Go Back   Winnipesaukee Forum > Lake Issues > Boating Issues > Speed Limits
Home Forums Gallery Blogs YouTube Channel Classifieds Links Calendar Register FAQDonate Members List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 02-08-2011, 07:38 PM   #1
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default Did anyone consider radar/lasar detectors for the lake?

I'm just curious if anyone else has thought about radar/lasar detection while running on the lake? With near infinite range, it would be very easy to pick up the MP when they are using it.

I have a fairly nice one that even has stealth mode. I don't need it on the lake since 45 is pretty much the top end of what my boat could do anyways.

If a boat was being clocked in front or behind me anywhere in the vicinity, I'm certain my detector would sniff out MP.

Food for thought and something that just dawned on me today.
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-08-2011, 09:29 PM   #2
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,685
Thanks: 23
Thanked 363 Times in 170 Posts
Default

When they were doing the infamous "speed study" I found that the alarm on my depth finder goes off when a radar gun hits the boat.
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 12:57 PM   #3
Dave R
Senior Member
 
Dave R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,764
Thanks: 225
Thanked 628 Times in 368 Posts
Default

IMO, there's really no need for a detector.


Given that lidar and radar have limited range that becomes more limited by motion (like a rocking boat), AND that there's wiggle room of +10 MPH like on the road, here's why I think this way:

Based solely on geography, there are places where it's safe to go fast and there's places where it's not. I think this is a reasonable assumption and this concept immediately eliminates many areas that are simply too limited in space for safe high speed operation. If you opt to operate above 55 MPH in tight areas, you deserve a ticket (speed limit or not) IMO.

Where it is safe to go fast, there's no place to hide and catch speeders. If an operator is going over the speed limit in an area that is safe, they only need to avoid coming within 500 to 1000 feet of any stationary boat to avoid having thier speed checked. If you are speeding and you can't avoid a stationary boat by 500 to 1000 feet, you should either slow down, or plan to get a ticket.

Exceeding 40 MPH at night is pretty dumb and if you do that, you deserve a ticket (speed limit or not) IMO.

My point is that a safe and thoughtful boat operator does not have to worry about the speed limit at all. You can't get caught if you just use your head.
Dave R is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Dave R For This Useful Post:
BroadHopper (02-10-2011), VitaBene (02-09-2011)
Old 02-09-2011, 01:57 PM   #4
Rusty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,028
Thanks: 603
Thanked 686 Times in 424 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave R View Post
IMO, there's really no need for a detector.


Given that lidar and radar have limited range that becomes more limited by motion (like a rocking boat), AND that there's wiggle room of +10 MPH like on the road, here's why I think this way:

Based solely on geography, there are places where it's safe to go fast and there's places where it's not. I think this is a reasonable assumption and this concept immediately eliminates many areas that are simply too limited in space for safe high speed operation. If you opt to operate above 55 MPH in tight areas, you deserve a ticket (speed limit or not) IMO.

Where it is safe to go fast, there's no place to hide and catch speeders. If an operator is going over the speed limit in an area that is safe, they only need to avoid coming within 500 to 1000 feet of any stationary boat to avoid having thier speed checked. If you are speeding and you can't avoid a stationary boat by 500 to 1000 feet, you should either slow down, or plan to get a ticket.

Exceeding 40 MPH at night is pretty dumb and if you do that, you deserve a ticket (speed limit or not) IMO.

My point is that a safe and thoughtful boat operator does not have to worry about the speed limit at all. You can't get caught if you just use your head.
WOW, WOW, WOW and WOW!! Thank you Dave R….It is so refreshing to read something that has a lot of logic to it. If everyone thought the way you do then there wouldn’t be any speed limit and we could all enjoy Lake Winnipesaukee for all it has to offer. You told it the way it is and I appreciate it very much! You made my day!!
I hope that you belong to the SBONH because this is what we should all be hearing from them.

IMHO this thread was started to show how boaters can get away with violating the speed limit and also to cause hate and discontent among the opposing groups. Some people thrive on pushing peoples buttons and the OP of this thread does exactly that.
Rusty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 02:45 PM   #5
Woodsy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,614
Thanks: 52
Thanked 712 Times in 292 Posts
Default

BI...

I find it hard to believe that your depth finder (sonar - sound waves) goes off when your boat was painted with radar (microwaves). Especially considering your sonar transducer is located under the waterline of the boat in either the bilge (internal) or external on the transom....

DaveR...

The LIDAR units are not well suited for marine use because of the wave motion.... if you have one of those laser pointers go outside and try to hold it steady on an object approximataly 1/8 to 1/4 mile away. The units that look like binoculars are better, but still difficult to use give wave action and rocking boats.

The handheld Radar units work pretty good and are pretty easy to use, the problem is they emit a cone of radiation and unless you are the only boat in area its hard to prove it was you.

In both instances, the Law of Cosine works in your favor. The accuracy of the unit diminishes exponentially as the angle increases. In other words the units are most accurate when you are directly approaching or departing the radar/lidar unit. As the angle increaes, the speed it records you at decreases. Thats why on the roadways they give you a minimum 5 MPH leeway and thats with an approximate 5 degree angle..... Increase that angle to 10 or 15 degrees off your heading and the accuracy rapidly diminishes!

Woodsy
__________________
The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid.
Woodsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 02-09-2011, 03:21 PM   #6
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty View Post
WOW, WOW, WOW and WOW!! Thank you Dave R….It is so refreshing to read something that has a lot of logic to it. If everyone thought the way you do then there wouldn’t be any speed limit and we could all enjoy Lake Winnipesaukee for all it has to offer. You told it the way it is and I appreciate it very much! You made my day!!
I hope that you belong to the SBONH because this is what we should all be hearing from them.

IMHO this thread was started to show how boaters can get away with violating the speed limit and also to cause hate and discontent among the opposing groups. Some people thrive on pushing peoples buttons and the OP of this thread does exactly that.
You also fail to recognize a key piece of his post. The fast majority of the lake have wide open site lines making it very easy to see other objects and boats. There is a reason why there are so few accidents when compared to the roads.

Also, your post implies that without the SL in place, people were flying all over the place which is simply not true.

And regarding the radar/lasar detectors, I have no doubt that mine would pick up MP. I see nothing wrong with using a detector to prevent getting a ticket. And I don't have mine because I am a chronic speeder (on road or water) so don't play that game either.

My last ticket on the road was for 73 MPH in a 65 MPH zone on the Maine Turnpike by a State Trooper. I was one of three cars in the area at 6:30AM and the first in the line. I had NH plates at the time. First thing the cop said when he pulled me over was, "we have strict enforcement of the speed limits here in Maine." I'll let you decide why he would offer that comment the minute I rolled down my window. And I will offer that when he called in my license he would have seen a clean record too.

The trooper was doing well over 90 MPH to catch up and then pull me over. Not to mention that when he switched to the middle lane without signaling he cut my boss off who was following behind me (had just stopped at his house to jump start his car). He didn't turn on his blue lights until he was about 10 ft from my bumper, tail gating me. The most dangerous car on the road that day had blue lights on top

A month later I got a radar detector and have had one ever since. The one in my truck is about as top of the line as you can get. My old one stays in my wife's car. Now that I have my toy Mustang I may need to learn how to keep my right foot out of the gas however

And no, I'm not baiting anyone. You decided to take it that way. I don't look at the SL as cut/dry or win/lose. I seriously had not thought of the radar/lasar detector on my boat and wondered if anyone had. I don't know what they are using and what band they transmit it at.

I do find it odd that BI would say his depth finder would go off from the MP radar. There is a myth out there that you can use a fish finder to jam radar. That is certainly a myth. You can definitely jam radar and lasar but in order to do it, you have to transmitin a way that violates FCC rules and if caught would get you in far hotter water than a speeding ticket.
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 03:28 PM   #7
Skip
Senior Member
 
Skip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dover, NH
Posts: 1,605
Thanks: 247
Thanked 506 Times in 176 Posts
Thumbs up BI is not telling any "fish tales" here!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsy View Post
BI...

I find it hard to believe that your depth finder (sonar - sound waves) goes off when your boat was painted with radar (microwaves). Especially considering your sonar transducer is located under the waterline of the boat in either the bilge (internal) or external on the transom....
Actually RF energy wouldn't (and couldn't) be present or stimulate the sonar transducer. However, the RF energy emitted by a nearby radar unit could easily penetrate the usually poorly shielded depth finder housing and interact with internal electronics causing a false alarm or other ghost readings.

As a certified radar operator I have had the opportunity to spend many hours operating various radar devices over the years and have found that not only can I induce other electronic devices to act sporadically by pointing the beam a particular way, but I can also induce the radar to display false readings in the same method. One of my favorites is to see what I get for a reading from a digital watch, depending on the brand, or to search for distant aircraft radars audibly by listening to the radar's received doppler audio output while searching the sky with the cone.

I have many many interesting radar stories...and I do get a kick out of reading a lot of the false assumptions that layman make online about radar! But never had I read so much misinformation than I did during the speed limit threads. While much of it was humorous, I do believe most of it was do more to plain misunderstanding than plain deception.....

That all said Bear Islander's claims are not only plausible, but I have seen those same effects first hand.
Skip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 03:32 PM   #8
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsy View Post
BI...

I find it hard to believe that your depth finder (sonar - sound waves) goes off when your boat was painted with radar (microwaves). Especially considering your sonar transducer is located under the waterline of the boat in either the bilge (internal) or external on the transom....

DaveR...

The LIDAR units are not well suited for marine use because of the wave motion.... if you have one of those laser pointers go outside and try to hold it steady on an object approximataly 1/8 to 1/4 mile away. The units that look like binoculars are better, but still difficult to use give wave action and rocking boats.

The handheld Radar units work pretty good and are pretty easy to use, the problem is they emit a cone of radiation and unless you are the only boat in area its hard to prove it was you.

In both instances, the Law of Cosine works in your favor. The accuracy of the unit diminishes exponentially as the angle increases. In other words the units are most accurate when you are directly approaching or departing the radar/lidar unit. As the angle increaes, the speed it records you at decreases. Thats why on the roadways they give you a minimum 5 MPH leeway and thats with an approximate 5 degree angle..... Increase that angle to 10 or 15 degrees off your heading and the accuracy rapidly diminishes!

Woodsy
Woodsy, thanks. I was going to reply to that post.

The reality is the cone diverges (spreads) as it gets farther from the transmitter requiring the operator to ensure they have the correct target. Unlike the road where vehicles are closer together, this is not as big an issue on the water.

However, range is an issue but if the MP presense allows a boater time to slow down, then it gets the same result. I would guess that WinnFlabs is not satisfied unless a ticket is written however.
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 03:37 PM   #9
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skip View Post
That all said Bear Islander's claims are not only plausible, but I have seen those same effects first hand.
I wonder if it's brand specific? I would have thought the metal housing alone would prevent the intereference from radar. I'd think you have to be fairly close in order for that too happen.

What is MP using for units? Frequency/power?
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 03:46 PM   #10
Skip
Senior Member
 
Skip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dover, NH
Posts: 1,605
Thanks: 247
Thanked 506 Times in 176 Posts
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawn psycho View Post
I wonder if it's brand specific? I would have thought the metal housing alone would prevent the intereference from radar. I'd think you have to be fairly close in order for that too happen.

What is MP using for units? Frequency/power?
Very few modern sonar/depth finders have metal housings....most are plastic.

Additionally RF energy can be coupled into the device via the power leads. So a power lead that may be a derivative of the wave length of a particular RF transmitter could help induce interference into the device.

Finally a particular brand of Sonar may have an internal oscillator that is harmonically related to the frequency of the radar unit.

There are multiple ways/reasons that the particular device BI has, or the unique way that it is installed, could induce the particular interference he is seeing.

That's why marine electronics technicians that know what they are doing, and will work for a reasonable price, are a very scarce resource.

Finally this is why I beleive that while BI's claims are rare, they are plausible and verifiable in real world situations.
Skip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 03:49 PM   #11
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skip View Post
...As a certified radar operator I have had the opportunity to spend many hours operating various radar devices over the years....
Skip, where you a radioman? I started out life as a nuke electrician on fast-attacks. Way back in the day a bunch of the EMs and ETs on board got the ham bug. We all sat for our tests and then had piles of gizmos to make stupid sound transmitters and other annoying toys.

Of course back then we had no money. We had no limits to our imagination on what to make but there was no internet to order stuff online and it was expensive as hell to make any of the really cool stuff.

I shudder to think about what we could do today
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 03:49 PM   #12
Bear Islander
Senior Member
 
Bear Islander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Bear Island
Posts: 1,685
Thanks: 23
Thanked 363 Times in 170 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsy View Post
BI...

I find it hard to believe that your depth finder (sonar - sound waves) goes off when your boat was painted with radar (microwaves). Especially considering your sonar transducer is located under the waterline of the boat in either the bilge (internal) or external on the transom....
RADAR guns put out a lot of energy and can interfear with all kinds of electronic equipment.

I'm not suggesting the underwater transducer picks up the RADAR directly. However the lead from the transducer to the depth finder in the dashboard is very high impedance. And is mostly above the water line. It therefore is susceptible to RFI from The RADAR gun.

The depth finder interprets the RFI hash as multiple depths and the shallow-water alarm is triggered.
Bear Islander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 03:55 PM   #13
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skip View Post
Very few modern sonar/depth finders have metal housings....most are plastic.

Additionally RF energy can be coupled into the device via the power leads. So a power lead that may be a derivative of the wave length of a particular RF transmitter could help induce interference into the device.

Finally a particular brand of Sonar may have an internal oscillator that is harmonically related to the frequency of the radar unit.

There are multiple ways/reasons that the particular device BI has, or the unique way that it is installed, could induce the particular interference he is seeing.

That's why marine electronics technicians that know what they are doing, and will work for a reasonable price, are a very scarce resource.

Finally this is why I beleive that while BI's claims are rare, they are plausible and verifiable in real world situations.
I've never looked at my sound unit other than wax around it. I suspect the power leads are not shielded and/or twisted.

So now I have to wonder why the shipboard radars don't interfere with the depth sounders?
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 03:57 PM   #14
Skip
Senior Member
 
Skip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dover, NH
Posts: 1,605
Thanks: 247
Thanked 506 Times in 176 Posts
Smile Small world Bubblehead!

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawn psycho View Post
Skip, where you a radioman? I started out life as a nuke electrician on fast-attacks. Way back in the day a bunch of the EMs and ETs on board got the ham bug. We all sat for our tests and then had piles of gizmos to make stupid sound transmitters and other annoying toys.

Of course back then we had no money. We had no limits to our imagination on what to make but there was no internet to order stuff online and it was expensive as hell to make any of the really cool stuff.

I shudder to think about what we could do today
I was a boomer sailor (ballistic missile submarine for you landlubbers) in my distant youth, 640 class boats. That's where I received my electronics training (courtesy of Uncle Sam...thank you) and last served active duty as a Sonar Supervisor (STS1/SS) on th e SSBN-645 (James K. Polk). Afterwards I served a couple of tours as a reservist with a Mobile Inshore Undersea Warfare Unit out of Portsmouth, NH until the unit was dissolved and transferred a distance I didn't want to travel on a monthly basis. And as you infer....I shudder also to think of what we could do today with the internet as a resource!

At least you're not a skimmer puke!
Skip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 04:04 PM   #15
Dave R
Senior Member
 
Dave R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,764
Thanks: 225
Thanked 628 Times in 368 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skip View Post
Very few modern sonar/depth finders have metal housings....most are plastic.

Additionally RF energy can be coupled into the device via the power leads. So a power lead that may be a derivative of the wave length of a particular RF transmitter could help induce interference into the device.

Finally a particular brand of Sonar may have an internal oscillator that is harmonically related to the frequency of the radar unit.

There are multiple ways/reasons that the particular device BI has, or the unique way that it is installed, could induce the particular interference he is seeing.

That's why marine electronics technicians that know what they are doing, and will work for a reasonable price, are a very scarce resource.

Finally this is why I beleive that while BI's claims are rare, they are plausible and verifiable in real world situations.
During my time working in Bell Labs, I did some electromagnetic interference and susceptibility testing on telecom gear. This is stuff that is carefully shielded to prevent interference and you would not believe the ways microwave radio waves can get into stuff. There's no requirement that a depth finder has to meet a susceptibility rating, so it would not surprise me at all if it could act as a radar detector.
Dave R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 04:06 PM   #16
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skip View Post
I was a boomer sailor (ballistic missile submarine for you landlubbers) in my distant youth, 640 class boats. That's where I received my electronics training (courtesy of Uncle Sam...thank you) and last served active duty as a Sonar Supervisor (STS1/SS) on th e SSBN-645 (James K. Polk). Afterwards I served a couple of tours as a reservist with a Mobile Inshore Undersea Warfare Unit out of Portsmouth, NH until the unit was dissolved and transferred a distance I didn't want to travel on a monthly basis. And as you infer....I shudder also to think of what we could do today with the internet as a resource!

At least you're not a skimmer puke!
My career has taken a REALLY wierd path. Nuclear Reactors -> Electrical Engineering -> Cardiac Ultrasound -> Electrical Engineering

I don't know what I want to be when I grow up (or rather I get bored easily)
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 04:09 PM   #17
NoBozo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Portsmouth. RI
Posts: 2,233
Thanks: 402
Thanked 459 Times in 307 Posts
Default

I think the FCC is VERY particular about how electronic devices radiate energy. Look at the documentation that comes with everything you buy that "may" radiate energy. Your garrage door opener for example, etc. A term that comes to mind is "May Not" (meaning not permissible) interfere with other gadgets within a certain range.

Now if a radar were able to penetrate another gadget so easily, I would think the FCC would have something to say about it. The inside of the plastic case on my computer has metal/foil shielding to prevent either intrussion or radiation outward, by Rf energy which might interfere with the operation of other electronic devices. NB
NoBozo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 04:15 PM   #18
NoBozo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Portsmouth. RI
Posts: 2,233
Thanks: 402
Thanked 459 Times in 307 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skip View Post
I was a boomer sailor (ballistic missile submarine for you landlubbers) in my distant youth, 640 class boats. That's where I received my electronics training (courtesy of Uncle Sam...thank you) and last served active duty as a Sonar Supervisor (STS1/SS) on th e SSBN-645 (James K. Polk). Afterwards I served a couple of tours as a reservist with a Mobile Inshore Undersea Warfare Unit out of Portsmouth, NH until the unit was dissolved and transferred a distance I didn't want to travel on a monthly basis. And as you infer....I shudder also to think of what we could do today with the internet as a resource!

At least you're not a skimmer puke!

The correct Navy term for a submarine sailor is "Bubblehead" NB
NoBozo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 04:22 PM   #19
Skip
Senior Member
 
Skip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dover, NH
Posts: 1,605
Thanks: 247
Thanked 506 Times in 176 Posts
Default Back to radar/lidar....

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoBozo View Post
I think the FCC is VERY particular about how electronic devices radiate energy. Look at the documentation that comes with everything you buy that "may" radiate energy. Your garrage door opener for example, etc. A term that comes to mind is "May Not" (meaning not permissible) interfere with other gadgets within a certain range.

Now if a radar were able to penetrate another gadget so easily, I would think the FCC would have something to say about it. The inside of the plastic case on my computer has metal/foil shielding to prevent either intrussion or radiation outward, by Rf energy which might interfere with the operation of other electronic devices. NB
You are confusing spurious RF energy emissions which are limited or eliminated by FCC type acceptance, with a case of a legally permitted RF source interfering occassionally with a third party device. It happens all the time in the real world as all operating conditions cannot be controlled or anticipated for various reasons. There would be nothing "illegal", even via the FCC's rigid standards, to prevent the anomaly that BI experiences.

Anyway, we have strayed significantly from the original post's question and intent. By the way, to get back to the original post, a radar or laser detector would probably work significantly better over open water than its intended terrestial application. Since the radar/lidar units operate within the same parameters frequencywise as their land use cousins than they would operate as least as well over the water, where they are not currently banned under existing NH regulations.
Skip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 04:24 PM   #20
Dave R
Senior Member
 
Dave R's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,764
Thanks: 225
Thanked 628 Times in 368 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rusty View Post
WOW, WOW, WOW and WOW!! Thank you Dave R….It is so refreshing to read something that has a lot of logic to it. If everyone thought the way you do then there wouldn’t be any speed limit and we could all enjoy Lake Winnipesaukee for all it has to offer. You told it the way it is and I appreciate it very much! You made my day!!
I hope that you belong to the SBONH because this is what we should all be hearing from them.

IMHO this thread was started to show how boaters can get away with violating the speed limit and also to cause hate and discontent among the opposing groups. Some people thrive on pushing peoples buttons and the OP of this thread does exactly that.
I am a member of SBONH. I am very pragmatic and therefore I'm opposed to absolute speed limits on the water (having spent a lot of time driving in places where speed limits don't exist, are very high, or are ignored, I'm also opposed to overly restrictive speed limits on the road too...). I don't have a fast boat and never operate fast at night. I'm unaffected by boating speed limits above headway speed.
Dave R is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 04:30 PM   #21
Skip
Senior Member
 
Skip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Dover, NH
Posts: 1,605
Thanks: 247
Thanked 506 Times in 176 Posts
Smile Nope, I definitely was a "boomer" sailor!

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoBozo View Post
The correct Navy term for a submarine sailor is "Bubblehead" NB
Right and wrong again....

Submarine sailors in genearl are called bubbleheads, as referenced in one of my posts to fellow bubblehead lawn psycho.

However Fleet Ballistic Missile submariners have a specific nickname known as "Boomer" sailors, a reference to the 16 or 24 ballistic missiles their particular boat class carried.

As a submarine sailor or "bubblehead" you had two career paths you could follow. Lawn Psycho chose to go the "fast attack" route and I chose to be a "boomer" sailor. That is how we in the submarine world differentiated between the two significantly different classes of submarine service.

See what you learn when you when you delve deep into depths of the posts here on Winnipesaukee.com!
Skip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 04:31 PM   #22
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skip View Post
By the way, to get back to the original post, a radar or laser detector would probably work significantly better over open water than its intended terrestial application. Since the radar/lidar units operate within the same parameters frequencywise as their land use cousins than they would operate as least as well over the water, where they are not currently banned under existing NH regulations.
Skip, that is what I suspect as well. There is probably much less interference out on the water as well but I do wonder about how the radar units people have would be detected as a false positive.

I will tell you that my land-based unit that I currently own sniffs radar/lasar enforcement with very good accuracy. The only caveat is when you are the only car on the road.

To anyone who considers buying a radar detector (for land or water), you get what you pay for.
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 04:33 PM   #23
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skip View Post
Right and wrong again....

Submarine sailors in genearl are called bubbleheads, as referenced in one of my posts to fellow bubblehead lawn psycho.

However Fleet Ballistic Missile submariners have a specific nickname known as "Boomer" sailors, a reference to the 16 or 24 ballistic missiles their particular boat class carried.

As a submarine sailor or "bubblehead" you had two career paths you could follow. Lawn Psycho chose to go the "fast attack" route and I chose to be a "boomer" sailor. That is how we in the submarine world differentiated between the two significantly different classes of submarine service.

See what you learn when you when you delve deep into depths of the posts here on Winnipesaukee.com!
And to follow up with what Skip said, that is why I prefaced my post about the type of boat I was in........ And yes, a submarine is a boat.

Submarines are one of the few places you would admit to wearing a "poopy-suit" and be proud of it
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 04:45 PM   #24
Woodsy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,614
Thanks: 52
Thanked 712 Times in 292 Posts
Default

BI...

I stand corrected!

Skip...

Thanks! PS: Hope you gettin some riding in!


I do admit I still have a hard time believing a low powered RF emitter like the K-band Handheld Units can wreak this kind of interference unless at an extremely close range.


Woodsy
__________________
The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid.
Woodsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 04:52 PM   #25
Rusty
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,028
Thanks: 603
Thanked 686 Times in 424 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawn psycho View Post

And no, I'm not baiting anyone. You decided to take it that way. I don't look at the SL as cut/dry or win/lose. I seriously had not thought of the radar/lasar detector on my boat and wondered if anyone had. I don't know what they are using and what band they transmit it at.
Thanks lawn psycho!

I can see you know what you're talking about.....continue on.
Rusty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 08:49 PM   #26
NoBozo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Portsmouth. RI
Posts: 2,233
Thanks: 402
Thanked 459 Times in 307 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skip View Post
Right and wrong again....Submarine sailors in genearl are called bubbleheads, as referenced in one of my posts to fellow bubblehead lawn psycho.

However Fleet Ballistic Missile submariners have a specific nickname known as "Boomer" sailors, a reference to the 16 or 24 ballistic missiles their particular boat class carried.

As a submarine sailor or "bubblehead" you had two career paths you could follow. Lawn Psycho chose to go the "fast attack" route and I chose to be a "boomer" sailor. That is how we in the submarine world differentiated between the two significantly different classes of submarine service.

See what you learn when you when you delve deep into depths of the posts here on Winnipesaukee.com!
Right and WRONG Again....??

How am I wrong? I guess I don't get it.

I was stationed (Navy) at SuBase, NLon when SSBN 645 was launched at EB. I was enlisted.. as you were. My Rate was OM1. I am proud to have been a part of the Support System for the "Boats" at SuBase. I also worked on the diesel boats as well. Remember them...? WE were a team then. Just sayin. NB
NoBozo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 09:01 PM   #27
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoBozo View Post
I was stationed (Navy) at SuBase, NLon when SSBN 645 was launched at EB. I was enlisted.. as you were. My Rate was OM1. I am proud to have been a part of the Support System for the "Boats" at SuBase. I also worked on the diesel boats as well. Remember them...? We were a team then. Just sayin. NB
A lot of people don't realize the cool boats that have been stationed or worked on at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard. NR-1, USS Dolphin, USS Sand Lance, and a bunch of other boats the did some interesting ops.

Some good stuff. Also, read Blind Man's Bluff.
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 09:15 PM   #28
NoBozo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Portsmouth. RI
Posts: 2,233
Thanks: 402
Thanked 459 Times in 307 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawn psycho View Post
A lot of people don't realize the cool boats that have been stationed or worked on at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard. NR-1, USS Dolphin, USS Sand Lance, and a bunch of other boats the did some interesting ops.

Some good stuff. Also, read Blind Man's Bluff.
Speaking of the NR-1. I know a guy who was on the Sunbird..towed the NR-1 around... (Transatlantic) to whereever it was detailed to go. (Find a missing Nuke Bomb.)

Read "Dark Waters"" By Lee Vyborny and Don Davis.
NoBozo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 09:22 PM   #29
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoBozo View Post
Read "Dark Waters"" By Lee Vyborny and Don Davis.
Have to pick it up before my next long-haul flight to a communist country (China)
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 09:44 PM   #30
NoBozo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Portsmouth. RI
Posts: 2,233
Thanks: 402
Thanked 459 Times in 307 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawn psycho View Post
Have to pick it up before my next long-haul flight to a communist country (China)
Try The Submarine Museum (Gift Shop) at SuBase NLon, CT. This book is an EXCELLENT addition to "Blind Man's Bluff" by Sherry Sontag and Christopher Drew. NB
NoBozo is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to NoBozo For This Useful Post:
lawn psycho (02-09-2011)
Old 02-09-2011, 09:51 PM   #31
lawn psycho
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: On the move...
Posts: 987
Thanks: 113
Thanked 248 Times in 133 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoBozo View Post
Right and WRONG Again....??

How am I wrong? I guess I don't get it.

I was stationed (Navy) at SuBase, NLon when SSBN 645 was launched at EB. I was enlisted.. as you were. My Rate was OM1. I am proud to have been a part of the Support System for the "Boats" at SuBase. I also worked on the diesel boats as well. Remember them...? WE were a team then. Just sayin. NB
NB, we also had a name for our bretheren in the forward end of the boat. Anyone who was not a nuke and served up-front was known as a "coner" which is what skip would have been referred too.

Regardless of rate, I will always have respect for my fellow submariners even if they are on the wrong side of the SL debate. We could have a blanket party to give him a correction
lawn psycho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 10:03 PM   #32
NoBozo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Portsmouth. RI
Posts: 2,233
Thanks: 402
Thanked 459 Times in 307 Posts
Default

For those who have no idea what this is about: The NR-1 was a Nuclear Mini Stealth Submarine that was developed by the Navy for.......Research...YES Research. It was in service for 50 years. Rickover, Hyman, Adm. ..The father of the Nuclear Navy was behind it. It's real mission was Top Secret for Decades. It gave the Soviets Fits. NB
NoBozo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-09-2011, 10:11 PM   #33
NoBozo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Portsmouth. RI
Posts: 2,233
Thanks: 402
Thanked 459 Times in 307 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawn psycho View Post
NB, we also had a name for our bretheren in the forward end of the boat. Anyone who was not a nuke and served up-front was known as a "coner" which is what skip would have been referred too.

Regardless of rate, I will always have respect for my fellow submariners even if they are on the wrong side of the SL debate. We could have a blanket party to give him a correction
I remember the Blanket Party. We had a guy in Boot Camp that had an aversion to water..he wouldn't take a shower. In todays politically correct and "caring" society......Well...there's no need to describe a Blanket Party. NB
NoBozo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2011, 01:38 PM   #34
Woodsy
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Weirs Beach
Posts: 1,614
Thanks: 52
Thanked 712 Times in 292 Posts
Default

Completely off topic....

But I hope you Bubbleheads have had the opportunity to check out the sub that started it all.... convieniently located here in Portsmouth NH! Some of the things this sub pioneered and developed are still classified! Its def a very cool place to visit!

http://ussalbacore.org

Woodsy
__________________
The only way to eliminate ignorant behavior is through education. You can't fix stupid.
Woodsy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2011, 07:35 PM   #35
Pineedles
Senior Member
 
Pineedles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Moultonborough & CT
Posts: 2,460
Thanks: 970
Thanked 605 Times in 339 Posts
Default

I didn't stay at a Holiday Inn last night, but I did tour the Lionfish in battleship Cove nearly 20 years ago with my Cub Scout son.
Pineedles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2011, 07:45 PM   #36
ApS
Senior Member
 
ApS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Winnipesaukee & Florida
Posts: 4,493
Thanks: 929
Thanked 433 Times in 317 Posts
Cool Lurching Back to the Topic...

Quote:
Originally Posted by lawn psycho View Post
I'm just curious if anyone else has thought about radar/lasar detection while running on the lake? With near infinite range, it would be very easy to pick up the MP when they are using it.
I am presently eight miles from a major RADAR emitter. About every 20-seconds, I pick up its scanning "b-r-r-r-r-p!" on a relatively low AM frequency (610) on each of my standard home radios. This particular RADAR has a large baud-width, so it is fairly easy to detect.

Besides BI's low-depth alarm, there may be a frequency on a standard scanner or standard boat radio that picks up some cycle of NHMP RADAR.

RADAR was used by the military coastal surveillance for enemy aircraft and ships, and employed civilian "Coast-Watchers"). Before there was RADAR, there were the so-called "Coast-Listeners".



I have a good collection of these: the above device appears to be American.

The variety of those listening device designs is amazing. Long before the aircraft would appear in sight, I expect an experienced operator could determine if fighter or bomber, the speed, the number of engines on each aircraft, as well as the exact direction of compass—the general direction of flight—and the number of aircraft approaching. (Much more data than early RADAR.)

'Course, out on the lake, such data collection by ear is unneeded. During the day, you can hear loud boats eight miles away, and still not be able to see them!
ApS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-10-2011, 09:06 PM   #37
NoBozo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Portsmouth. RI
Posts: 2,233
Thanks: 402
Thanked 459 Times in 307 Posts
Default Thanks Woodsy

I have seen that boat many times off the side of US-1 on the way north to Bath. Never stopped. I have been aboard a few boats..both when I was in the Navy and when I worked for Defence Contractors afterward. I have even been aboard a British Fast attack boat when it showed up in Newport some time ago.

Memory's from an old Surface Puke who worked with the "Boats". There was a friendly rivalry then. I don't take that term as a put down..

The Bubbleheads referred to Surface Ships as TARGETS. NB
NoBozo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2011, 12:42 PM   #38
webmaster
Moderator
 
webmaster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,172
Blog Entries: 1
Thanks: 319
Thanked 2,745 Times in 647 Posts
Default

Since this thread is hopelessly off-topic I'll add that I toured U-995 in Kiel, Germany many years ago. The interior was like a sardine can and at 6'3" I almost had to crawl through it. The bunks couldn't have been more than 15" from the ones above and below. I couldn't imagine being at sea or in battle in that thing. No place for anyone with claustrophobia.

By the way, one of my favorite movies is U-571. Highly recommended for submarine warfare fans.

webmaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2011, 08:32 PM   #39
NoBozo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Portsmouth. RI
Posts: 2,233
Thanks: 402
Thanked 459 Times in 307 Posts
Default

Since we are TOTALLY off topic, maybe with some interest in old submarine Sea Stories.. I'll relate this:

It was 1987 and I was working for a Defense Contractor (Navy) in Newport. Our company was an engineering company and was tasked with updating a (NUSC) submarine laboratory.

Anyhow, we had a couple of Bubbleheads who were either Retired or recently separated from the Submarine Service. At the same time, the Clancy book "Hunt For Red October" had just come out. I seemed to be the first to find a copy. Before long everyone in the office had a copy and was reading the book during lunch.

One of our ex Bubbleheads was a "Plank Owner" (Ret) in Nautilus (SSN-571, THE First Nuke Boat) As they were reading the book, people in the office started asking him questions about such things as "Sosus".. and other little tidbits in the book. His Response: Just a smile and a shrug. Sub Sailors are "Debriefed" when leaving the service. They are sworn to NEVER talk about what they saw or did during their service. I know a few of them. They will NOT respond. One of them has been a friend for over 40 years. NO Comment on Sub OPS. This friend was on a boat that was Cable Tapping the Soviets in Russia during the cold war. All he will admit was he was on a particular boat. "Blind Mans Bluff" told me what his boat had been doing. As we used to say back then: "Negative Further". THEY are patriots. NB

DEFINITION: Plank Owner: A sailor who was part of the Original Commissioning crew on any Navy Ship.. or in this case a "Boat".

BOTTOM LINE: Those who served must remain Silent. Civilians (authors) who run across stuff can publish whatever they want.
NoBozo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2011, 08:56 PM   #40
Pineedles
Senior Member
 
Pineedles's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Moultonborough & CT
Posts: 2,460
Thanks: 970
Thanked 605 Times in 339 Posts
Default

This thread is definitely OK as far as I'm concerned Don. People are connecting through shared experiences and even some jokers (non-military) folks like me can add to the conversation. Keep up the good work you guys rock. And, thanks for your service to our Country!
Pineedles is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-11-2011, 09:34 PM   #41
trfour
Senior Member
 
trfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Lakes, Central NH. and Dallas/Fort Worth TX.
Posts: 3,479
Blog Entries: 3
Thanks: 2,563
Thanked 424 Times in 203 Posts
Default USS Hazelwood ( DD-531 )...

Our brother Mel was stationed aboard the USS Hazelwood while serving in the Navy. They had a Family cruise on a visit to Boston, and my sister Dianne and I got to go aboard and enjoy the day complete with a steak dinner. 1959- 1960, as I recall. A great experience for us!!

Here's some history and other specifics on this ship.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Hazelwood_(DD-531)





Terry
__________________________________________________ _
Attached Images
 
__________________
trfour

Always Remember, The Best Safety Device In The Boat, or on a PWC Snowmobile etc., Is YOU!

Safe sledding tips and much more; http://www.snowmobile.org/snowmobiling-safety.html
trfour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-12-2011, 07:06 AM   #42
ApS
Senior Member
 
ApS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Winnipesaukee & Florida
Posts: 4,493
Thanks: 929
Thanked 433 Times in 317 Posts
Angry The "Times", They are A-Changin'

Quote:
Originally Posted by NoBozo View Post
Since we are TOTALLY off topic, maybe with some interest in old submarine Sea Stories.. I'll relate this: ...Anyhow, we had a couple of Bubbleheads who were either Retired or recently separated from the Submarine Service. At the same time, the Clancy book "Hunt For Red October" had just come out. I seemed to be the first to find a copy. Before long everyone in the office had a copy and was reading the book during lunch...people in the office started asking him questions about such things as "Sosus".. and other little tidbits in the book. His Response: Just a smile and a shrug. Sub Sailors are "Debriefed" when leaving the service. They are sworn to NEVER talk about what they saw or did during their service. I know a few of them. They will NOT respond. One of them has been a friend for over 40 years. NO Comment on Sub OPS. This friend was on a boat that was Cable Tapping the Soviets in Russia during the cold war. All he will admit was he was on a particular boat. "Blind Mans Bluff" told me what his boat had been doing. As we used to say back then: "Negative Further". THEY are patriots. NB
1) Tom Clancy gets plenty of classified data into his books: all it takes is one to "talk" over a bottle or three.

2) "Sosus" got corrupted, and Toshiba caused the waste of billions of US taxpayers' dollars. I have Navy friends who won't touch Toshiba products. (I own none.)

3) TIME magazine has published accounts of many of our still-classified operations, costing us even more billion$ in American "intellectual property".

This is not to mention America's "Newspaper of Record".
ApS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-13-2011, 04:39 AM   #43
trfour
Senior Member
 
trfour's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Lakes, Central NH. and Dallas/Fort Worth TX.
Posts: 3,479
Blog Entries: 3
Thanks: 2,563
Thanked 424 Times in 203 Posts
Default Yes, The Skunks Of The Sea Hid In Them Tin Cans...

We also found a better way to route them out! No contest. Run silent, run deep, is in the past! Acres per Second is a proof + to this.

Class, I don't think so...


And I very proudly served as a Spec. E-4 during the Vietnam war, in the signal Core, kept my mouth shut pretty good in those times...

Now, out the 'nother side, Oh, don't we have Acres P S.

"Shut Up, trfour!"


Terry
______________________________________
__________________
trfour

Always Remember, The Best Safety Device In The Boat, or on a PWC Snowmobile etc., Is YOU!

Safe sledding tips and much more; http://www.snowmobile.org/snowmobiling-safety.html
trfour is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-25-2011, 07:56 AM   #44
Skipper
Member
 
Skipper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 35
Thanks: 3
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Cool What about radar and laser jammers?

Radar detectors may be good to have on board but what if we all used radar and Laser jammers?

You can Google Radar or Laser Jammers and find some that work and some that are illegal to use on the roads of some states. I don't see any that are illegal to use on boats.

They are cheaper than a speeding ticket and if enough people have them on board then the speed trap becomes a non-issue
__________________
Skipper

Learn to be a real Skipper, click HERE and learn more.
Skipper is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:07 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.

This page was generated in 0.38939 seconds