Slashdot Mirror


New Tech Lets Submarines 'Email' Planes (bbc.com)

A way for submerged submarines to communicate with planes has been developed by researchers at MIT. From a report: At present, it is difficult for planes to pick up underwater sonar signals because they reflect off the water's surface and rarely break through. The researchers found an extremely high-frequency radar could detect tiny ripples in water, created by an ordinary underwater speaker. This could let lost flight recorders and submarines communicate with planes. Submarines communicate using sonar waves, which travel well underwater but struggle to break through the surface. Planes communicate using radio signals that do not travel well in water. At present, submarines can surface to send messages - but this risks revealing their location. Sometimes, buoys are used to receive sonar signals and translate them into radio signals. "Trying to cross the air-water boundary with wireless signals has been an obstacle," said Fadel Adib, from the MIT Media Lab. The system developed at MIT uses an underwater speaker to aim sonar signals directly at the water's surface, creating tiny ripples only a few micrometres in height. These ripples can be detected by high-frequency radar above the water and decoded back into messages.

58 comments

  1. Ummm by Rick+Zeman · · Score: 2

    The researchers found an extremely high-frequency radar could detect tiny ripples in water, created by an ordinary underwater speaker.

    Umm, couldn't an adversary use the same tech to detect the larger ripples (albeit not targeted) generated by the sub displacing water as it moves?

    1. Re:Ummm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Probably not. But the enemy can just watch the surface for communications now. You know the sub is directly beneath or the signal would reflect off the interface.

    2. Re:Ummm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not really. You can use coding to hide your signal below the noise floor. Your intended receiver can still pick it up if they know the code, but your adversary wouldn't be able to. For example, this is how military GPS hides their signals: you can pick up the civilian satellite GPS (codes) but not the military GPS. Another example is in secure UWB communications.

    3. Re:Ummm by crunchygranola · · Score: 1

      This is a real concern for submarine security, and it limits a submarine's ability to travel fast at shallow depth. Aerial submarine reconnaissance missions do look for this, and it has been of interest for radar satellites.

      I think the flight recorder scenario is more a more likely scenario since a submarine can surface an antenna buoy without creating acoustic signals.

      I have wondered about whether it would be possible to engineer a back-up flight data recorder buoy that would be released in a crash (possibly by water pressure activation?). It might be hard to ensure that it would escape and surface under every possible scenario, but if it did so 95% of the time that would very useful.

      --
      Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
    4. Re:Ummm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It wouldn't even necessarily need to be a full flight recorder. Simply a transponder that detached on impact and floated would be pretty useful I would imagine ?

    5. Re:Ummm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, you know, they could just put gps trackers on every plane and track it in real time right down to the second it impacts the water.

      Or maybe just contact google and get the location of the passenger's phones at the time it went missing.

    6. Re:Ummm by FormOfActionBanana · · Score: 1

      Yeah, but as this is analogous to "email" per TFH, I guess the semi-public nature of the communication is perfectly acceptable.

      --
      Take off every 'sig' !!
    7. Re:Ummm by jwdb · · Score: 1

      Umm, couldn't an adversary use the same tech to detect the larger ripples (albeit not targeted) generated by the sub displacing water as it moves?

      Depends. There's more low-frequency energy than high-frequency energy on the ocean surface, so if the sub motion only generates large slow waves then it may in fact fall below the noise level, even while this high-frequency stuff doesn't.

  2. Email? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You idiot millenial bitches this is not goddamn email

    1. Re:Email? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. The title used quotes. The submitter or editor knows it's not really email.

      2. The title says it allows 'email' - you could in principle send an RFC-822-formatted email using this technique, but you would never know if it arrived.

  3. Meh by fisted · · Score: 0

    Because letting a buoy with an antenna rise up to the surface would be too difficult. Let's analyze micro water ripples in a lab setting instead, it will totally work on the oceans.

    1. Re:Meh by omnichad · · Score: 1

      The whole point of being underwater is to not reveal your position. A buoy that's directly above you is an absolute giveaway. But these signals could probably not be detected without already knowing their position.

    2. Re:Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Radar can detect a buoy, and it also leaves a wake in the water if it's attached to a moving submarine. So, it's not a good idea if the submarine is attempting to avoid detection (which is sort of the point of a submarine).

    3. Re: Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So how's the sub going to communicate its position to the airplane before communication starts?

    4. Re: Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And what, a ginormous plane or helicopter hovering over the water to bounce the radar won't give you away??? Seems like a small transponder floated to surface us much better....

    5. Re:Meh by Anil · · Score: 1

      You are assuming this would only be used for military/covert comms. Based on the overview alone, I could see this being useful for tons of stuff. Non-mil submarines that don't have Bouys; Situations where bouys or surfacing is a waste of time. unmanned sub status communications. black boxes. emergency/crash comms.

    6. Re:Meh by rossdee · · Score: 1

      Or the plane could drop a sonar buoy like they have been doing for more than half a century

    7. Re: Meh by magarity · · Score: 2

      It doesn't. The plane flies a predetermined route. If the sub has anything to say it needs to be close enough to that route and send its message at the time the plane will be overhead.

    8. Re:Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because letting a buoy with an antenna rise up to the surface would be too difficult.

      Let me preface this with two things ... 1) I assume we're talking about military applications, and 2) everything I know about submarines I learned from Tom Clancy novels. ;-)

      If you don't need to be stealthy, you could use a buoy or surface.

      If you do need to be stealthy, the buoy or going to the surface would give away your position.

      If you're in a submarine and trapped on the bottom, you need a way to signal to people where you might be.

      At present this sounds like this is preliminary work to allow comms to cross the water/air layer.

      The actual article that BBC links to provides more actual information:

      Using the system, military submarines, for instance, wouldn't need to surface to communicate with airplanes, compromising their location. And underwater drones that monitor marine life wouldn't need to constantly resurface from deep dives to send data to researchers.

      Another promising application is aiding searches for planes that go missing underwater. "Acoustic transmitting beacons can be implemented in, say, a plane's black box," Adib says. "If it transmits a signal every once in a while, you'd be able to use the system to pick up that signal."

      So, a couple of possible applications to the technology.

      Really, this is an early steps type of technology, and it isn't going to be deployed on a wide scale any time soon. But, like so many things, it has some promise, and the potential to open up some new things.

      Expanding the flight data recorders of planes to include something like this might also help in search and rescue operations, because it might at least give you a beacon to look for instead of "somewhere in the ocean".

      Let's analyze micro water ripples in a lab setting instead, it will totally work on the oceans.

      You know, 20 years ago the idea of using software to account for atmospheric turbulence for ground-based telescopes was new too. Now ground-based telescopes can be far better than they used to be. As people refine the techniques, they get better and better.

      What they've done is something new, how far they can take it ... well, that's why we do research.

    9. Re: Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and the adversary can observe the plane and lay mines in the area of the route. Genious

    10. Re:Meh by crunchygranola · · Score: 1

      The whole point of being underwater is to not reveal your position. A buoy that's directly above you is an absolute giveaway. But these signals could probably not be detected without already knowing their position.

      Most of the time the "folks back home" will know the sub's route and communication rendezvous (which may or may not all be kept) so knowing where to look/listen is usually not a problem. And communication aircraft can fly lots of bogus tracks so that that does not give it away.

      An antenna buoy is pretty easy to spot, if an observation platform in in sight of it. So you don't use these when that is likely (subs have a number of alternate methods of communication). But my concern is whether this acoustic signal can be detected by a sonobuoy or other hydrophone platform. Being acoustically quiet is what a submarine is all about. Most subs never uses its active sonar, ever (although it has one, just in case).

      --
      Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
    11. Re: Meh by crunchygranola · · Score: 1

      You must have lots of mines since an airplane can fly hundreds of fake track miles.

      As you say - "genious" (sic).

      --
      Second class citizen of the New Gilded Age
    12. Re: Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't really understand what credible threat subs are actually facing right now or why this would be a concern in any way?

      This all seems like war games posturing with people with literally nothing better to do or validate their income.

      Just having X nuclear subs spread out over the world is a deterrent, right? They could almost be parked in known locations.

    13. Re:Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well it wont be directly above you, the line can easily be long enough to trail some distance behind you. But even that is pretty close. The thing about Submarines hiding is that the ocean is a big place. You aren't using buoys for communication close to a hostile fleet. You do it miles and miles away. The buoy does not have to be big because the antenna doesn't have to be big and it most definitely isn't painted in a high vis color. It also wont give off an appreciable radar return so its perfectly viable. You reel it back in when you're done. If that isn't practical the subs also have radio masts that transmit in very directional bursts. So someone planning to eavsdrop has to be in the right place at the right time to even detect it. let alone decrypt it. These transmissions are text only and usually very concise and direct due to bandwidth constraints. But its plenty for the purpose.

    14. Re:Meh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the submarine is supposed to use a speaker to send a signal to make sound waves and not reveal its location? LOL

    15. Re:Meh by ChrisMaple · · Score: 1

      High frequency audio under water can be easily beamed, and dissipates fairly rapidly with distance. A submarine 200 feet down beams ultrasound at the surface, the ripples from which are detected by an airplane overhead. An enemy attempting to listen ten miles away may be 40 dB down in the beam pattern, 30 dB down from the ratio of distances, and 60 dB down from attenuation through the water (numbers hypothetical). Total 130 dB down, maybe undetectable.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    16. Re:Meh by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Sonar from whales you hear 100ds of miles under water, and their singing even farer.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  4. So... by Type44Q · · Score: 1

    I thought this was the purpose of HAARP?? (I kid; nobody actually believed that...)

  5. The first "email": by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 1

    New sub, who dis?

    ;)

    --
    Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
    1. Re:The first "email": by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Tyrone. I be fucking yo wifes."

      ;)

    2. Re:The first "email": by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Send nudes

  6. waves by DredJohn · · Score: 1

    FTA: "it does not work when there are waves taller than 16cm (6in) in the water." Doesn't most of the ocean have waves higher than 6 inches?

    1. Re:waves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FTA: "it does not work when there are waves taller than 16cm (6in) in the water." Doesn't most of the ocean have waves higher than 6 inches?

      The Wright Brothers' first powered flight was only about 120 feet/37 metres ... now look at what we can do.

      It would be idiotic to think that any new technology is going to work perfectly in all situations. It would also be idiotic to think once you've proven you can do it that you can't improve on it.

      This is how science and engineering work ... you do something new, some idiot says "yeah, but it doesn't do this", and then you make it better. If nobody made it in the first place, we'd never get cool things.

      So, what potential breakthroughs have you made this week? We'll all be happy to tell you why it's not good enough.

    2. Re:waves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      depends on the weather. There are plenty of areas that get becalmed under a high pressure area and the sea is nearly glass for hours or days at a time.

    3. Re:waves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like you need OP.

  7. Either by JustOK · · Score: 2

    Either the sub crew is reciting Beowulf in pig-latin or the prawns are farting.

    --
    rewriting history since 2109
  8. A whole plane? by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    Geez, and my crummy ISP only lets me do 10mb of attachments.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
    1. Re:A whole plane? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Still waiting to download a real burrito. Where's my burrito?

  9. MH370 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    At present, it is difficult for planes to pick up underwater sonar signals because they reflect off the water's surface and rarely break through. The researchers found an extremely high-frequency radar could detect tiny ripples in water, created by an ordinary underwater speaker. This could let lost flight recorders and submarines communicate with planes.

    In all the stories about MH370, I never understood why it was apparently so difficult to locate the flight recorder. Now, finally, in a story that has absolutely nothing to do with MH370, I understand.

    I'm glad I now know, but sure would have been nice if at least one of the many MH370 stories had actually explained this.

    1. Re:MH370 by FormOfActionBanana · · Score: 1

      There was a lot of good stuff on ppprune.org.

      The water was just too deep to capture any sounds from the surface. There were theories that the temperature gradient also redirected sounds horizontally and away from the surface where the detectors were.

      --
      Take off every 'sig' !!
    2. Re:MH370 by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      There were theories that the temperature gradient also redirected sounds horizontally and away from the surface where the detectors were.
      That is actually a fact, and salt difference gradients have the same (stronger) effect. That is why modern subs (Swedish in particular, but also German and Norwegian) are nearly undetectable in the Baltic seas and close to similar stealthy in the Atlantic.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  10. Re: Absolutely correct by c6gunner · · Score: 2

    The real solution (one that I think is already being used) - is quantum entangled communication.

    The problem with quantum entangled communication is that it requires cold fusion reactors to power it. Otherwise it doesn't have enough energy to travel through the ether.

  11. Limited utility by morethanapapercert · · Score: 1
    As others have said, there is a limited utility since the aircraft would pretty much have to know exactly where the sub or flight data recorder was in order to reliably communicate. However, it's possible that a sensitive enough satellite equipped with the right type of radar could be quite useful in at least finding a static target such a black box.

    There is one fact that reduces the usefulness of this as a military communications channel that I haven't seen mentioned by anyone else. As far as I know, subs communicate with higher authority using VLF, ELF and SLF frequencies. The way it would work is that the sub would tow a very long antenna behind it while on cruise in order to communicate with the base station(s), which in turn routed the signals to the land based submarine command facility and the joint chiefs communication facility. From there, it could be further routed by conventional radio or satellite to naval or aviation assets in the area of operations.

    They are low-bandwidth frequencies of course, but you can transmit a hell of a lot of information using pre-generated code phrase books/databases to cover most contingencies.Those of use who deal with passwords and IT security are well aware of how quickly the number of possible alphanumeric character combinations goes up as you add successive characters to a required length. (for those of us who don't know: an 8 character string has 218,340,105,584,896 possible combinations so you could have that many code phrases in a database)

    --
    I need a wheelchair van for my son. Help me get the word out. https://www.gofundme.com/wheelchair-van-for-jj
  12. Bad idea by WinstonWolfIT · · Score: 1

    There's a reason subs are sea-gapped.

    1. Re:Bad idea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's a reason subs are sea-gapped.

      But they aren't! Submarines have floating antenna arrays which communicate with satellites. They rise on a buoy when they are not actively trying to avoid detection and float on the surface via a cable connection.

  13. Just pant a target on it why don't you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The problem with this is that you have to have a pretty good idea of where the submarine is in the first place. This is what we ran into when we were trying to communicate with submarines with blue-green lasers and other optical means (i.e. line of sight). We had to fly our aircraft in a search pattern over the area where we THOUGHT the submarine was (maybe by appointment or the fact that that was its patrol area), hoping to pick up a signal from it. If an enemy was watching us, he'd have had a pretty good idea where to start looking himself.

  14. Re:Absolutely correct by FormOfActionBanana · · Score: 0

    You know, the latest public information about submarine technology is like from the 1970s. What I suspect is that the state of the art is WAY beyond civilian technology. I always thought they would find a way to use gravitational waves to communicate through masses like water and the earth's crust. I bet you could vibrate a bar in the direction of its length, at a very high frequency to send a rather directional gravity wave that could be picked up by a another massive sensor.

    --
    Take off every 'sig' !!
  15. Re:Absolutely correct by FormOfActionBanana · · Score: 1

    And quantum entanglement is SUPPOSED to be incapable of transmitting information.

    --
    Take off every 'sig' !!
  16. Unnecessarily Reinventing the Wheel by thechemic · · Score: 1

    Submarines already have towed floating antenna arrays which are capable of communicating with satellites which can then relay messages to planes all over the globe. They also have towed sonar arrays, towed optics arrays to communicate digitally with light.

    Looks like some of these MIT boys n' girls should have joined the Navy before inventing solutions to things which don't have a problem.

    --
    Let's make like a bird... and get the flock outta here.
  17. Great! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They've solved the Planes & Submarines. When will they solve the Trains & Automobiles?

    Hmmm?

  18. Subs, yes; flight recorders, no by GPS+Pilot · · Score: 1

    detect tiny ripples in water, created by an ordinary underwater speaker. This could let lost flight recorders and submarines communicate with planes.

    Chances are this underwater speaker would have to be quite "loud," and connected to a powerful amplifier that would quickly drain the battery in a flight recorder.

    --
    That that is is that that that that is not is not.
  19. Re: Absolutely correct by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The whole of the physics world for thirty years bent over backwards to substantiate statements like that - whilst arguing with Einstein who himself was certain that their ideas were hogwash - and that quantum communication was probably pretty simple. He didn't figure out how to do it in his lifetime, but then he had much less powerful tech in his laboratory in the 30s, 40s, and 50s. Quantum comm has to be done indirectly, that's all.

    Personally, I'm convinced that quantum communication is in use today, by folks who like the idea of having all that power all to themselves.

  20. In a pool, or in the ocean? by kenwd0elq · · Score: 1

    Did they do this in a calm, still pool, or did they do this in the noisy, wavy ocean? If it was in a pool, get a dozen kids playing "Marco Polo" and see if it still works.

  21. buzz-word mindset by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... 'Email' Planes

    Why not "talk to" the (people on) planes instead? Is this what the buzz-word mindset is creating? We need extra technology just to communicate? Now transmitting data through multiple mediums is already fancy but even a digital version of this doesn't need a keyboard, visual display and dedicated server.