Slashdot Mirror
Grounded Russian Nuclear Sub Photographed With Sonar
Lanxon sends in an intriguing piece from Wired: "This eerie wreck image is not computer-generated. It's the sonar image of Russian nuclear submarine B-159 (called K-159 before decommissioning), which has been lying 248m down in the Barents Sea, between Norway and Russia, since 2003. The Russian Federation hired Adus, a Scottish company that specializes in high-resolution sonar surveying, to evaluate if it would be possible to recover the wreck. 'The operation was complicated as the submarine was very deep, so we had to use the sonar equipment mounted on a remotely operated vehicle' [also pictured in the article], says Martin Dean, the managing director of Adus and a forensic-wreck archaeologist. 'We also had a problem with the surveying due to the density of North Atlantic cod attracted to the sound of the sonar and the light of the cameras.'"
Looking at the image, it looks like your baby is a boy and you have quite the flat stomach...
This eerie wreck image is not computer generated.
You don't have to use 3d studio max to generate an image with a computer. I would suggest that this image is in fact generated by a computer. It's just generated from sonar data instead of an artists interpretation.
Could such an image also be called an acoustigraph?
Looks like they could just patch a few holes and pump air in to refloat it.
(and yeah that might just be how it looks).
http://michaelsmith.id.au
"We also had a problem with the surveying due to the density of north Atlantic cod attracted to the sound of the sonar and the light of the cameras. So at the beginning we had to turn off the equipment for 40 minutes and wait for the fish to go."
Thought the sonar wasn't good for the marine life in that they would avoid it. Is this a peculiarity of cod?
April first is a really unfortunate date to publish any article on the internet that isn't a joke. The whole day has basically been ruined by people taking April Fools too far.
The image is obviously computer generated; it's just computer generated from a real dataset. (Although the dataset has been coloured to separate the sub from the sea floor and a model of the sub fitted to the data so that when rendered the sub will obscure the sea floor behind the sub)
Too bad the Glomar Explorer has been refitted for deep sea oil drilling. The biggest problem she would have had with a wreck 248 meters down is that it might be too shallow, as the wreck Glomar Explorer was designed to go after was 4.9km down. The Russians would probably object to its use, though, given the ship's history.
If you create an image of something using sound waves, the correct term would be "sonographed". "Photographed" implies that you used light to create the image.
I really don't get how 248 m is considered "very deep". For a reference the Titanic lies at 4000m depth, and there are points in the pacific ocean where the depth is around 13000 m ...
Maybe there is a reason why it says so, i just don't see it ...
We learn from history that we learn nothing from history - Tom Veneziano
Thought one could use Google to look up known, easily answered questions. Is this a peculiarity of you?
It looks like that one sock that always goes missing out of the washing machine, and it's lying on a lonely yellow jumper.
That image is of a knitted wool and felt prop from The Clangers.
Unfortunately there is no "anymore" there. People never cared much for using words exactly how their grandfather did. Otherwise you'd still be speaking like in Beowulf. What is nowadays the right way to read and write in modern English would have been the _awfully_ wrong way a mere couple of hundred years ago. (E.g., "knight" used to be read exactly like it's written, with a hard K, an I like in "dim", and the G and H actually pronounced. Look at the mangled way you're reading it nowadays. Tut tut.)
Any modern language in fact consists of the typos, mis-pronunciations and funky kewl-kid ways of using words, from the ages past.
Meanings change too. "Seelie" once meant holy or blessed, now it evolved into "silly". "Thing" once meant a session of a ruling assembly (think: your city council in session), and by extension the assembly itself. Then it evolved to mean by extension the agenda of that meeting, then a topic on that agenda, then the object that will be the topic of that discussion, then eventually just the modern meaning of "thing."
There's your "shame" vs "pancake" right there.
So, you know, essentially complaining about kids using words wrong compared to _your_ seelie standard, is essentially hypocritical. Unless you're also going to go, "man, look at how we mangled the beautiful language of Shakespeare. Whar is this junk I'm speaking?" ;)
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
Neutrons don't, but the salts of the fissible material (and of fission by-products) might travel.
How this could have been modded informative, I don't know.
they talk out of their asses. literally
here is a .wav of a herring fart talking, and a story about it:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4343-fish-farting-may-not-just-be-hot-air.html
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn4343-fish-farting-may-not-just-be-hot-air.html
this link perhaps explains the cod's behavior: herring use sound (farting) to "talk" to each other (coordinate schooling after dark). so that would perhaps explain the attraction to the sonar. i don't know how related cod are to herring, but even if not related, there is perhaps convergent evolution going on here (schooling fish in the north atlantic coordinating with sound)
apparently some fish literally talk out of their asses
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
All I need now is a couple pints of guiness
The Kursk, which famously sunk in 2000:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f6/Kursk_wreck.jpg
From the wiki article you provided the link to, this was the 13'th sub out of 16 that was being towed for decommission.
Lucky 13.
Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
What a cromulent observation!
Ninjas don't carry tic tacs
and use it to boil the water out of the sub - hey presto it raises itself to the surface. Those sub reators are uber-reliable it probably still works.
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
In Soviet Russia, sub finds you!
(Haven't read the article or the summary, so only the mods will tell if the oblig. joke is relevant.)
I'm not a lawyer, but I play one on the Internet. Blog
I'm unsure exactly what's newsworthy here. The Russians have known where the wreck lies since the day it was lost. Computer generated imagery from high resolution sonar has been around for over a decade, as have ROV's carrying said high resolution sonars, as well as the sonars themselves.
Or, IOW, move along - nothing to see here but a 'news' story based on a self serving puff piece press release.
It did not run aground on a shoal or beach. It sank.
Damping absorbs vibrations. Dampening is caused by moisture.
Is all these ditched Russion subs -- the reactors alone have quite a lot of already enriched fuel in them, and who knows what else they carried. 248 meters they say is hard. Hah -- if you were a state or sub-state actor and knew where one was, you'd be after that thing foot horse and marines -- and get it. I bet you can even see the thermal bloom on some of them via satellite.
Why guess when you can know? Measure!
Give me a ping, Vasili. One ping only, please.
And this what one of the commenters had to say:
"I process sonar data and if that is an image based on real soundings I will eat a school of Atlantic Cod. I think someone had too much time on his hands and a fancy computer on April 1."