Military Review

US Navy develops Hammerhead homing mine

56

Mk 60 CAPTOR's homing mine aviation modifications


In 1979, the US Navy received the Mk 60 CAPTOR homing naval mine (mine-torpedo complex). In 2001, it was removed from service due to obsolescence, without creating a direct replacement. But almost two decades later, they returned to the forgotten concept, and now a new complex for a similar purpose is being created under the name Hammerhead.

Hammerfish Project


From 2001 to the present day, the US Navy has no homing mines / mine-torpedo systems. In order to close the empty niche in 2018, we launched a new program Hammerhead ("Hammerhead"). It is proposed to create a modern analogue of the Mk 60 CAPTOR with the same operating principles, but based on current technologies and solutions.

According to the plans for 2018, in the next 2019, a "request for opportunities" was to be released, inviting various organizations to develop the project. In fact, this document was not released until early 2020. For several weeks thereafter, the Navy planned to accept applications from potential developers. In April, an online conference was held with the participation of representatives fleet and competing companies.

The competitive design process has not yet been completed and a winner has not yet been selected. The best preliminary design will be chosen within a few months, after which a full-fledged contract will appear for the development of a mine and torpedo complex with the subsequent production of a pilot batch for testing.

The current plans of the Navy provide for the purchase of 30 experimental Hammerhead products by the end of 2021, with their help they will conduct tests, which will take no more than several years. In 2023, it is planned to launch a full-scale serial production and supply weapons in the arsenals of the fleet.

US Navy develops Hammerhead homing mine
Loading the Mk 60 product onto a submarine

Design Requirements


In terms of concept, architecture, etc. the new Hammerhead complex has no fundamental differences from the old CAPTOR. The Navy wants to get an autonomous product capable of being on duty at a given position and identifying enemy submarines. When a target is detected, a naval mine should release a homing torpedo. However, old and proven ideas are proposed to be implemented at a new technological level and with the introduction of useful solutions.

The hammerhead should have a modular architecture, which should simplify future upgrades. If necessary, it will be possible to change individual modules, improving the complex as a whole or increasing the characteristics of individual systems. Also, modularity will allow the introduction of new functions.

The Hammerhead will include an anchor module, a launching device, a communication unit, a data processing and control unit, and a sonar module. The most important part of the complex will be a homing torpedo - the serial Mk54 is used in its role. All of these products will be assembled into a compact device suitable for transport on a carrier and quick installation in position.

Quite high requirements are imposed on the complex controls. The mine must remain in position and be on duty for several months. With the help of its own GAS, it must monitor the situation and identify the noises of submarines. The data processing unit will store the acoustic signatures of all modern submarines, which will make it possible to distinguish between detected objects and determine the range to them.

When a target approaches a given range, the automatics must launch a torpedo. Coming out of the launch container, the torpedo will independently search for a target and hit it. Then the complex must transmit information about the attack and shut down. Reuse is not provided.


The principle of operation of a homing mine

To defeat enemy submarines, it is proposed to use the small-sized Mk 54 Lightweight Torpedo torpedo. It is a product of 324 mm caliber, 2,72 m long and weighing 276 kg. The torpedo is equipped with a heat engine that propels at a speed of over 40 knots. Range - 2400 m. The 44 kg warhead is delivered to the target using active and passive acoustic homing.

The Mk 54 torpedo was chosen due to its limited size and weight. Thanks to this, the launch container and the entire Hammerhead complex can be made as compact as possible and suitable for use on various carriers. In the future, torpedoes of other types can be added to the complex, which will be facilitated by the modular architecture.

Application specifics


The Mk 60 CAPTOR naval mine was compatible with a wide range of carriers that were in service during the years of its operation. Depending on the tasks assigned, it could be set using aircraft and helicopters of various types (from carrier-based fighters to strategic bombers), as well as through torpedo tubes of ships and submarines. After getting into the water, the product worked according to a given algorithm and got up on duty.

The main carrier of the new Hammerhead mine can be the XLUUV (Extra-Large Unmanned Underwater Vehicle) unmanned underwater vehicle. Such products will be able to carry several mines and deliver them to a given area. The forces of several underwater drones will be able to install large minefields and block dangerous areas in the shortest possible time. Compatibility with fleet torpedo tubes and carrier aircraft is likely to remain.


Shooting a torpedo Mk 54 from a ship vehicle

The Hammerhead complex is proposed to be used to create minefields in specified areas, both long-term and directly in the enemy's path. The experience of the CAPTOR product shows that such homing mines are a fairly effective anti-submarine weapon and are quite capable of protecting water areas from enemy penetration. At the same time, the use of modern technologies and components should provide certain technical and tactical advantages over the old product.

The future of mine


Almost two decades after the abandonment of the Mk 60 CAPTOR, the US Navy decided to return to the forgotten concept of a mine-torpedo system or homing mine. In addition, other new models are being developed in the class of mine weapons. It is expected that in the next 3-5 years, the promising Hammerfish complex will pass all checks and go into operation, expanding the anti-submarine potential of the Navy.

However, such optimism may be excessive - the project is already facing some problems at the very early stages. So, for a number of reasons, the choice of the developer and manufacturer is delayed, which can negatively affect the subsequent stages of the project. In addition, difficulties cannot be ruled out at the stage of creating and testing new controls and other equipment - such troubles neutralize the time and cost savings from the use of a finished torpedo.

The future of the new project directly depends on related developments. It is believed that the best results Hammerhead will show in conjunction with heavy unmanned underwater vehicles. Such equipment is not yet ready for operation, and without it it will not be possible to realize the full potential of the mine and torpedo complex. However, the creators of XLUUV and other similar projects have a margin of time before the completion of work on the new weapon.

Thus, the US Navy intends to fill the still empty niche in the field of mine and torpedo weapons with a new complex of an already known class. The Hammerhead naval mine will have a high potential and therefore will be of great interest to the fleet. However, the development of such a product will not be quick and easy, which can lead to delays at all stages, as well as problems during the implementation and deployment stages. In the coming years, it will become clear whether it will be possible to cope with these difficulties and return homing mines to the fleet.
Author:
Photos used:
US Navy, USAF
56 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Fan-fan
    Fan-fan 28 October 2020 15: 10
    +5
    Here is an example of how to effectively deal with submarines, we would have such a complex.
    1. Borik
      Borik 28 October 2020 15: 25
      +2
      So it is still unknown an effective or so-so complex, We must first try on a submarine, whether he will be able to hit it.
      1. Mountain shooter
        Mountain shooter 28 October 2020 17: 25
        +1
        Quote: Borik
        So it is still unknown an effective or so-so complex, We must first try on a submarine, whether he will be able to hit it.
        range 2400 m and there is some reaction time. At a speed of 30 knots, when the boat is "heard", the boat travels almost a kilometer in a minute! If it passes right over the mine, maybe a torpedo will be able to hit, although the speed difference is only 18 km / h. And if a little aside? The torpedo may simply not have enough range. And there is only one shot ...
        1. Kalmar
          Kalmar 29 October 2020 10: 20
          +1
          Quote: Mountain Shooter
          And there is only one shot ...

          So after all, mines, as a rule, are not placed one at a time, they are scattered over whole fields. Again, such devices can be mined in those areas where the enemy submarine will just be forced to go at low speed to ensure stealth.
          1. YOUR
            YOUR 29 October 2020 16: 08
            0
            There were such mines even during the Second World War. And they mined the paths of the probable passage of enemy ships or fairways. By the way, one of the reasons why the Americans did not use their UDC ships and other landing ships to land in Iraq. Iraqi also had Soviet and Italian mines in service. Two ships, the helicopter carrier Tripoli and the cruiser Princeton, were blown up on the Italian manta rays.
      2. Doccor18
        Doccor18 28 October 2020 22: 58
        0
        will he be able to hit her.

        The complex is promising, but the torpedo is too insignificant.
        A warhead weighing 44 kg.

        To defeat a modern nuclear submarine is clearly not enough.
        If only a group attack ...
        1. Kalmar
          Kalmar 29 October 2020 10: 29
          +1
          Quote: Doccor18
          To defeat a modern nuclear submarine is clearly not enough.
          If only a group attack ...

          It will probably not work to drown the submarine with such a charge, but it will still not gain health. In a successful scenario, you can, for example, damage the propellers and deprive the submarine of its course (or, at least, stealth: the damaged propeller will make noise). And if the nuclear submarine runs into a whole "clearing" of such mines (is that how they are placed?), Then here is a group attack for you.
        2. YOUR
          YOUR 29 October 2020 16: 12
          0
          Drowning is most likely not enough, and damaging, but no problem. The torpedo is self-guided, guided by noise, i.e. on the screws, will carry them down at a time. A very formidable weapon.
    2. Undecim
      Undecim 28 October 2020 18: 41
      10
      we would have such a complex.

      Anti-submarine mine complex PMK-1 "Golets" with anti-submarine mine-missile PMR-2.
      In service since 1972. In 1983, a more advanced PMK-2 was developed.
    3. Vadim237
      Vadim237 28 October 2020 23: 38
      +1
      Russia has such a mine MShM - a sea shelf jet-floating broadband mine for active covert and defensive mine laying from 533-mm torpedo tubes of submarines or from surface ships.
      1. Brylevsky
        Brylevsky 29 October 2020 04: 53
        +4
        The comparison is not entirely correct ... simply because the American mine uses a homing torpedo as a warhead, and this mine (and the like RM-1 and RM-2) implements a completely different principle of hitting the target. The combat capabilities of the American mine are significantly higher due to response radius apparatus non-contact separator , while our mine of the RM type (like the MShM) requires that the target pass practically over her... I don’t know about the MShM, I didn’t study it at one time, but the RM-1 and RM-2 have a proximity fuse response radius of only about 10 m, which means that a mine, when it ascends from a depth, should pass at a distance of no more than 10 m from the target, or hit it. Against this background, a homing torpedo as a warhead (the same "Hummingbird") looks much better.
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 29 October 2020 12: 41
          +1
          The MShM 2 has a radius of detection and destruction of 2000 meters - the principle is the same as that of the American, only that the rocket thrust is.
  2. Ramadan
    Ramadan 28 October 2020 15: 22
    -2
    Poseidon Defense Perspective
    1. Mountain shooter
      Mountain shooter 28 October 2020 17: 27
      -6
      Quote: Ramazan
      Poseidon Defense Perspective

      No options at all. Unless Poseidon crashes right into her. It is much faster.
      1. The eye of the crying
        The eye of the crying 29 October 2020 00: 17
        +1
        Quote: Mountain Shooter
        No options at all.


        Oncoming traffic is a great option.
      2. Kalmar
        Kalmar 29 October 2020 10: 23
        0
        Quote: Mountain Shooter
        No options at all.

        It depends on how far the mine can detect the Poseidon. It is possible that the mine will "hear" him at a sufficiently large distance to have time to bring the torpedo to intercept.
  3. OgnennyiKotik
    OgnennyiKotik 28 October 2020 15: 28
    0
    Ideal weapon for unmanned and unmanned systems. Any UAV, BANK, NPA are transformed into an anti-aircraft missile system with minor modifications.
    1. Brylevsky
      Brylevsky 28 October 2020 18: 25
      +8
      The tactical niche of such mine and torpedo complexes is the protection of their naval bases and the organization of "ambushes" in the deployment areas of our SSBNs. Good results ( for them) can be achieved if such mines are installed on the routes of the movement of merchant ships, because their routes are rather severely limited by economic feasibility. For example, there are not many routes from Vladivostok to Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, specifically, only two. If they secretly "shit" with such mines, then for us it will be a disaster.
      1. Doccor18
        Doccor18 28 October 2020 23: 02
        +5
        If they secretly "shit" with such mines, then for us it will be a disaster.



        And what a ... and taking into account the complete anabiza of mine-sweeping systems of the domestic fleet ...
  4. Narak-zempo
    Narak-zempo 28 October 2020 16: 37
    +1
    In general, as described in the article, conceptually no different from the "Catcher".
    A radical increase in the combat capabilities of such complexes can only be achieved by developing methods of communication with already installed mines. Otherwise, how to transfer an already installed obstacle into combat mode? How to promptly update target signatures in memory? Not emptying out every mine for service?
    1. Jacket in stock
      Jacket in stock 28 October 2020 16: 57
      +1
      Why take out?
      A small such drone comes up, connects and updates the database.
      1. Narak-zempo
        Narak-zempo 28 October 2020 16: 59
        0
        Quote: Jacket in stock
        Why take out?
        A small such drone comes up, connects and updates the database.

        Well, okay, but how to "inform" the mines about the start of the war? While the drone is floating from one to another, the submarines will slip through the barriers.
        1. Brylevsky
          Brylevsky 28 October 2020 17: 59
          +3
          Well, okay, but how to "inform" the mines about the start of the war?

          In addition to the war, there is the so-called "threatening period". This is when it is already clear to everyone that "just about, already" ... "Captor" could have been installed from aircraft, the new complex, I think, will retain this quality. So, in a "threatening period", the means of the fleet can be carried out explicitly (aviation, surface ships) or hidden (submarines) installation of a minefield on the routes of the proposed advance of the enemy and for the defense of their naval bases. In general, this is an elementary truth ... and this was the only acceptable option until they learned how to transmit information under water.
    2. Brylevsky
      Brylevsky 28 October 2020 17: 43
      +6
      Otherwise, how to transfer an already installed obstacle into combat mode?

      1) Sound underwater communication, by means of a coded signal. Or over a wire line if a minefield is set up to guard a naval base.
      2) By setting an appropriate time delay in the "Urgency Device" of the mine, although this may require information from the fleet's intelligence directorate.
      How to promptly update target signatures in memory?

      No way. What for? It is enough for Mina to know the acoustic portraits of her submarines. If the detected target is not his own, then it will be attacked by a mine.
      Do you want the mine to be "online" with your headquarters? This can be achieved if the mine will release the antenna to the surface of the water at specified intervals, then the communication session will be possible. The question is: who needs it and why? Their own will not go into the minefield, and the mine will react to the enemy even without "valuable instructions" from above.
  5. Undecim
    Undecim 28 October 2020 18: 46
    +1

    As you can see from the diagram, the new Hammerhead mine plans to use the container of the old CAPTOR with the new "stuffing".
    1. Brylevsky
      Brylevsky 28 October 2020 19: 04
      0
      I don't understand the meaning of "HF array", what is it? Is this something for HF radio communication? Although it clearly doesn't look like a shortwave radio antenna ...
      1. timokhin-aa
        timokhin-aa 28 October 2020 19: 37
        0
        High-frequency antenna, apparently hydroacoustic.
        1. Undecim
          Undecim 28 October 2020 20: 55
          +1
          High-frequency antenna, apparently hydroacoustic.
          Apparently, it is. At first I thought about the communication module, but then I found another diagram where it is indicated.
      2. Undecim
        Undecim 28 October 2020 19: 47
        +1
        I tried to find the answer to your question. As for me, the answer is in this figure. It is slightly different.

        As you can see, here it is more specific - "passive HF receiver". According to the program, the mine should have a communication module to communicate with nearby submarines, sensors and possibly other Hammerheads. It will most likely be based on an acoustic modem. That is, the "passive HF receiver" indicated in the figure will most likely perform the function of converting an acoustic signal into a digital one.
        1. Brylevsky
          Brylevsky 29 October 2020 06: 30
          +1
          Thank you so much for the detailed answer! Teach me
          1. Brylevsky
            Brylevsky 29 October 2020 06: 58
            +2
            taught the technique of the 60-70s, then one could not even dream of such a thing ... Combining mines into a single information field is, of course, logical: mines will be able to distribute targets among themselves and attack under the most favorable conditions ...
  6. ZEMCH
    ZEMCH 28 October 2020 19: 28
    +1
    Mk 60 CAPTOR. In 2001, it was removed from service due to obsolescence, without creating a direct replacement. But almost two decades later, they returned to the forgotten concept, and now a new complex for a similar purpose is being created, called Hammerhead.

    It's time for us to return to PMR-2E)) wink
  7. Knell wardenheart
    Knell wardenheart 28 October 2020 19: 54
    -1
    An interesting toy, but I would rather consider the use of such products as an element of cruising warfare. The submarines are now quite low-noise, they run fast + acoustics, etc., the chance that this product will intercept the submarine is quite modest, unless you thoroughly hit the production of these mines and put them really massively later. Which is quite expensive. Moreover, the countermeasures against such devices are quite obvious - a sound simulator on a BPA or a surface ship in the form of a towed installation.
    But as a weapon for damage to enemy peaceful or surface military shipping, it is quite an interesting toy. Conceptually. And there is more noise and less caution. And the main thing will be the potential ability to more economically harm enemy shipping without the presence of vulnerable forces in the region.
  8. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 28 October 2020 20: 25
    -2
    What if "shark maneuver"? The shark does not swim alone ... it is accompanied by sticky fish and pilot fish! If the submarines and the AUV are escorted by the "electronic explosive", "sticking and pilots"? what
  9. Alien From
    Alien From 28 October 2020 21: 29
    -1
    Wow, the dimensions of these mines ...
  10. Momotomba
    Momotomba 28 October 2020 21: 49
    0
    And from what depths should this product work?
  11. Bat039
    Bat039 28 October 2020 23: 07
    +3
    If we assume guidance only by noise, then a problem arises in the sense that a number of submarines of the same project are in service with several countries, and the destruction of a foreign ship, even by mistake, can lead to war with this state. Thus, fighting with one enemy, you can get a war on 2 fronts.
    1. Jacket in stock
      Jacket in stock 29 October 2020 06: 19
      0
      If such a world is placed near Vladivostok, for example, then what other fleets' submarine can be accidentally caught there? And even during military operations?
      Not those who have Varshavyanka.
      1. Bat039
        Bat039 5 November 2020 18: 45
        +3
        It still needs to be installed near Vladivostok, and in wartime anti-submarine ships and aircraft will be on guard there, and the same submarine submarines of the Russian Federation will walk in a low-noise mode, in an ambush mode. But by placing on your shores, or in neutral waters, you can destroy the neutral, which went to reconnaissance, or just to exercises.
    2. Kerensky
      Kerensky 29 October 2020 19: 23
      -2
      a problem arises in the sense that a number of submarines of one project are in service with several countries,

      Doesn't arise. Each has a specific signature. Like a fingerprint. Now any ship (and merchant) is registered "in the library". And they and we.
      1. georg 2
        georg 2 2 November 2020 02: 09
        +1
        [quote] [Does not occur. Each has a specific signature. Like a fingerprint. Now any ship (and merchant) is registered "in the library". And they and we.
        / Quote]
        Where such confidence? Are you dealing with these issues professionally or have you read a lot of Internet literature? So, I want to tell you, no one has automatic classification. And all these signatures are exclusively research concepts that are being worked on in a laboratory environment. Not so simple in this matter.
        1. Kerensky
          Kerensky 2 November 2020 10: 41
          0
          And all these signatures are exclusively research concepts that are being worked on in a laboratory environment.

          Not at all. There are some complexes (we will not trump names now), the segments of which are laid down at key points of shipping. There are not so many of them, about a couple dozen. These complexes remove the signature of any aircraft and transfer it to the "library". The same containers are laid on the roadsteads of the naval bases (and they have them and we) and in the areas of the training grounds ...
          That is, the "child" left the laboratory a long time ago.
          Moreover. I will hint that work is underway on the signature of the wake and gas analysis.
          1. georg 2
            georg 2 3 November 2020 19: 23
            0
            There are some complexes (now we will not trump names), the segments of which are laid down in key points of shipping. There are not so many of them, about a couple of dozen. These complexes remove the signature of any aircraft and transfer it to the "library". The same containers are laid on the roadsteads of the naval bases (and they have them and we) and in the areas of the training grounds ...

            I want to lower you from heaven to Earth. To talk about these topics, you must first understand what you define by the term signature, and in general, you need to professionally deal with such issues. Regardless of the subjective assessment of this concept, it turns out that this is a kind of classification feature inherent in a particular goal. A set of such signs, in your understanding, describes specific noisy objects. And if for each object a corresponding set of identified features is formed, then the issue of automatic classification can be easily solved. This understanding of this issue is erroneous, although very attractive, because this explanation at the everyday level is attractive for its accessibility and simplicity. However, to tell why the automatic classification for today only by noise is very difficult, or, scientifically speaking, it has too low probability of detection, too long history. Today, no one has an automatic classification of noisy targets, take this as a fact. The final decision on the classification is always made by the operator.
            1. Kerensky
              Kerensky 3 November 2020 19: 47
              0
              A set of such signs, in your understanding, describes specific noisy objects. And if for each object a corresponding set of identified features is formed, then the issue of automatic classification can be easily solved. This understanding of this issue is erroneous.

              Hmm! Why? If now, in practice, we can distinguish between civilian ships and naval ships, we can recognize the type of "merchant" by the noise of additional installations, we can estimate the type of engine (country of origin) and many other parameters in automatic mode, then where is the error?
              1. georg 2
                georg 2 4 November 2020 02: 58
                0
                Why?

                Because. I am not a sofa expert, for more than 10 years I have served in the North on a submarine in positions obliging to know all these questions, first the hydroacoustics team, then the Head of the RTS. Here's a DPL charging diesels. Nearby there is a "crowd" of fishermen and there are diesel engines on each. What is the difference? Yes, nothing. Diesel, it is diesel in Africa. Try to discern where who is. The noise of the nuclear submarine is similar to the noise of ships going under the turbine. Of course, ordinary transport can easily be distinguished from the noise of a nuclear submarine, especially with a trained ear of acoustics, but what an operator can easily do is not always easy for an automatic machine. And this is with a good S / P ratio of the input signal. And if there is bad hydrology, excitement, own interference, and even the spatial anisotropic interference of the ocean, but the signal is weak, generally a bum. What kind of automation is there. Now about the expression like "noise like a fingerprint". Remind me why the fingerprint is so effective in forensics? Because it does not change over the years. He is with you for the rest of your life. And now, by his drawing, one of a kind, you can determine who took a smooth object in his hands. Provided that these fingerprints are in the database. But, if the print is smeared, on the material, if the hand is in a glove, no database will help you. So, even in this case, certain conditions must be met. What is a similar imprint for a noise? That's right, its spectral image, and in the averaged form. Now bend your fingers, which affects the distortion of this image. Distance to the target, external interference, interference with the operation of the SAC, heading angles of the target, mutual depths of immersion, modes of operation of mechanisms and the mutual speed of movement of the target (Doppler effect), non-identity of processing channels of various H / A systems and the devil knows what, what, maybe I did not list. And all this must be compensated for, usually this is done with the appropriate software. But even in this case, the PL noise is a kind of cluster, which can number tens or hundreds of images for different situations. And then the laws of classification come in, according to which the number of signs should be. 5-6 times more than the objects themselves. Now count how many ships and boats have been built, multiply this by the number of images of one target and another 6. This number of features will not be processed by any machine. Here. And a professional doesn't need to explain such questions. And what we recognize is the operator recognizes by ear. And everyone else did not go too far. And don't read Soviet newspapers at night.
                1. Fizik M
                  Fizik M 10 November 2020 03: 23
                  0
                  Quote: georg 2
                  More than 10 years he served in the North on the submarine in positions that oblige him to know all these issues, first the hydroacoustics commander, then the Head of the RTS

                  well, so shitty you knew them ...
                  Quote: georg 2
                  Nearby there is a "crowd" of fishermen and there are diesel engines on each. What is the difference? Yes, nothing. Diesel, it is diesel in Africa.

                  fool
                  uuuuu, what a DILY knowledge ...
                  especially considering that "something" is issued by a specific seiner (with the captain's VIO)
                  about "underwater tractor drivers" - I will not be here bully
                  Quote: georg 2
                  The noise of the nuclear submarine is similar to the noise of ships going under the turbine. Of course, ordinary transport is easily distinguished from the noise of a nuclear submarine, especially with a trained ear of acoustics, but what an operator can easily do is not always easily done by an automatic machine.

                  technology does it very well
                  especially in the case of an "average" or poorly trained speaker
                  Quote: georg 2
                  That's right, his spectral image, and in the averaged form.

                  just THIS is the way to "nowhere"
                  Quote: georg 2
                  No machine can handle so many features

                  process
                  has long
                  and not supercomputers at all
                  Quote: georg 2
                  And a professional doesn't need to explain such questions.

                  ARE YOU a "professional"?!?!? belay do not make me laugh lol
                  Quote: georg 2
                  so the operator recognizes it by ear. And everyone else did not go too far. And don't read Soviet newspapers at night.

                  uuu what a DUMB of "knowledge" wassat
                  1. georg 2
                    georg 2 10 November 2020 03: 31
                    0
                    what a DRAGGED "knowledge"

                    Normal cognition. Sufficient, so as not to be conducted on all sorts of amateurish reasoning in this matter.
                    1. Fizik M
                      Fizik M 10 November 2020 03: 37
                      0
                      Quote: georg 2
                      Normal cognition. Sufficient

                      fool
                      Quote: georg 2
                      that would not be conducted on all sorts of amateurish reasoning in this matter.

                      taking into account how many JUNKIES YOU and just CHILDREN'S nonsense have written YOURSELF lol
                  2. georg 2
                    georg 2 10 November 2020 03: 35
                    -1
                    technology does it very well

                    Perhaps with a good input s / n ratio. So in this case the acoustician will also carry out the classification.
                    1. Fizik M
                      Fizik M 10 November 2020 03: 37
                      0
                      Quote: georg 2
                      Perhaps with a good input s / n ratio. So in this case the acoustician will also carry out the classification.

                      Monsieur YOUR "knowledge" wassat just DREAM lol
                  3. georg 2
                    georg 2 10 November 2020 03: 46
                    -1
                    process
                    has long
                    and not supercomputers at all

                    They are processing, you say? Read how the Americans plan to classify targets using their surface drone designed to search for submarines. You consider yourself an expert, I think you will figure it out and everything will be clear. And what you do not understand, so I will explain.
                    1. Fizik M
                      Fizik M 10 November 2020 03: 54
                      0
                      Quote: georg 2
                      Read how the Americans plan to classify targets using their surface drone designed to search for submarines

                      just with him there is no problem of classification - stupid because of the clear target tracing
                      Quote: georg 2
                      And what you do not understand, so I will explain.

                      Monsieur, with YOUR DUMB wassat "level" lol knowledge in modern hydroacoustics, YOU can only explain to the ducks in the bathroom "murzilka" lol
            2. Fizik M
              Fizik M 10 November 2020 03: 17
              0
              Quote: georg 2
              Today, no one has an automatic classification of noisy targets, take this as a fact.

              Yes
              and many
              incl. in RF
              with pretty good efficiency for REAL goals (including the "newest" ones)
              1. georg 2
                georg 2 10 November 2020 03: 28
                -1
                Yes
                and many
                incl. in RF
                with pretty good efficiency for REAL goals

                That's exactly what the cool specialists told me at EGAP back in 1986. I didn't believe them.
                1. Fizik M
                  Fizik M 10 November 2020 03: 39
                  0
                  Quote: georg 2
                  back in 1986, cool specialists

                  what happened in 1986 is not even the level of "Skat-3" (where it can work well only under very harsh CONDITIONS)
                  but after 1986 a lot has changed
                  and new complexes (including very small-sized ones) received "somewhat large" opportunities
  12. Eug
    Eug 29 October 2020 14: 43
    0
    Wasn't there anything like that in the Soviet Navy? In Kharkov, NPO Carbonat (a research institute with a pilot plant) produced a very interesting powder that generates electricity upon contact with salty (understand sea) water ... The question is - why?