The US Navy's unmanned underwater vehicle Guardian can operate autonomously for up to 45 days.

The United States Navy has selected autonomous technology from Houston-based Cellula Robotics. The Guardian, an unmanned underwater vehicle developed by this manufacturer and selected by the US Navy, boasts autonomous operation for up to 45 days and a payload capacity of 5,000 liters.

This was reported in the press service of the company.

The device is capable of autonomously exploring vast underwater spaces, traveling up to 5,000 kilometers from its base. Its sensors, various equipment, and other payloads are housed in modular compartments.

The company calls the Guardian an excellent solution for anti-submarine warfare, as well as various underwater and surface missions, including intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance. Its primary mission is cargo delivery in combat situations without GPS support.

Replacing the device's fuel cell with a battery will reduce its autonomy somewhat. In this case, it can operate independently for 20 days within a range of up to 2650 kilometers.

It appears that crewed submarines are beginning to give way to unmanned vehicles. The world's leading naval powers are investing heavily in these developments. They are striving to ensure that these vehicles can operate autonomously for as long as possible.

Comments

[Uncle Sam_2]

can take on board a payload of five thousand liters.

.
We like to measure in liters, but it would be better if they wrote it in tons...

[Flooding]

Quote: Uncle Sam_2

We like to measure in liters, but it would be better if they wrote it in tons...

We're talking about volume.
Those. cubic meters.

[Uncle Sam_2]

Thank you, I finished school. I was interested in load capacity.

[Flooding]

This is not a bulk carrier.
What is important here is the volume in which high-tech equipment or weapons can be placed.

[Uncle Sam_2]

Once again. Just for you: "equipment or weaponry" has mass. And its density is much higher than air and even water (!). Therefore, carrying capacity (in our case) is more important than volume. 5th grade, second quarter.

[Flooding]

Quote: Uncle Sam_2

5th grade, second quarter.

This is a submersible vehicle.
Buoyancy, diving and surfacing of which is certainly provided by a ballast system.
Due to the volume of ballast tanks, the carrying capacity can be greater or lesser within the limits established by the design.
But the volume in this case is a constant value.
Maybe this will make it clearer?

[Uncle Sam_2]

It just won't stop...
Dearest "know-it-all", ONCE AGAIN, especially for you! About "underwater vehicle, buoyancy, diving and surfacing"...

The article is called "Shipbuilding Basics for Dummies"

""""What is the displacement of a submarine?

Displacement is the mass of a submarine. It comes in two forms: underwater (when the boat is underwater) and surface (when on the surface). The difference is that underwater displacement is greater than surface displacement by the mass of water. The unit of measurement is a ton.This is an important technical characteristic of a ship. It is built into the design documentation from the very beginning. For comparison, consider this: diesel submarines have a surface displacement of only 2-4 tons. But the world's largest nuclear submarine, the Dmitry Donskoy, which is listed in the Guinness Book of Records, has a surface displacement of over 23 tons, and a submerged displacement of a whopping 48 tons. The difference is significant.

Where? Where does it say about volume?! In the morning, take your school bag and go to school! And don't be late!

[Flooding]

=Uncle Szm_2Where? Where is it written here about the volume?!

Well, since you allow yourself to switch from the language of arguments to personalities, please do so.
I will explain it to you in a way that is understandable, citizen ignoramus, who considers himself a know-it-all.

Displacement is an intuitively understandable characteristic: the volume of water displaced by a vessel, which actually corresponds to the vessel’s weight (Archimedes’ principle).

Archimedes' Law
buoyant force, numerically equal to the weight of the volume of liquid or gas displaced by the body.
Due to insufficient diligence in school, you take generally accepted units of measurement too literally.
Without delving into the essence.
The difference between the full and surface displacement of a submarine is achieved by collecting ballast water from the sea into ballast tanks.
It is the empty volume of the ballast tanks (and not the difference in tons!) that ensures buoyancy.

What kind of rude behavior is this?
Do you think it will be a one-way game?

[Uncle Sam_2]

What kind of rude behavior is this?

WHERE? Where, dear Dunno, did you see "rudeness" in your fevered brain? It is very revealing for narrow-minded people to accuse their opponents of far-fetched actions or rudeness without any arguments (or relevant knowledge).

ignorant citizen

- which is what we see here as an example, our "cultured" one!

Due to insufficient diligence in school, you take generally accepted units of measurement too literally.
Without delving into the essence

This is really funny! No need to fantasize! Why are you making up things that don't exist? For what reasons? A disorder? Domestic problems? Inflated self-esteem? Would you like to talk about this?

Archimedes' law

Excellent! To drag in the school curriculum by the ears, which I told you about!

Do you think it will be a one-way game?

I don’t like to play ANYTHING with ignoramuses, and especially with graphomaniacs who don’t have the courage to admit they’re wrong. and improve your grammar!
ONCE AGAIN! FOR THE LAST TIME! For the "especially gifted"!
"In commercial shipping, a distinction is made between deadweight cargo capacity (DWCC) and the total or gross deadweight of a vessel (DWAT). The former represents the maximum mass of cargo that a vessel can accept up to its maximum draft according to the load line. This value may vary depending on the actual load of the vessel with fuel and supplies, as well as on the planned navigation areas. The total or gross deadweight is a constant and includes, in addition to the total mass of the cargo, the total mass of the ship's crew, removable equipment and ship's stores (fuel, fresh water, provisions, etc.) [1].

The term "deadweight" is used only for merchant ships, and exclusively for cargo ships. Deadweight at the load line draft is an indicator of a cargo ship's cargo capacity and its primary operational characteristic. (from Wikipedia)
"deadweight" or "displacement" is measured in tons!, and not your fictitious, "but the force of insufficiently diligent studies at school" quantities.
For sim, I bow. Don't write to me anymore, I'm not interested in you at all. (And off to school! Off to school!)

[Flooding]

Don't get so excited.
I have accepted your discussion rules.

Quote: Uncle Sam_2

It just won't stop...
Dearest "know-it-all", ONCE AGAIN, especially for you!

This is rudeness.
From intonation to the fool emoticon.
I understand that you are not used to looking after yourself.
But this does not relieve you of responsibility.
You didn't mention Archimedes' law at all.

Quote: Uncle Sam_2

5th grade, second quarter.

Are these the very words that now deprive me of the right to remember school physics?
In that case, I'm sorry I had to write about Archimedes first.
Here's something from the 7th grade program.

The main physical law that affects a ship in water is Archimedes' principle.
It reads:
A body immersed in a liquid or gas is subject to a buoyant force that is numerically equal to the weight of the liquid or gas in the volume of the immersed part of the body.

You asked.

Quote: Uncle Sam_2

Where? Where does it say about volume?!

I answered you where it is about volume.
If you spent even a fraction of the time you spent writing impertinence trying to figure it out, it would make more sense.
Compare our comments by volume, meaning and amount of copy-paste.
Which of us is the graphomaniac?

[Flooding]

Quote: Uncle Sam_2

For sim, I bow. Don't write to me anymore, I'm not interested in you at all. (And off to school! Off to school!)

Only a narrow-minded person would write "don't write to me anymore" on a forum intended for the exchange of opinions.
Only a limited person would write about some kind of interest in an opponent.

[Uncle Sam_2]

Only a complete imbecile would suggest that people measure the carrying capacity of a ship without in tons, and in "boas", "parrots" or "greyhound puppies"...

[Flooding]

Quote: Uncle Sam_2

Only a complete imbecile would suggest that people measure the carrying capacity of a ship without in tons, and in "boas", "parrots" or "greyhound puppies"...

That's exactly why I didn't suggest it.
I didn't write ANYTHING about the load capacity at all.
As in the article, NOTHING was written about the load capacity.
But I answered the question of one ignoramus, who considers himself an educated person, about how the carrying capacity of a ship is related to the volume of displaced water.
And how important is volume for a submarine?
If you can prove otherwise, go for it.
If the number of emojis you used in your comments were directly related to your intelligence, you'd be considered a professor.

[Uncle Sam_2]

But I answered the question of how the vessel's carrying capacity is related to the volume of displaced water.

And again, unbridled sexual fantasies! Why? For what reasons? Disorder? Domestic problems? Inflated self-esteem? And again, no answer...
Where? Where and who asked for your "valuable," completely useless opinion?

The article didn't say ANYTHING about the load capacity.

You are our sick one, and that's what I'm saying!
If the quantity of letters used by graphomaniacs in comments translated into quality, you, poor thing, would be respected on this forum. BUT, alas... After reading your "dialogues" with attacks on the participants, "denunciations" and "verdicts" on something that you again imagined... No one calls you anything other than a "snitch" and a "provocateur"...
I understand your loneliness, your attempts to find friends, at least here, but your pathetic attempts to “be an expert in everything” will lead to nothing.
Without possessing basic (school) knowledge, much less narrow professional knowledge, or simply human qualities, you will continue to "drag out a miserable..."
I understand: a bad habit, poor upbringing, weak intellect, school vocabulary.
But still, you shouldn't step on the same rake at your age.
He's not a kid anymore.

You may be delighted with your own manipulation of words.
But from the outside it looks like a pathetic clown show...

[Flooding]

Quote: Uncle Sam_2

Nobody calls you anything other than a "snitch" and a "provocateur"...

You are lying, and it is telling.
One single character called me a snitch for bringing his boorish behavior to the attention of the administration.
I called him a provocateur because of his provocative behavior.
Just one small episode from your long comment, filled with nothing but insults.
But how much this episode says about your capricious personality.

Don't take on the role of arbitrator.
Don't dig through other people's dirty laundry.

[Uncle Sam_2]

You're lying

Here it is!! Just as I said! - ""denunciations"" and ""sentences"" of something that you imagined again!

One single character called me a snitch for bringing his boorish behavior to the attention of the administration.

- No need to be modest, baby! You've done this more than once or twice! - I've reread your attacks on the forum members!

I called him a provocateur because of his provocative behavior.

So you were "the very picture of modesty," but you called him a "liar and provocateur" just for the hell of it? For "educational purposes"?

Just one small episode from your long comment, filled with nothing but insults.
But how much this episode says about your capricious personality.

Bravo, "prosecutor and whistleblower"! Now reread your comments above!

Don't take on the role of arbitrator.
Don't dig through other people's dirty laundry.

MA LA (damn it) BABY!! "Did my question get through to you? To your mind, to your heart, to your liver and the rest of your rotten offal." (c) I had no intention of digging around in your shit! But sticking my nose in there is easy!
ONE MORE TIME! Displacement, carrying capacity, deadweight, - only in tons!

To school, running, dropping your slippers!

[Flooding]

Quote: Uncle Sam_2

No need to be "modest", baby! You've done this more than once or twice! - I've reread your attacks on the forum members!

I see. You've decided to hit rock bottom.
I have long since turned half a century.
What or who, other than your own lack of culture, gives you the right to address your opponent in this way?
These are the kind of people I call boors.
Even though you recently asked yourself the question "why?"
I never attack without reason.
I never cross the boundaries of decency unless my uncultured opponent allows himself to do so.

Quote: Uncle Sam_2

So you were "the very picture of modesty," but you called him a "liar and provocateur" just for the hell of it? For "educational purposes"?

Stupid man, why do they call liars and provocateurs liars and provocateurs?
For bad deeds that are not permissible for decent people.
I explained to you why I consider you a liar.
Showed exactly where you lied.
And you just lied again.
You cannot know who and how many filed complaints to the administration.
Commentators do not have such an opportunity.
I don't have such a habit.
But you write without a doubt that I did this “more than once or twice.”
This is your essence, empty talker.
The breaches continue.

Quote: Uncle Sam_2

Nobody calls you anything other than a "snitch" and a "provocateur"...

This is your lie.
Only one character, a bird of a feather, complained to others that I was a snitch.
One. And what are you writing, liar?
Nobody called me a provocateur.
Moreover, it was precisely that character who was called a provocateur by me.

Get out.
Sniff out dirty laundry.
My 15500 comments will keep you busy for a long time.

[Uncle Sam_2]

You decided to hit the bottom.

No! I don't have the same path as you.

I have long since turned half a century.

I'm almost 60, and in my life I've met a lot of assholes... well, you get the idea.
They also tried to "whistle in my ears", stupid people, the result, I think you know...

What or who, other than your own lack of culture, gives you the right to address your opponent in this way?

Your attitude towards people. And you're not my "opponent." You're "a stupid man, a liar, and a provocateur" (am I quoting correctly?) )

I never attack without reason.

Whoa-whoa-whoa! Take it easy, cowboy! Do you consider your libels "attacks"? Your ego is too high. This is being treated now.

Only one character, a bird of a feather, complained to others that I was a snitch.
One.

Aren't you a snitch? And you haven't complained to the admins? Go ahead, lie. Does "once" not count for us?

Sniff out dirty laundry.

No, my dear, fulfill your own wet sexual fantasies. No need to extrapolate.

My 15500 comments will keep you busy for a long time.

Who was it that wrote that he's "not a graphomaniac"? Remind me, my dear! I've read a couple dozen. It was enough to compile a "case history"...

And don't forget, - in tons!

[Flooding]

Hasn't it even occurred to you that "long past fifty" and "nearly sixty" are separated by just a couple of years?
Which definitely do not give the right to be addressed as "baby".
In that case you are hopeless.
Age hasn't done you any good.

Quote: Uncle Sam_2

Who wrote there that he is "not a graphomaniac"? Remind me, my dear!

Let me remind you letter by letter what exactly I wrote.

Quote: Flood

Compare our comments by volume, meaning and amount of copy-paste.
Which of us is the graphomaniac?

Even in small things you cannot be precise.
What can you expect from you when it comes to logic, argumentation, and conclusions?

[Uncle Sam_2]

You didn't even have a simple thought,

Oh my god, is it starting to make things up again?! Why. Are. You. Making. This up. Again? I'm telling you - it's a clinic.

Even in small things you cannot be precise.
What can you expect from you when it comes to logic, argumentation, and conclusions?

But you "bring out", as if out of your mind, "a local Freud"... Tell Bormental to give you some herring!

[Flooding]

So what did I come up with?
You justify calling me "baby" by saying that you are "in your late sixties."
This follows directly from our, so to speak, communication.
What exactly am I wrong about?
Don't bother yourself, though.
I don't expect anything reasonable from you.
It's characters like these that I connect with.
Foul-mouthed, rude, and not smart.

[Uncle Sam_2]

I'm back! Well, my faithful Hachiko, are you bored?

This follows directly from our, so to speak, communication.

And I didn’t intend to “communicate” with a piece of shit... (well, you get the idea!) You brought it on yourself, and don’t think that I’ll get off your back now, my little snitch, liar and know-nothing!

What exactly am I wrong about?

Oh my god! I've already rubbed my nose in your sh...t 10 times, and you still don't get it?! That's your problem, silly girl!

I don't expect anything reasonable from you.

I don't care about your "expectations and hopes"! I'm waiting for you to start gaining knowledge. Both academic and professional... Although, who am I telling this to? ...Or at least learn to google.

It's characters like these that I connect with.

Yo-yo, "coupler", practice on the cars! (on cats)
Well, here's a quote:
After reading your "dialogues" with attacks on the participants, "denunciations" and "verdicts" on something that you again imagined... No one calls you anything other than a "snitch" and a "provocateur"...
I understand your loneliness and your attempts to find friends, at least here, but your pathetic attempts to “be an expert in everything” will lead to nothing.
Without possessing basic (school) knowledge, much less narrow professional knowledge, or simply human qualities, you will continue to "drag out a miserable..."
I understand: a bad habit, poor upbringing, weak intellect, school vocabulary.
But still, you shouldn't step on the same rake at your age.
He's not a kid anymore.

You may be delighted with your own manipulation of words.
But from the outside it looks like a pathetic clown show...

[Flooding]

Get lost, windbag.
I won't get dirty with you anymore.
Next time, think three times before you talk behind someone's back.
If you're itching like a woman's groin, write your complaints in private messages.
You might find a friend with similar interests.

[Uncle Sam_2]

windbag.

- That's exactly what I thought of you when you started spewing out your "pearls" about how to "correctly understand generally accepted conventional units of measurement."
Without delving into the essence." (Am I quoting correctly? )

think before you talk about someone behind their back

Are you lying again, my little ignoramus? I always told you straight to the point, "who you are and what you are"!

write your complaints

Well, you're lying again! After all, you were the one who complained to the admins. And even those you complained about confirm it. (Who wrote me complaints about the service? Not you? But I read them!)
Inability to admit one's mistakes is an indicator of one's level of intelligence...

[Flooding]

Anyone who's interested can go through our correspondence thread and see who's who.
I have nothing more to discuss with you in the VO format.
Keep barking at the moon.

[Uncle Sam_2]

Anyone interested can go through our correspondence thread.

and will count how many times you called me a "boor" and also suggested "calculating the load capacity in liters" because "you need to get to the bottom of things"!

Keep barking at the moon.

Well, no comment here, my dear. Don't get sick.

[Sokolov_Vladimir]

If the cargo is light, then nothing prevents you from carrying fuel and lubricants or drinking water in ballast tanks, which means the loading volume can be increased by an average of 2 times, but the carrying capacity is always the same

[Flooding]

Quote: Sokolov_Vladimir

If the cargo is light, then nothing prevents you from carrying fuel and lubricants or drinking water in ballast tanks, which means the loading volume can be increased by an average of 2 times, but the carrying capacity is always the same

Interesting note.
And reasonable.
But these tanks cannot accommodate the target load.
But I meant something slightly different.
Depending on the internal layout, the same payload capacity may leave a different volume.
It may be larger or smaller.
With the same lifting capacity!
Depending on the design features of the vessel.
This is why this indicator is critically important.
***
I don’t know where you got the minus from or why.

[S. Viktorovich]

Even in Soviet times, there were some very successful underwater vehicles. "Gidropribor," a branch in Uralsk. Then...

[Boa kaa]

Quote: Uncle Sam_2

And don't forget, in tons!

Gentlemen, I apologize for interrupting your highly intellectual dispute, but as a long-time forum participant, I think this is permissible.
A couple of remarks about:
1. The buoyancy reserve of a submersible is usually measured in PERCENTAGES (the difference between the submerged and surface values, divided by the submerged value, multiplied by 100). Before diving, mechanics determine the variable load in the compartments, then calculate the boat's weight...And there's no mention of liters!
2. Your bickering is interesting to quarrelsome amateurs who would rather squabble over a fence than talk. For the majority of forum members interested in underwater technology, your public clarification of your level of "competence" is of no real interest...
Therefore, it would be more logical for you (and less tiresome for other site visitors) if you moved the showdown to a private message.
3. Why did I get involved in your caustic "get-together"?
Firstly, I am older than both of you in age and,
Secondly, it did have some connection to underwater vehicles, albeit with a slightly larger displacement than the American Guardian. It just happened that way.
Colleagues, I apologize once again, but I ask you to refrain from instigating such communal squabbles on the pages of VO in the future, taking up the space of the discussion on the topic of the publication.
AHA.

[Alexander]

So what's wrong with that? It'll be hard to catch up!