3 ms·
Surely not. The submarine with the larger more sensitive instruments in a quieter environment ought to be able to detect sound levels below that which their ac
by gpm 5y ago
Surely not.
The submarine with the larger more sensitive instruments in a quieter environment ought to be able to detect sound levels below that which their active opposition can.
If X amount of noise-energy hits the submarine, it only reflects Y<X of that energy, and only Z<Y of that reflection goes in the right direction to be detected by the opposition. The noise should be louder at the submarine, than at the thing detecting the submarine.
Both of these weigh in favor of the submarine detecting the searcher before the searcher detects the submarine.
- omni 5y agoI'm fully willing to admit I'm talking out my ass here, but does it not make sense to assume that both a) the active drones are going to be much faster than a submarine trying to maintain silence, and b) there are likely to be many drones converging from different directions if they're searching a known submarine parking spot? Still seems like advantage drones to me
- gpm 5y agoI'm not more of an expert of submarine tactics than you are, I was just taking issue with the physical claim that they already know where you are by the time you hear them.
- imwillofficial 5y agoNo such thing as a sub parking spot. Think of the ocean and sound conductance like layers of a cake. I’m sure drones will get there, but right now advantage is the subs
- addingnumbers 5y ago... so the sub discovers the active buoy 0.66 seconds sooner for every kilometer of distance between them. I don't imagine that knowing you'll be detected 40 seconds before they know you've been detected changes the tactical situation a whole lot.
- gpm 5y agoNo, nothing I was talking about was related to the speed of sound in water (which is where I assume you're getting 0.66 seconds/km, since it's about right). I agree the speed of signal propagation seems unlikely to matter much in most situations.
- addingnumbers 5y agoMy point is in this scenario there's no appreciable difference between "if you can hear them, they've already found you" and "if you can hear them, they'll find you in 40 seconds" The observation that they are "detecting the searcher before the searcher detects the submarine" is academic and inconsequential when we're talking about such a negligible amount of time between detections.
- gpm 5y agoBut there is an appreciable difference between "if you can hear them, they've already found you", and "if you can hear them, they might never find you because you can see them looking from farther away than they can see, and they might just be outright searching the wrong area". All my arguments went to the latter kind of problem, not the former. Your 40 seconds number seems to be based on the speed of signal propagation, not the range at which things can be detected. Even in the event where they do find you, the arguments I gave would suggest that it would take vastly longer than the speed of signal propogation to do so, because they would have to move closer to you. Giving you substantially more notice than 40 seconds.
- addingnumbers 5y agoI see where you're coming from. Good points. I was taking it for granted that knowing the location of an unmanned, expendable sonar buoy or probe before you're discovered is not tactically important. Now that you have me thinking, it would clearly allow you to stay out of detection range if you had the good fortune for their pings to initiate within your detection range but outside theirs.