was in and out a lot, but it didn't go out when the weather was sloppy, so it might not have done well in higher sea states. Cool ass ship for sure

[@richardpaquette8352]

Never operated out of North Island; was at Naval Station SD and briefly at the sub base.

[@Johnthedagger]

@@richardpaquette8352 Did Subbase Point Loma two tours also. Traffic sucked at both😉

[@ronansmith9148]

I have heard that a downside of these stealth ships is that they are to stealthy, meaning that while you can't see the ship, your radar also can't see the water the ship is displacing, so it looks like a hole in the ocean.

[@keirfarnum6811]

You mean it “can” see the water displacement?

[@MayaHaddad-u6n]

​@@keirfarnum6811pedant 😜

[@ronansmith9148]

@@keirfarnum6811 it sees the surface of the water. Stealth ships don't reflect anything, so it sees a hole.

[@kimleechristensen2679]

I've read that too. An aircraft with surface search radar flying high enough, can indirectly detect the Sea Shadow, as the return signal from the ocean surface will be absent where the ship is, so its detected because it dosn't reflect enough of the radar beams back, to mimic what that the ocean surface does. 🤔🤔🤔

[@許進曾]

@@ronansmith9148 It does reflect things back, but it will be too small and be filtered out by the computer as ground clutter.

[@FUBAR762]

Lockheed in the 80s sure was helluva company building stuff like that

[@DaShaneo]

During construction. Everyone in the HMB-1 referred to them as Nacelles. As my old man used that word so many times after that project and kept his word and never talked about it until his contract was up.

[@Stealth_Pilot]

Sharkbite looking ass ship

[@stillamarine1001]

In 1995 I was stationed at North Island Naval Air Station. Can’t say what I was doing on that base but I did see this ship come in while on duty. It was all hush hush stuff.

[@harryjohnson9215]

Talk to the R class battleship about stealth Bombarding a port without the port knowing it was there

[@NinjaMan47]

The thing is we already invented Stealth ships over a century ago, they are called Submarines.

[@grimmlinn]

Which are significantly slower and vulnerable while surfacing. The sea shadow was for quick insertion of special forces.

[@Themaritimes99]

@@grimmlinn lol

[@kristinaF54]

I think they're called "demi-hulls" similar to a catamaran's.

[@EverythingRomeo_84]

I remember looking over and seeing this thing while driving on base at Norfolk Naval base. Looked so cool. Would have been fun if they gave us a tour or told us about it. It was out in the open no hanger or anything they just didn't give it any press like it was a dying ship no one wanted to talk about. Like fast and the furious Tokyo drift.

[@1337flite]

Seems to work for RN SSNs - take a look at the Astute hulls.

[@thechoku9765]

No matter how stealth a surface ship can be, it's no match for submarine's Stealth ability, and the fact that submarine can launch torpedo and missile while diving and being protected from air-strike makes us wonder why do we even need a stealth surface ship in the first place.

[@marcalvarez4890]

An order of magnitude cheaper...thats why.

[@thechoku9765]

@@marcalvarez4890 Dude, even the least expensive submarine is cheaper than average surface Stealth ship, and yet it still stealthier than them.

[@thechoku9765]

Damn i used too much stealth

[@deepbludreams]

Subs don't have "stealth" an undetectable sub does not exist, nor a "stealthy" one, good reason why subs spent the entire cold war tracking each other. Subs only have "Stealth" with in X distance of destroyers, it's why modern sonar systems are such a heavily protected state secret. They are just hard to surface detect because modern ones can just stay underwater for their whole patrol, surface ships can and do detect subs with hydroacoustic systems of various flavors, and after a torpedo or missile launch they pretty much instantly die from return fire in the form of surface ship launched torpedoes or helicopter anti-sub torpedoes/depth charges Also on the surface or at launch depth they are pretty easily detected, the destroyer is still the natural hunter of subs, subs have not displaced surface ships, hell even an entire class of aircraft exist to kill subs, not to mention aircraft dropped submarine detection systems. So no, Subs are not protected against air strikes, if anything they are the least protected, they cannot really defend themselves and any hit will in most cases sink a sub.

[@Veldazandtea]

@@deepbludreams Turn off the subs power. There. Stealth sub.

[@ralphrotten6912]

Got to see this ship in its covered floating dock at MARAD in Benicia CA. Impressive.

[@konstantinavalentina3850]

I think the model is wrong. There was a boat called "Ghost" built by Inventor Gregory Sancoff who wanted to make a cool boat for the Navy had propellers in the front of the torpedo-looking pods. The propeller in the front design created a supercavitation effect allowing the boat to go much faster. The Sea shadow takes many design elements from Gregory Sancoff's design. Whether or not Sancoff got anything out of the Navy "borrowing" from his concept is probably locked away behind security clearances and NDAs.

[@luishsteuer1660]

Stealth ships exist; theyre called submarines

[@ultrajd]

The original Sea Shadow was likely retired either scrapped or is being held in storage somewhere. However, see that the idea of a stealth surface ship is bonkers in my mind is being too shortsighted. Now a lot of people seem to get terms, mixed up or mixed together. For instance, I’ve seen people basically use the phrase stealth to equate to essentially invisibility. Now stealth doesn’t necessarily mean being visually unidentifiable or detectable. Current stealth technology is all about being invisible to sensors. After all, even on a flat featureless ocean , without advanced optics and stuff even trained naval personnel likely will not actually see a ship coming until it is at the point of which we would call on the horizon. And by the way, the average human can only see about I think it’s 10 miles before their brain essentially can’t discern what something is in the distance without enhanced optics. The sea shadow itself I like to think it was more of a proof of concept. Rather than an outright idea for a ship. Now the kind of technology that it used to float, and all that stuff is a well understood technology. In fact, there are private companies that are developing Both pleasurecraft, and even potential rescue vehicles that have a similar design in terms of how they go through their locomotion. One of which is very interesting, where the screws actually aren’t on the rear of the vessel they’re actually at the front. And they act like the propellers on an airplane, pulling the vessel through the water instead of pushing. But again, I’m more than willing to bet that the technology that was used for the development of the sea. Shadow is probably still highly classified and newer versions are likely on the drawing board, if not in small scale, prototyping tests. Vessels like this would be ideal for the deployment of special forces units, or even to be used as scouting vessels. Hell, another idea would be use the overall design, but shrink it and turn it into an un spy device or something. Honestly, the overall idea of a vessel like the sea shadow at least I personally feel is scientifically and tactically sound. Think about it this way. The Comanche. The space age looking stealth helicopter that would’ve probably supported and then maybe it some point replaced the attack helicopters such as the Apache and cobra. Allegedly that program was also shelved, but we also need to take any consideration. The fact of the alleged stealth Blackhawk helicopters that were used during operation Neptune spear. Something tells me that the stealth attack chopper idea didn’t pan out at least as much as we know they likely use the data for the development of these stealth versions of the Blackhawks. They say that the project has been canceled likely does not mean that the project truly has been canceled. It may simply be stated that way to pull it out of the public eye. Perhaps something was discovered that required more in-depth and secretive testing.

[@1slotmech]

Sea Shadow was scrapped. Its hangar, after sitting in the Suisun Bay mothball fleet for a number of years, was sold to a ship repair company for use as a floating dry dock; Bay Ship & Yacht Co, Alameda CA USA. (Right next to the Main Street Ferry terminal. You can see it any day you take the ferry. :) )

[@mattevans4377]

Honestly I think this kind of ship makes the most sense as a transport. Drive up to a shore undetected, unload a special forces team, and then back off and let them do their thing, before coming back for them later on.

[@The-L-3]

Ah yes wacthing a great vid when its 2;20 in the night

[@raymondannas4496]

I remember having a micro machines model of this back in the early 90s.

[@mypuppydogtizzy1058]

you missed the most important reason why it was canceled and became a pur research vesal, Because 'clue' it shows up on radar like a 60 foot hole in the middle of your lawn. 'have you got it yet' it's problem was it was to good and showed up as a dark ship shaped patch on the radar screen

[@stunimbus1543]

wasn't this in the James Bond movie 'Tomorrow never dies'

[@jbingyou]

It was built in Redwood City not in the Santa Cruz Islands… “Sea Shadow was developed and built at Lockheed's Redwood City, California facility, inside the Hughes Mining Barge (HMB-1), which functioned as a floating drydock during construction and testing.” That’s in the Bay not LA

[@emergency_preparedness]

The word for the Nacelles is "Pontoon" at least that's what they are called on catamaran hulls.

[@BariumCobaltNitrog3n]

SX-70 meets SR-71. That's not the Santa Cruz Islands but Treasure Island, in the San Francisco Bay, a former Navy Base. Northern California.

[@ComboBreakerHD]

World of Warships ads are so funny like look how realistic every single detail is also here's Godzilla using a stack like a stripper pole

[@geronimo5537]

ultimately what destroyed the concept was none of that. it was simply cost being somewhere around 20x more expensive then projected and some 50x more expensive than a traditional ship. I have no doubt we still have some form of these in operation in some far away from city eyes.

[@HaydenCharlesFTW]

super top secret, but here are a couple of kids having a look over the rails...

[@piergaay]

09:40 The project was so secret only todlings had permission to view. 🤣

[@vaughanellis7866]

I'm willing to bet that the "Sea Shadow" and any similar craft like the M80 Stiletto have been used in operational missions Infiltration/Exfiltration of special operation troops as their concepts would fit in with special operation doctrines.

[@richardpaquette8352]

Stilleto is a very high RCS small craft.

[@QalOrt]

I had a toy Sea Shadow as a kid and the top part near the stowage bay could open and reveal four missiles.

[@fallty]

Wasn't this particular prototype moored at the "ghost fleet" off San Francisco for a time? I seem to remember a series of photos of the ships with this among them.

[@randompanda876]

The fact that at one point this was a real ship is actually crazy

[@Veldazandtea]

They're still around. They're just good at stealth now. The best stealth ship is one without power. Can't detect it with sonar or radar. In WW2 the SAS and navy seals would often do missions involving this.

[@zombieshoot4318]

Always thought it was in a museum somewhere. Kinda pisses me off that it was scrapped.

[@noobepro_7146]

When i was a kid, i make this ship model from cardboard, man it took 2 weeks for me to finish it

[@rex8255]

Oh, Lockheed built it all right! And in the process learned they should have listened to Kelly Johnson when he said to NOT do business with the Navy.

[@Pavlos_Charalambous]

Imagine such a ship being combined with the drone technology

[@samsonCoby]

Fact: The Sea Shadow is in the Strike Series video games; Nuclear Strike, and Urban Strike

[@chadcurtiss5965]

Soo, I’m going to put my personal ignorance on display here with what is probably a really dumb question. Radar is radio waves essentially.. which is just a particular part of the light spectrum. So I’m just confused as to how we can accurately SEE or even take pics or video of stealth vehicles. Because that’s based on beams of light as well. Just in a different spectrum. If there’s anyone out there who actually has a solid understanding of how this stuff works, I would really appreciate it! Or maybe if there’s a KZbinr reading this, I feel like the explanation on this would make a good video!!

[@jamiehope4580]

End of the day it's the boots on ground that make the difference. And yanks lack that skilled area by light-years.

[@neves5083]

You're going to make an vídeo on that SWATH destroyer right 3:32 ?

[@offshoretomorrow3346]

You can't lift a ship 'out of the water' on pontoons. It will displace exactly the same amount of water.

[@FortuneZer0]

12:15 *For those not well versed in contemporary navy terminology: The Zumwalts were a fucking desaster.

[@dundonrl]

I took a tour of the Sea Shadow when she was moored in San Diego for fleet week (my ship was moored on the same pier). Interesting ship from the outside, but nothing spectacular on the interior.

[@HypnoticChronic1]

The primary reason the Zummwalt class was axed was due to the fact that it triggered the Nunn-McCurdy Amendment (you can look up what that amendment entails yourself). A secondary reason was due to the fact that primary weapon system the Mark 51 Advanced Gun System (AGS) was cost prohibitive to operate, this was exclusively due to the proprietary ammunition used with the system known as the Long Range Land Attack Projectile (LRLAP) a 155mm projectile being terribly expensive at a cost of $800,000-$1 million per round with a full load of 2,000 rounds costing roughly $1.8-$2 billion. As of now those guns are being removed and are being replaced with hypersonic missile platforms, so with those hypersonics along with the VLS already incorporated into the hulls at the very least we will get some use out of the ships as floating missile batteries. Suffice to say the Zummwalts along with the LCS classes were fanciful pipe dreams of a "21st century navy" incorporating far to many unproven technologies into singular hulls that fell flat on their face and are little better than floating lemons at this point, hence why we are reworking the Zummwalts to at least be somewhat useful and are starting the process of decommissioning the LCS classes, with 7 of the total number already decommissioned as of the time of this writing consisting of 2 of the Independence class and and 5 of the Freedom class.

[@richard--s]

Never had a sonar camera ;-)

[@seagie382]

Wasn't this in a bond movie?

[@alexbarnett8541]

The Cartel that purchase the Sea Shadow definitely chopped it for scrap.

[@zh84]

How did they get a ship that size to Death Valley? Without anyone noticing?

[@SamtheIrishexan]

What do yall think the capsule and disc craft are? Those are our most advanced. They just titrate the tech as science discovers it or is coming close and they canf suppress it.

[@aleksandarrudic3694]

Top secret - I bet I've seen it featured in a James Bond movie, that's how top secret it was.

[@heuhen]

USA had Norway's Skjold class over for testing, before they build Zumwalt class

[@russdavis71]

A huge waste of money and resources that the military is famous for in the end.

[@skankhunt9078]

I remember that awesome jame bond film where there was a stealth ship that was super duper awesome.

[@akiko009]

The stealth ships are so stealthy we don't even know they are there...

[@razorsharpview9090]

Gundam Seed Has Warship design that maybe are practically viable like the trimaran zumwalt like destroyer of Orb, Called Aegis Cruiser.

[@jaredkennedy6576]

Many years back I worked with a guy who claimed to have been doing design work on this ship in southeastern Connecticut. It always made me wonder if he was a bit crazy, or if the nature of the program just made him seem crazy.

[@richardpaquette8352]

He was crazy

[@kennethhummel4409]

I seem to remember that NAVSEA put the barge, sea shadow and glomar explorer back in 2006. The NAVY was willing to sell them to anyone willing to buy them. effectively ending the CIA branch of the US Navy.

[@loganschmidt-if6db]

Can you do a video of the J 10 jet

[@kanubeenderman]

"What ever happened to Stealth Ships?" gee, I dunno, they're stealthy, so maybe they all decided to disappear.

[@bobman36]

Never thought about it but I guess sonar Polaroid wouldn’t work on stealth jets, that’s pretty cool! Unfortunately I don’t own a sonar Polaroid to test this, only a one step

[@mindripperful]

8:53 they have something up their sleeves

[@raymondyee2008]

“Janes USNF 97” sees this boat making a cameo appearance.

[@DM-yj9qf]

i remember these from the James Bond movie Tomorrow Never Dies

[@robertarnold9815]

Just to note sonar and radar don't work the same way. Yes, sonar does bounce off pings or listens for noise, but radar doesn't actually use "reflected" microwaves. What happens is the target absorbs the MW's energy and then re-emits it back to the receiver; it’s a quantum thing.

[@fwootamala]

Suggest just calling the pontoons "arm floaties"

[@keithtaylor6259]

I remember seeing one of those things in a james bond movie

[@Rose_Butterfly98]

Isn't the littoral combat ship designed for stealth? The one that keeps cracking in weird spots? I think those are called pontoons, but frankly they're just twin hulls

[@splitsong7368]

Their comes a point in stealth ship design where you may as well go back to the mobile pressurized tube that goes pew pew from under the water.

[@TimInertiatic]

Seems like it would be a perfect torpedo boat

[@TheMeepster72]

They didn't go away. Even your typical modern destroyer is shockingly stealthy. That's why there was all those collisions in the south China sea a few years ago. The navy ships were trying to be sneaky and operating without transponders or active sensors that put out em noise. So the cargo ships couldn't see them and collided in the dark.

[@СергейСердюк94]

China and EU lead the way with this tech

[@tatonka411]

Reminds of the HMCS Bras D'Or