Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

spectrum.ieee.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 159 posts

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#71

Post by sitkack »

ceejayoz wrote: post #23
ok_dad wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea is subs deliver missiles halfway around the world, the rockets do the rest. It’s a matter of an hour for a rocket to transit from the Great Lakes to the other side of the planet, but half that for rockets fired from most of the way there already.

Shortening the time to target is one of the benefits (well, is that really the right term here?) of submarines, yes, but another is survivability for a retaliatory strike as a deterrent. Trident missiles have at least a 7,500 mile range. A couple in the Great Lakes would provide that with complete safety against Russian hunter-killer subs.

Russian subs are already in the Great Lakes.

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#72

Post by naniwaduni »

ceejayoz wrote: post #39
hyperhopper wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no." https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headli...

Which is great, until someone writes the "Can any headline that ends in a question mark be answered by the word no?" article.

That's a "No, but this one can be."

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#73

Post by nradov »

BeefWellington wrote: post #48
unchocked wrote: post #8

Seems naive that, as the article claims, nations might agree to limit their detection technology to enhance survivability of their adversaries’ nuclear forces. If “ocean transparency” comes to pass, it seems much likelier that we’d have to deal with a realignment of the MAD calculus.

I would guess that on some level, some analyst many years ago laid out a plan for what should happen with that, and the first thing would be to have a few armed satellites to ensure the continued effectiveness of MAD as a concept. Yes, it would violate treaties against the weaponization of space but I would lay even money on the idea that some country has already done this.

Armed satellites aren't survivable.

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#74

Post by shrewduser »

sitkack wrote: post #71
ceejayoz wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shortening the time to target is one of the benefits (well, is that really the right term here?) of submarines, yes, but another is survivability for a retaliatory strike as a deterrent. Trident missiles have at least a 7,500 mile range. A couple in the Great Lakes would provide that with complete safety against Russian hunter-killer subs.

Russian subs are already in the Great Lakes.

surely this is in jest

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#75

Post by l33t2328 »

sitkack wrote: post #71
ceejayoz wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shortening the time to target is one of the benefits (well, is that really the right term here?) of submarines, yes, but another is survivability for a retaliatory strike as a deterrent. Trident missiles have at least a 7,500 mile range. A couple in the Great Lakes would provide that with complete safety against Russian hunter-killer subs.

Russian subs are already in the Great Lakes.

If you’re not joking, where do you suspect they were deployed from?

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#76

Post by xattt »

RajT88 wrote: post #61
noduerme wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It does seem silly, but not out or the realm of possibility. The Great Lakes stretch further north and closer to the Russian heartland than almost any land in America. Any international waters further north and closer by great circle distance to Moscow, besides the north Atlantic, are covered in ice part of the year. Someone said it's cheaper to dig holes in the ground. The problem is those holes are on a first strik…

Great lakes commercial fisherman and also crew on container ships have said for years that they see weird stuff dozens of miles offshore in the Great lakes. Fish stories and all that. But there is precedent for submarines and even aircraft carriers in the Great lakes. Lake Michigan is filled with crashed trainer aircraft from WWII.

Can you be more specific about the weird stuff? Are you suggesting the Great Lakes are occupied by foreign states?

A comment above mentions a demilitarization treaty of the Great Lakes.

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#77

Post by lb1lf »

jakzurr wrote: post #14
Retric wrote: post #10

At least for the US why not keep one or more nuclear missile subs in the Great Lakes? Lake Superior alone covers 31,700 square miles to an average depth of 483 feet. It’s far to large an area to target with a first strike and well protected from non US/Canadian forces. Edit: A US/Canadian treaty demilitarized the Great Lakes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush–Bagot_Treaty

We could use that as a defense against Canada. ;)

You may be joking, but do keep in mind that the Canadians (well, the British, but if memory serves, a significant fraction of the force were from Canada) sacked Washington D.C. in 1814.

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#78

Post by hdevalence »

Retric wrote: post #37
jwithington wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we could but why build a whole base complete with nuclear weapons handling and reactor maintenance facilities on the Great Lakes? Just use the ones in Georgia/Washington. It’s a fun thought exercise though!

Ships much larger than ohio subs can get into and out of the Great Lakes via locks. Looks like the real reason is a US Canadian treaty. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rush–Bagot_Treaty

Wikipedia lists the https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seawaymax size as allowing at most 26.5’ of draft, while the Ohio-class submarines require 35.5’. So treaty aside, it seems probably not physically possible, even though the locks are bigger in other dimensions.

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#80

Post by ac29 »

DoingIsLearning wrote: post #63
trasz wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like lasers?

Optics would need line of sight. The earth's curvature puts a very hard limit to how far you could communicate. The accepted standard in underwater is VLF, but as the name implies you are only capable of very low data rates.

The name implies only the frequency, which doesnt have anything to do with data rates. The VLF band is tiny though - only 27kHz. The small bandwidth is the main reason it would be slow.
Post reply on HN