Slashdot Mirror
Virtual Earth Exposes Nuclear Sub's Secret
NewsCloud alerts us to a story a few months old that has been getting a lot of play recently. A Seattle blogger, Dan Twohig, was browsing in Microsoft's Virtual Earth when he accidentally came across a photo of a nuclear sub in dry-dock. Its propeller is clearly visible — this was a major no-no on the part of someone at the Bangor Sub Base. The designs of such stealth propellers have been secret for decades. Twohig blogged about the find and linked to the Virtual Earth photo on July 2. The debate about security vs. Net-accessible aerial photography has been building ever since. The story was picked up on military.china.com on Aug. 17 — poetic justice for the Chinese sub photo that had embarrassed them a month before. On Aug. 20 the Navy Times published the article that most mainstream media have picked up in their more recent coverage. Twohig's blog is the best source to follow the ongoing debate. No one has asked Microsoft, Google, or anyone else to blur the photo in question. Kind of late now.
11 Carrier Battle Groups. The ability to project naval, air, and underwater force anywhere in the world The US has the mightiest navy in the history of the world, greater than every country's navy put together.
This is not such a big deal. Let the Chinese try to copy this. Then they'll only have to build the aircraft carriers, fighter jets, support ships to protect it.
God Bless America, and God Bless the US Navy.
isn't it safe to assume that all countries with satellites in orbit have been watching each others military facilities for decades?
Hmm, do you believe that having subs means needing a big surface fleet to protect them? The US has a big navy because they have a need to be everywhere at once. Some places the US likes to get involved lack any friendly air bases so they need carrier groups. China has no need to try to match the US Navy, just as the US has no need to match the size of the Chinese Army. Additionally, any intelligence of value on current US sub programs is already in Moscow and Beijing: history has shown how simple it is to buy information in a debt driven economy.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
The MonsterMaritime.com entry linked to in the writeup was actually posted on July 2, a full 2 months ago. 2 months later and they haven't tried to put the horse back in the barn so while it's technically a secret, it's probably not that important of a secret. Besides, even if they asked MS to blur the image on Live they'd still have to ask other companies with access to the data to blur it, and then they'd have to go to the source of the imagery and ask them to stop selling it (which they may not have a case for).
In reality, if they censored the images the only people who wouldn't be able to see it are people not willing to spend money to see images of a classified submarine. Any country/organization with it's own program for developing nuclear submarines or technology to detect submarines likely has the financial/organizational resources to aquire this imagery without depending on a free website.
I have a book (U.S. Submarines Since 1945, An Illustrated Design History, by Norman Friedman, 1994 Naval Institute Press) that shows an old publicly released official Seawolf model with a hooked propeller very similar to the one shown in that image. The same book also has a very good image of the scythe-bladed propeller of a Las Angeles class submarine, whos manufacturing techniques were at the root of the late Toshiba milling technology sale scandal) I'm thinking that the blogger who discovered this has made a few assumptions about the level of secrecy associated with the item in question as the propeller form, at least, has appeared in public before.
You completely missed the point. The original post was practically dripping with jingoism. The quote was a refutation of the jingoism.
then why was the quite good German admirals so afraid of facing it?
Oh I dunno, some 500 years of British naval combat experience perhaps? Plus the Brits had the numbers on their side. Technology will only help you so far, but numbers win every time.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Still, the German Navy almost defeated them with their much more effective submarines.
The German U-boat fleet rarely engaged the Royal Navy. And with the occasional exception, when they did this, they were sunk. The U-boats were used as commerce raiders, and had great success. For a year or so. Now please look up the statistics on how many u-boats actually survived the war, and talk to me about "success". It was a disaster, like almost everything else Germany did after taking France.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
Forgive my naivety but why would your god bless instruments of or an organization dedicated to perfecting death? Aren't "love your enemy" and "turn the other cheek" core teachings of jesus and of most Judeo-Christian religions?
Article X: The powers not delegated... by the Constitution...are reserved...to the people
(Obligatory disclaimer but without the obligatory tortured acronym: Yes, I am a former submariner (and have been to the Delta Pier many times), and am a student of naval history and related security issues.)
The props haven't been as jealously gaurded recently as in times past - in fact, I saw pictures openly published of them as early as the late 1990's. Though the less knowledgeable may drool over seeing them at all - the pictures on Virtual Earth are not particularly high res, nor particularly useful. The fact that the US uses scythe blade propellers has been openly acknowledged since the early 90's.
Or, to put it even more simply, these pictures show nothing not already publically known and acknowledged.
Ditto for the weapons magazines - there is nothing classified about the exteriors, existence, or location.
This article is however a interesting point on the problem of getting your news from blogs; sometimes the author knows what he's talking about. Usually, when it comes to specialized topics, he doesn't.
I couldn't agree more. The best way to maintain a technological edge over the enemy is to screen, analyze, and filter all human communication from central points. This will prevent the enemy, ubiquitous and wily though he is, from learning too much of science and engineering.
Of course, it will also prevent our own citizens from learning too much of science and engineering -- but if you think about it, our own citizens are more likely than anyone to be the true enemy in disguise. So it's really a win-win situation.
Of course, then you find out that "gayness" isn't something you can "drive out", it's just something you are. Then you become a jackass self-hating prick with a special chip on your shoulder about fags. Man, I tell ya' the USMC is rife with them.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
I'll put in my two cents here, so they don't get lost in the copious amounts of typical /. noise.
The issue here isn't that "Google or Live didn't blur it out". It's that the base people didn't care much for the eyes in the skies. I'm sure the Chinese (or Martians) have seen the secrets.
I think they could defeat the peasants. They could probably defeat all non-microbial life in the area, if they were told to.
Their orders are a bit messier though. "Go there and shoot only the guilty - they look just like the innocent. Make everyone love us!"
I'd hate to be in the army now. It's an essential service, but it's being pissed away on a mission that it can't win by people who don't respect the use of the institution or the sacrifice made by those who serve.
The only time the "hearts and minds" of Iraq were available might have been directly following Gulf War 1, if we (the world) had removed Saddam. Everyone who would have helped in GW2 had been executed after GW1.
I'm not from the US, but I'd still rather the US prevailed in any conflict.
If the US has to become like China to win, that's not much of a victory.
Still, quite a demanding exercise to be able to convince the opposing leadership that they will be specifically targeted, and that they will be successfully eliminated within the first few hours of any conflict. When it comes to autocrats the reality is that if they believe they will definitely be killed, they will comply, as long as they believe they will continue to survive with their power over their own populace largely intact.
Democracies are a little bit trickier because the power is more widely distributed, and a lot of the players involved have no qualms about stabbing each other in the back ie. quite content for the majority of the leadership to get eliminated as long as they survive and can gain power. So technically autocrats require more weapons than democracies, as the autocrats need to target the population as a whole, whilst democracies only need to target the autocrats (the autocrats will target their own internal back stabbers with a vengeance).
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
Google says you're not the first, but what the hell...
That's almost precisely backwards. These submarines exist to ensure that never happens. They're part of the Mutually Assured Destruction balance. Neither side is going to launch a first strike unless it knows with absolute certainty that it's going to come out sufficiently ahead in the ensuing trade-off to survive as a viable state. Nuclear subs completely screw with any certainty you might think you've got in launching that attack, because it's damn near impossible to know that you'll be able to kill enough of the opposition's subs before they can launch. Stealthy propellers are a big part of that, helping to ensure that the enemy can't get and keep a lock on your position. These submarines aren't designed as first-strike weapons, but as an assured second-strike. To say that this technology cannot be used completely misses the point. In just existing, they are being used - as an insurance policy. If they were ever to launch, humanity would already be dead.
Reality is the ultimate Rorschach.