US ship

[gsturgeon]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...elivery-powerful-new-warship-leaves-wake.html

I thought ships could not exceed 1.4 times the sq root of wl length. Does this one plane?

 

[Sticky Fingers]

Well certainly looks like semi-displacement, and with 113,000 HP there's power aplenty. Bet it uses some fuel...

 

[rbcoomer]

5' wake! A few watersports enthusiasts will be rewriting their Christmas lists...

 

[MapisM]

I thought ships could not exceed 1.4 times the sq root of wl length. Does this one plane?

Short answer, yes they can, and no, she doesn't.
The rule of thumb you mention is simply used as a reference for efficient max speed on displacement vessels, but going faster is just a matter of how much power you throw at them.
There are nuclear submarines of similar length capable to cruise at 40+ kts while completely submerged, go figure!
Nice video, though. The fountain of sea water forced back through the anchor pocket is particularly impressive...
...knowing the americans, I wonder if they put there a sign advising not to walk above that point of the deck, unless interested in the ultimate bidet experience!

 

[grumpy_o_g]

Short answer, yes they can, and no, she doesn't.
The rule of thumb you mention is simply used as a reference for efficient max speed on displacement vessels, but going faster is just a matter of how much power you throw at them.
There are nuclear submarines of similar length capable to cruise at 40+ kts while completely submerged, go figure!
Nice video, though. The fountain of sea water forced back through the anchor pocket is particularly impressive...
...knowing the americans, I wonder if they put there a sign advising not to walk above that point of the deck, unless interested in the ultimate bidet experience!

I think the 1.4 time sq root thing only applies to surface vessels as it's mostly due to the wave formation, so submarines get a free pass.

Nice to see our colonial cousins continuing their fine traditon of inventing things that the rest of the world (and often they themselves) have had for ages. Basically it's a frigate as far as I can see, albeit a bit faster than most - only the USA could come up with a 3,000 ton, 400 ft ship with a 3,000 nm range, that carries a helicopter, missiles, guns, depth charges and 10 ton+ tenders and then call it "coastal".

I remember an RAF pilot giving me a run-down on a course he went on to discover this exciting new AAC concept the USAF had come up with in the early 70's and wanted to teach NATO about. "We call it dog-fighting" he said "I don't what the hell they were using their fighters for before they had AAC (air-to-air combat), but it's nice to see they've got something to do with them now".