Navy's LFA Sonar a threat to divers?

[CD_in_Chitown]

Turns out the judge in Cali made a statement in favor of the environment, if you hadn't heard This story

The navy will have to back up some on the LFA, we'll see how well that works out.

 

[Don Burke]

cd_in_SeaTac once bubbled...
Turns out the judge in Cali made a statement in favor of the environment, if you hadn't heard

The navy will have to back up some on the LFA, we'll see how well that works out.

I was able to read the press release, but the judgement document won't open for me.

It looks like the judge made at least one unwarranted assumption, but came to the right conclusion anyway.

As long as the groups aren't a bunch of idiots, this should work out fine.

 

[sketchy]

Interesting judgement, now NATO can force peace, "Any aggression and the fish get it!" **smiley witheld**

LFA is just poor science, bigger is not always better, e.g. the Spanish armada. It would have been nicer to hear of pressure being placed to find a less (potentially) destructive alternative.

 

[Don Burke]

sketchy once bubbled...
LFA is just poor science, bigger is not always better, e.g. the Spanish armada.

I don't know about that. For about the last 20 years we have been coming up against the limitations of passive systems.

Which, incidentally, are friggin' huge.

The noise emitted by Akula and Los Angeles class submarines makes passive detecton really tough. SOSUS and that thing the T-AGOS ships pull are really well beyond the point of diminishing returns.

I know less about Seawolf and Centurion, but find it hard to believe they would be noisier.

The Swedish have been making some really good diesel submarines that can run on batteries for extended periods. Passive means are nearly worthless for them. They are also cheap enough for smaller countries to afford.

sketchy once bubbled...
It would have been nicer to hear of pressure being placed to find a less (potentially) destructive alternative.

That research is ongoing as well. Active SONAR is not the first choice of a prudent warship. The system gives away your position which could make it pretty tough to survive.

 

[bermudaskink]

if anyone is interested about the tested effects of this system please read

 

[Knavey]

*yawns*

Why didn't we use the other thread?

I saw the link to theecologist...knew exactly what it was going to say before I even clicked.

 

[drbill]

Knavey- Of the three threads on LFA, this one (started by me) was the second one. Why? If you read the original posts in each thread, they each pose a different question. Where the thread goes from these original postings is not in the thread starter's control.

Sounds like your mind is a bit too closed to listen anyway, unless I interpreted your post incorrectly. Somehow I don't think so.

Dr. Bill

 

[Knavey]

Yes Doc,

My mind is very closed to the subject. I made my point of view extremely clear on this issue on the other threads...as has just about everyone else who wanted to weigh in on the subject.

My point was that some of the other threads contained almost all (if not all) of the arguments already. I did not reread them all before I posted, so I may be wrong since you are saying they are all "different".

Personally, the one by GSmith looks to me like a troll from someone that wants to remain anonymous, as does the second one by Garibaldi. Please note the relative shoot and duck approach never to return and stay involved. All threads may have started "different" but they ended up in the same place.

I would challenge you (or anyone else) to come up with even one scuba diver that was killed as a result of the current use of Naval sonar. Submarines just do not like to hang around at depths that divers care to frequent and vice versa. It makes for a VERY short life for either. This makes it VERY unlikely that a diver will ever be anywhere near the sonar when it is used...and even more so now that the judge has limited the areas where it will be deployed.

As for the whales...go read my other post about if I value them over a human life. Although I love to see them and place a high value on the natural resources of this earth, they just are not on the top of the priority food chain for me. Sorry if others feel that the life of a fellow man is less than (or equal to) that of an animal.

But this is just my 2 psi...

 

[sketchy]

If your mind is closed, why continually open your mouth? Just make a post, give your view and ignore the thread.

As regards your last thread, forgive me if I'm wrong but I was unaware that LFA was for submarine use. After all as, Don Burke pointed out, making a loud noise tends to make you easy to find and the main military point of submarines is that you don't know exactly where they are (IMHO).

Ships and divers can be in similar places at the same time, certainly within 100 miles unless extraordinary safety measures are in place. Safety measures that, in all probability, would put the security of the LFA vessel at risk (again IMHO).

 

[drbill]

Knavey- Again you seem to have missed my point. My thread was the second on the subject as far as I know. It asked a different question from the first, so it was quite valid to initiate a new thread.

LFA is a different type of sonar that what has been used in the past. Because it is low frequency, it packs a lot more power and therefore MAY be more lethal at the same distance or at longer distances.

I don't know that LFA poses a threat... that's why I asked the question. I was open to studies that show no impact as well as those that show significant impact... in other words, the truth. Based on what I've heard from studies conducted by the Navy itself, I would be concerned if I were within range of it... both San Diego and San Clemente Island, areas of significant Naval activity, are within 100 miles of me which raises concern.

A debate requires two open minds to be successful.

Dr. Bill