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

131–140 of 159 posts

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#131

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

whakim wrote: post #59
ceejayoz wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It would very much change the calculus for the UK and France, though. Maybe Israel, as well.

I'm not sure it'd change the calculus for the UK or France because they are NATO members which effectively ensures their second strike capability. (It certainly might change the cost/benefit calculation on building submarines, though!) Israel probably doesn't even subscribe to a second strike doctrine given that the potential adversaries they're trying to deter don't even have nuclear weapons.

France has made a deliberate point of not relying on NATO, and instead maintaining its own nuclear arsenal.

If the Cold War had turned hot, the Soviet plan was to drive to the Rhine and then negotiate, on the theory that the US might sacrifice West Germany, but that France would definitely retaliate on its own.

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#132

Post by Retric »

jlawson wrote: post #51
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

They might be an easier target than you think. What could a dozen 1MT warheads, sunk to a depth of 100ft, do to submarines anywhere in the Great Lakes? Shockwaves travel through water much better than through air. Water explodes into steam in a way that air doesn't. My intuition is that you actually could pretty reliably paste a sub inside the Great Lakes using some nukes launches from Russia. The lakes may just not…

Nuclear depth bombs are well known technology that was abandoned because they don’t actually work that well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_depth_bomb

They aren’t that much better than depth charges in part because energy is spread in 3D space. 1,000,000 times the energy means ~100x the range, but depth charges are very short range weapons. In WWII with a sub on radar and using 12 depth charges in a grid they only had a 5-10% kill chance. Which is one reason why nuclear depth charges where replaced by target seeking torpedoes.

Carpet bombing the Great Lakes with thousands of nukes could work but that’s a great nuclear sponge. Directing a huge quantity of munitions away from other targets.

PS: 100ft is likely shallow with much of the blast being sent into the air but that’s not very important to your suggestion.

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#133

Post by volkl48 »

onion2k wrote: post #83
bombcar wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is/was simpler and cheaper to just stick nukes in big holes in the ground all over the midwest. Some are probably still "hot".

Those will be among the targets in the first strike. Unless they can fire before the nukes hit they're not useful. Subs are pretty much the only option. I suspect foreign agents try to bribe people in submarine crews to sabotage their sub in the event of a strike. If someone onboard could stop the American second strike missiles being fired they'd give Russia a huge advantage. I imagine the Navy have considerer this.

In the event of a full nuclear war, whoever is on board the sub has probably just had their family, friends, and home vaporized.

Further, they are trapped in a small metal tube with 100 other people in similar condition, and who will probably be....not pleased if any sabotage is discovered.

I suspect it would be very hard to successfully bribe said crew members. (And have them actually follow through with their end of the deal, rather than just taking the money and...not doing it if the war ever happened)

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#134

Post by kennend3 »

lb1lf wrote: post #77
jakzurr wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This gets posted and re-posted often..

Not that it matters, but I am Canadian and we were taught in school Canada was created in 1867 via the BNA (British North American Act).

Therefor, those who "sacked" Washington must be British, the same way that George Washington must British as well be given he was born prior to the formation of the USA. He became "American" later, much as "Canada" was created later..

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#135

Post by Qem »

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

Wouldn't the pressure wave from a underwater burst make the submarine hull collapse, given the lake has limited depth to disperse the energy of the blast, when compared to open oceans.

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#136

Post by kennend3 »

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.

As others have posted, you must be joking?

Are you aware that in order to reach the Great lakes via the ocean requires navigating several locks?

Do you propose the Russian subs stopped at the locks, paid the lock fees and continued on their way?

when the reach the locks, what type of ship do they state they are

https://greatlakes-seaway.com/en/commercial-shipping/tolls-s...

They don't list "submarine"?

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#138

Post by Retric »

Qem wrote: post #135
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

Wouldn't the pressure wave from a underwater burst make the submarine hull collapse, given the lake has limited depth to disperse the energy of the blast, when compared to open oceans.

Not something I know that much about, though nuclear depth charges where apparently replaced with torpedoes because they aren’t that great a weapon.

Best case 500 ft vs 12,000 feet means the blast might have a range roughly square root of 24 or 5x as far. But a more variable topology might work like the walls of an anechoic chamber and disparate the blast much faster. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anechoic_chamber#/media/File:C...

Re: Will AI steal submarines’ stealth?

#140

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

tomohawk wrote: post #118

> Given the strategic importance of submarine stealth, Gower asks, “Why would any country want to detect and track submarines? It’s only something you’d do if you want to make a nuclear-armed power nervous.” The US had the capability to detect and track Soviet subs in large swaths of the oceans for decades using SOSUS and other sensor networks. https://dosits.org/people-and-sound/history-of-underwater-ac... During th…

> This is why it is important to keep a technological edge over authoritarian governments. Such governments are not morally equivalent to democracies. They have radically different goals, and radically different value systems.

For all this boasting about how moral the US is, remember that the US illegally invaded Iraq, leading to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. More generally, the US and its allies have wreaked untold havoc in the Middle East over the last 20 years. And going farther back, the US fought a long and brutal colonial war in Vietnam (plus neighboring Laos and Cambodia), in which it killed millions.

Post reply on HN