11 ms·

I wonder if U.S. agencies (e.g. the Navy) had picked up the sound of the implosion days ago, back when the Titan was said to have lost communication, and knew a

by danso 3y ago

I wonder if U.S. agencies (e.g. the Navy) had picked up the sound of the implosion days ago, back when the Titan was said to have lost communication, and knew all this time that the Titan had likely already been destroyed. But there's no incentive for them to publicly say anything, as it would hint to their underwater surveillance capabilities. And the "rescue effort" is good practice for their crews. I watched most of the press conferences and don't think I heard anyone ask about it. But hearing loud noises across thousands of miles is certainly within the U.S. military's capability.

danso 3y ago
From the WSJ: https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-navy-detected-titan-sub-implosion-days-ago-6844cb12?mod=e2tw https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-navy-detected-titan-sub-imp... https://archive.is/pSpem https://archive.is/pSpem U.S. Navy Detected Titan Sub Implosion Days Ago Underwater microphones designed to detect enemy submarines first detected Titan tragedy WASHINGTON—A top secret U.S. Navy acoustic detection system designed to spot enemy submarines first heard the Titan sub implosion hours after the submersible began its mission, officials involved in the search said. The Navy began listening for the Titan almost as soon as the sub lost communications, according to a U.S. defense official. Shortly after its disappearance, the U.S. system detected what it suspected was the sound of an implosion near the debris site discovered Thursday and reported its findings to the commander on site, U.S. defense officials said. “The U.S. Navy conducted an analysis of acoustic data and detected an anomaly consistent with an implosion or explosion in the general vicinity of where the Titan submersible was operating when communications were lost,” a senior U.S. Navy official told The Wall Street Journal in a statement. “While not definitive, this information was immediately shared with the Incident Commander to assist with the ongoing search and rescue mission.”
treyfitty 3y ago
This was quite prescient of you. At first (hours before they confirmed the debris was from the sub), I thought your comment was a stretch, but still plausible- yet impossible to prove. All too often, we dismiss these conspiratorial hypotheses, but now that the WSJ all but confirms your suspicions, I’m scared to find out what other inconvenient truths there are to life
awb 3y ago
Top Secret U.S. Navy System Heard Titan Implosion Days Ago (wsj.com) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36439661 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36439661
penlopt 3y ago
I was a Navy OT A during the Cold War. I worked in the SOSUS community meaning my shipmates and I detected and tracked submarines day in and day out. The fact that it was a small vessel could have made detection of an implosion more difficult. But most definitely not impossible. They also had the last known coordinates which helps triangulate location and a search area for debris fields. This was always something we trained for and hoped to never see an implosion in real time. Sadly, this was not to be.
EA-3167 3y ago
Seems likely, there's no point revealing classified capabilities in this context.
- gravitronic 3y ago
  There's a lot of unclassified information about their historic capabilities, I'm pretty sure they can give a lot of detail without leaking anything not already public. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOSUS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOSUS https://www.amazon.com/Red-November-Inside-U-S-Soviet-Submarine/dp/0061806773 https://www.amazon.com/Red-November-Inside-U-S-Soviet-Submar...
  - politician 3y ago
    A timely response conveys something about how fast we can locate something underwater.
mhh__ 3y ago
It's known that they can detect implosions from very long distances however this is a tiny submarines so perhaps they are just using it as a training opportunity with no other information.
- dredmorbius 3y ago
  FWIW, there are small (and highly stealthy) military submarines and submersibles, for whom accurately determining destruction based on acoustic signatures could very well have strategic value. So those capabilities (and this opportunity) could be more significant than might appear at first blush.
fuzzbazz 3y ago
Would the implosion have been loud enough? I mean the thing was a tiny 7x3m cylinder located 700Km from the nearest coast...
- jprd 3y ago
  I've never been in the military, not a sub-mariner, 1000% SOSUS could detect that. SOSUS could detect that in the 1970s, if not earlier.
  - jprd 3y ago
    https://archive.is/pSpem https://archive.is/pSpem
- can16358p 3y ago
  Sound can travel MUCH further and fast underwater, so in the event of an implosion, it might create enough of a spike in hydrophones that is statistically significant. Also the experts might be able to analyze the signal's signature to confirm (or bet) it's an implosion. Crossmatch that with the time of loss of communication and it's safe to assume that it's it.
  - analog31 3y ago
    Indeed, and moreover, the ability to detect underwater sound is probably aided by the lack of localized turbulence (wind noise in microphones) and the degree of sophistication sought after by navies due to the detection and counter-detection of military submarines. Without any actual knowledge, I imagine that a ship or sub could be festooned with hydrophones, enabling it to detect faint noises, but also to determine their direction from phase information.
- margalabargala 3y ago
  I have no idea specifically how loud it would have been. However with some probably-reasonable guesses, it looks like it actually would have been quite loud. Here's a naval study where they measured underwater sound propagation: https://www.navymarinespeciesmonitoring.us/files/7514/2780/4918/Soloway_and_Dahl_2015_Noise_Measurement_Trial_at_SSTC_5Feb2015.pdf https://www.navymarinespeciesmonitoring.us/files/7514/2780/4... They found that a 10lb block of C4 exploding produced ~210db of underwater sound. If we use that sound level as an approximation of the implosion of 200 cubic meters of submersible, which seems not completely unreasonable, then we can use the inverse square law to calculate the perceived sound far away. Halifax, NS is 1100km from the Titanic wreck. A sound that is 210db at 1 meter, is 89db at 1100000 meters. Boston is 1700km away; at that distance it would be 85db. 85db is really quite loud. You would be able to hear that, if you were underwater and paying attention. If the implosion was instead, say, 180db, then it would have been 55db in Boston harbor. Still easily detectable by instruments. For reference, when divers are performing construction using e.g. rock drills, those commonly reach 170db. The implosion of close to 200 cubic meters of air seems like it would produce a louder noise than a rock drill.
Solvency 3y ago
Maybe there is a term from quantum physics that can be used here metaphorically, but I think you can safely assume that what you said is probabilistically true, and probably true for all other comparable assumptions. It may resolve to be false when examined closely in any one particular instance, but it doesn't change the fact that they are working extremely hard to maintain a fog of mystery around their scope of capabilities.
psychphysic 3y ago
Other than awe for US military capability. What motivates this idea? Not only does it explain nothing, it requires additional explanation.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- danso 3y ago
  It's not a complicated or even malicious "coverup". They hear an anomalous sound, but don't know with 100% certainty that it's came from the lost sub. What is the Coast Guard supposed to do, not do anything the past few days and say it's because "Sorry we heard a loud sound at that time and are 99% sure that those people are dead"?
  - psychphysic 3y ago
    I must be missing something it seems simpler to assume "Coast guard gets report of lost sub and searches for a while". Why would you turn that into "USN knows that a sub imploded. Did nothing observable. Coast guard gets report of lost sub and searches for a while." I looked at the link, I can't see any reason to interject into that more capability than was demonstrated. It may exist, it may not. There is no reason to comment on additional capabilities based on this event.
    - danso 3y ago
      My assumption is that hearing this kind of long distance noise is well within the laws of physics and what we know of the U.S.'s capability. So I don't see this as "additional capability", but rather, am asking from a mindset of "How did they not hear a suspicious sound at the time of the missing sub?" Whether they did or not, nothing would presumably change about the Coast Guard conducting search-and-rescue/recovery operations (since they still don't know for sure what happened). Worth pointing out that private explorers, led by Richard Garriott (aka Lord British, apparently), complained that they had optimal rescue equipment but got pushback from the U.S. officials: https://archive.is/HXtFn https://archive.is/HXtFn > “Magellan has received mixed signals, first hearing from US Gov to get ready, waiting for plans, then getting told to stand down,” Garriott wrote in an email sent to Vice Admiral William Galanis, commander of Naval Sea Systems Command, U.S. Coast Guard Rear Admiral John W. Mauger, who is leading the recovery mission, Congressman Lloyd Doggett, and Representative Eric Swalwell on Wednesday afternoon. Again, hard to know if this is just standard operating procedure or not. If it's the case the U.S. govt already had things figured out by now, then it makes sense they weren't going to expedite Garriot's group, given that the search effort had already resulted in the loss of 1 (maybe 2) search vehicles: > In addition, at least one ROV, possibly two, was damaged or destroyed during the search-and-rescue mission—a testament to the difficult conditions currently facing rescuers.
ryanhuff 3y ago
That’s conspiracy thinking. The absence of your question being addressed doesn’t mean it’s plausible. The ocean is generally a noisy place, and the activities of a small submerged vehicle likely won’t raise notice without active listening.
- dehrmann 3y ago
  Conspiring to keep secret military capabilities secret?
- psychphysic 3y ago
  You're right this is insane. /r/UFO must be leaking. A complete non sequitur to assume it was detected with no observable action taken.
- danso 3y ago
  What's the conspiracy? That Coast Guard officials declined to say any more than is necessary? Yesterday the Coast Guard spokesman [0] said he hadn't even heard the notion that the banging noises were made at regular 30-min intervals, even though Rolling Stone published a leaked DHS report the day before [1], something which completely dominated the news coverage and gave people hope that there were survivors. When directly asked about most anything, the officials frequently demurred. Giving out the least amount of info necessary is their standard operating procedure, not a conspiracy [0] https://www.dvidshub.net/video/887852/coast-guard-partners-hold-press-briefing-21-ft-submersible-titan-900-miles-east-cape-cod https://www.dvidshub.net/video/887852/coast-guard-partners-h... [1] https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/titanic-submersible-missing-searchers-heard-banging-1234774674/ https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/titani...
haunter 3y ago
This is exactly what happened to the argentinian sub in 2017 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_ARA_San_Juan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_ARA_San_Juan >On 23 November the Argentine Navy said an event consistent with an explosion had been detected, on the day the submarine lost communications, by CTBTO seismic anomaly listening posts on Ascension Island and Crozet Islands >The organization had been asked to analyse data from the search area by the Argentine government on the week of the disappearance, but no leads had materialised until 22 November when the CTBTO informed the government. >The Navy added that it received information on the explosion on the afternoon of 22 November, adding that it would have concentrated search efforts in that area had it known sooner.
buggythebug 3y ago
Ya but even so they could have sent rescue ships there because "we think it could be here" - nothing given up.
- CoastalCoder 3y ago
  I could imagine a cost-benefit analysis making sense here. - Pro: increased chance of saving a few people's lives - Con: risk of leaking info about U.S. sonar sensitivity I.e., the decision would depend on the magnitude of the "pro" and "con" probabilities.
  - WalterBright 3y ago
    If it imploded the chance of survival is zero.
  - aflag 3y ago
    If they detected an implosion there's no chance of saving anyone's lives. It would increase the chance of maybe finding bodies, though.
  - toss1 3y ago
    Also - Pro: Excellent realistic training opportunity to maintain and upgrade skills
  - bell-cot 3y ago
    Audible-at-a-distance implosion ==>> Everyone inside is ~liquified The actual Pro would be "minor calibration opportunity for our secret sensor network".
- politician 3y ago
  It gives up bounds on how fast we can locate something.
  - buggythebug 3y ago
    or don't announce anything and just find it
2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
I'd imagine that location is the second most acoustically monitored part of the Atlantic (looking for ruskie subs coming from the north). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOSUS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOSUS
- jebarker 3y ago
  What's the first?
  - scrlk 3y ago
    I assume it's: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GIUK_gap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GIUK_gap
  - evgen 3y ago
    I would guess the gap between Iceland and the U.K. for the same reason.
    - 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
      Yes
onesphere 3y ago
Would you ever give the enemy demonstration of your detection capabilities especially when they know you’re looking for something?
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
akira2501 3y ago
I thought that loss of communication was an expected part of the trip due to the depth.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- agumonkey 3y ago
  I wonder if typical deep sea exploration use relay all along the descent, to ensure comms and raise rescue capabilities.
  - civilitty 3y ago
    The three main methods are: acoustic using SONAR to receive data, tether or umbilical cord, and buoy based where the DSV releases a buoy that ascends to the top. Relays don't really work because you'd need a LOT of them and they'd all have to keep themselves positioned within like 30 meters of each other which is very hard with ocean currents. That's with very low bandwidth VLF radio.
    - moffkalast 3y ago
      Kinda weird that they didn't have an optical cable tether tbh.
      - bg46z 3y ago
        Would be extremely heavy and very brittle
        rootusrootus 3y ago
        There are deep sea submersibles designed to go a good bit deeper than Titanic which have optical tethers.
      - denlekke 3y ago
        wouldn't it basically need to be the same as what they use for intercontinental cables ? tons of shielding and repeaters. maybe there'd be further risk bc if it breaks at the ship it could fall on or weigh down the submersible
Workaccount2 3y ago
Might explain why they denied offers from the British rescue sub (IIRC the only available one that could go to such depth) that wanted to come out to try to rescue the crew.
ranger207 3y ago
Possibly, but arguing against that are three factors: 1) the sub was tiny and its possible it wasn't actually loud enough; 2) the sub was at a depth that SOSUS doesn't listen at and sound propagation underwater is very complex; and 3) there's a lot of other potential sources of noise underwater, including both mechanical like ships and biological. Even if they did detect the Titan's implosion, there's enough sources of doubt that three days ago it would've been difficult to say definitely that it was gone.
rich_sasha 3y ago
I suppose to detect a noise is one thing, to know what it is is another. The ocean must be full of underwater volcano eruptions, tectonic activity, oil rigs banging and drilling, etc. One of the rescue boats was a commercial cable-laying vessel, presumably laying cables and making noise.

by danso 3y ago

danso 3y ago

From the WSJ: https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-navy-detected-titan-sub-implosion-days-ago-6844cb12?mod=e2tw https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-navy-detected-titan-sub-imp... https://archive.is/pSpem https://archive.is/pSpem U.S. Navy Detected Titan Sub Implosion Days Ago Underwater microphones designed to detect enemy submarines first detected Titan tragedy WASHINGTON—A top secret U.S. Navy acoustic detection system designed to spot enemy submarines first heard the Titan sub implosion hours after the submersible began its mission, officials involved in the search said. The Navy began listening for the Titan almost as soon as the sub lost communications, according to a U.S. defense official. Shortly after its disappearance, the U.S. system detected what it suspected was the sound of an implosion near the debris site discovered Thursday and reported its findings to the commander on site, U.S. defense officials said. “The U.S. Navy conducted an analysis of acoustic data and detected an anomaly consistent with an implosion or explosion in the general vicinity of where the Titan submersible was operating when communications were lost,” a senior U.S. Navy official told The Wall Street Journal in a statement. “While not definitive, this information was immediately shared with the Incident Commander to assist with the ongoing search and rescue mission.”

treyfitty 3y ago

This was quite prescient of you. At first (hours before they confirmed the debris was from the sub), I thought your comment was a stretch, but still plausible- yet impossible to prove. All too often, we dismiss these conspiratorial hypotheses, but now that the WSJ all but confirms your suspicions, I’m scared to find out what other inconvenient truths there are to life

awb 3y ago

Top Secret U.S. Navy System Heard Titan Implosion Days Ago (wsj.com) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36439661 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36439661

penlopt 3y ago

I was a Navy OT A during the Cold War. I worked in the SOSUS community meaning my shipmates and I detected and tracked submarines day in and day out. The fact that it was a small vessel could have made detection of an implosion more difficult. But most definitely not impossible. They also had the last known coordinates which helps triangulate location and a search area for debris fields. This was always something we trained for and hoped to never see an implosion in real time. Sadly, this was not to be.

EA-3167 3y ago

Seems likely, there's no point revealing classified capabilities in this context.

gravitronic 3y ago
There's a lot of unclassified information about their historic capabilities, I'm pretty sure they can give a lot of detail without leaking anything not already public. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOSUS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOSUS https://www.amazon.com/Red-November-Inside-U-S-Soviet-Submarine/dp/0061806773 https://www.amazon.com/Red-November-Inside-U-S-Soviet-Submar...
- politician 3y ago
  A timely response conveys something about how fast we can locate something underwater.

mhh__ 3y ago

It's known that they can detect implosions from very long distances however this is a tiny submarines so perhaps they are just using it as a training opportunity with no other information.

dredmorbius 3y ago
FWIW, there are small (and highly stealthy) military submarines and submersibles, for whom accurately determining destruction based on acoustic signatures could very well have strategic value. So those capabilities (and this opportunity) could be more significant than might appear at first blush.

fuzzbazz 3y ago

Would the implosion have been loud enough? I mean the thing was a tiny 7x3m cylinder located 700Km from the nearest coast...

jprd 3y ago
I've never been in the military, not a sub-mariner, 1000% SOSUS could detect that. SOSUS could detect that in the 1970s, if not earlier.
- jprd 3y ago
  https://archive.is/pSpem https://archive.is/pSpem
can16358p 3y ago
Sound can travel MUCH further and fast underwater, so in the event of an implosion, it might create enough of a spike in hydrophones that is statistically significant. Also the experts might be able to analyze the signal's signature to confirm (or bet) it's an implosion. Crossmatch that with the time of loss of communication and it's safe to assume that it's it.
- analog31 3y ago
  Indeed, and moreover, the ability to detect underwater sound is probably aided by the lack of localized turbulence (wind noise in microphones) and the degree of sophistication sought after by navies due to the detection and counter-detection of military submarines. Without any actual knowledge, I imagine that a ship or sub could be festooned with hydrophones, enabling it to detect faint noises, but also to determine their direction from phase information.
margalabargala 3y ago
I have no idea specifically how loud it would have been. However with some probably-reasonable guesses, it looks like it actually would have been quite loud. Here's a naval study where they measured underwater sound propagation: https://www.navymarinespeciesmonitoring.us/files/7514/2780/4918/Soloway_and_Dahl_2015_Noise_Measurement_Trial_at_SSTC_5Feb2015.pdf https://www.navymarinespeciesmonitoring.us/files/7514/2780/4... They found that a 10lb block of C4 exploding produced ~210db of underwater sound. If we use that sound level as an approximation of the implosion of 200 cubic meters of submersible, which seems not completely unreasonable, then we can use the inverse square law to calculate the perceived sound far away. Halifax, NS is 1100km from the Titanic wreck. A sound that is 210db at 1 meter, is 89db at 1100000 meters. Boston is 1700km away; at that distance it would be 85db. 85db is really quite loud. You would be able to hear that, if you were underwater and paying attention. If the implosion was instead, say, 180db, then it would have been 55db in Boston harbor. Still easily detectable by instruments. For reference, when divers are performing construction using e.g. rock drills, those commonly reach 170db. The implosion of close to 200 cubic meters of air seems like it would produce a louder noise than a rock drill.

Solvency 3y ago

Maybe there is a term from quantum physics that can be used here metaphorically, but I think you can safely assume that what you said is probabilistically true, and probably true for all other comparable assumptions. It may resolve to be false when examined closely in any one particular instance, but it doesn't change the fact that they are working extremely hard to maintain a fog of mystery around their scope of capabilities.

psychphysic 3y ago

Other than awe for US military capability. What motivates this idea? Not only does it explain nothing, it requires additional explanation.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
danso 3y ago
It's not a complicated or even malicious "coverup". They hear an anomalous sound, but don't know with 100% certainty that it's came from the lost sub. What is the Coast Guard supposed to do, not do anything the past few days and say it's because "Sorry we heard a loud sound at that time and are 99% sure that those people are dead"?
- psychphysic 3y ago
  I must be missing something it seems simpler to assume "Coast guard gets report of lost sub and searches for a while". Why would you turn that into "USN knows that a sub imploded. Did nothing observable. Coast guard gets report of lost sub and searches for a while." I looked at the link, I can't see any reason to interject into that more capability than was demonstrated. It may exist, it may not. There is no reason to comment on additional capabilities based on this event.
  - danso 3y ago
    My assumption is that hearing this kind of long distance noise is well within the laws of physics and what we know of the U.S.'s capability. So I don't see this as "additional capability", but rather, am asking from a mindset of "How did they not hear a suspicious sound at the time of the missing sub?" Whether they did or not, nothing would presumably change about the Coast Guard conducting search-and-rescue/recovery operations (since they still don't know for sure what happened). Worth pointing out that private explorers, led by Richard Garriott (aka Lord British, apparently), complained that they had optimal rescue equipment but got pushback from the U.S. officials: https://archive.is/HXtFn https://archive.is/HXtFn > “Magellan has received mixed signals, first hearing from US Gov to get ready, waiting for plans, then getting told to stand down,” Garriott wrote in an email sent to Vice Admiral William Galanis, commander of Naval Sea Systems Command, U.S. Coast Guard Rear Admiral John W. Mauger, who is leading the recovery mission, Congressman Lloyd Doggett, and Representative Eric Swalwell on Wednesday afternoon. Again, hard to know if this is just standard operating procedure or not. If it's the case the U.S. govt already had things figured out by now, then it makes sense they weren't going to expedite Garriot's group, given that the search effort had already resulted in the loss of 1 (maybe 2) search vehicles: > In addition, at least one ROV, possibly two, was damaged or destroyed during the search-and-rescue mission—a testament to the difficult conditions currently facing rescuers.

ryanhuff 3y ago

That’s conspiracy thinking. The absence of your question being addressed doesn’t mean it’s plausible. The ocean is generally a noisy place, and the activities of a small submerged vehicle likely won’t raise notice without active listening.

dehrmann 3y ago
Conspiring to keep secret military capabilities secret?
psychphysic 3y ago
You're right this is insane. /r/UFO must be leaking. A complete non sequitur to assume it was detected with no observable action taken.
danso 3y ago
What's the conspiracy? That Coast Guard officials declined to say any more than is necessary? Yesterday the Coast Guard spokesman [0] said he hadn't even heard the notion that the banging noises were made at regular 30-min intervals, even though Rolling Stone published a leaked DHS report the day before [1], something which completely dominated the news coverage and gave people hope that there were survivors. When directly asked about most anything, the officials frequently demurred. Giving out the least amount of info necessary is their standard operating procedure, not a conspiracy [0] https://www.dvidshub.net/video/887852/coast-guard-partners-hold-press-briefing-21-ft-submersible-titan-900-miles-east-cape-cod https://www.dvidshub.net/video/887852/coast-guard-partners-h... [1] https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/titanic-submersible-missing-searchers-heard-banging-1234774674/ https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-features/titani...

haunter 3y ago

This is exactly what happened to the argentinian sub in 2017 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_ARA_San_Juan https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_ARA_San_Juan >On 23 November the Argentine Navy said an event consistent with an explosion had been detected, on the day the submarine lost communications, by CTBTO seismic anomaly listening posts on Ascension Island and Crozet Islands >The organization had been asked to analyse data from the search area by the Argentine government on the week of the disappearance, but no leads had materialised until 22 November when the CTBTO informed the government. >The Navy added that it received information on the explosion on the afternoon of 22 November, adding that it would have concentrated search efforts in that area had it known sooner.

buggythebug 3y ago

Ya but even so they could have sent rescue ships there because "we think it could be here" - nothing given up.

CoastalCoder 3y ago
I could imagine a cost-benefit analysis making sense here. - Pro: increased chance of saving a few people's lives - Con: risk of leaking info about U.S. sonar sensitivity I.e., the decision would depend on the magnitude of the "pro" and "con" probabilities.
- WalterBright 3y ago
  If it imploded the chance of survival is zero.
- aflag 3y ago
  If they detected an implosion there's no chance of saving anyone's lives. It would increase the chance of maybe finding bodies, though.
- toss1 3y ago
  Also - Pro: Excellent realistic training opportunity to maintain and upgrade skills
- bell-cot 3y ago
  Audible-at-a-distance implosion ==>> Everyone inside is ~liquified The actual Pro would be "minor calibration opportunity for our secret sensor network".
politician 3y ago
It gives up bounds on how fast we can locate something.
- buggythebug 3y ago
  or don't announce anything and just find it

2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago

I'd imagine that location is the second most acoustically monitored part of the Atlantic (looking for ruskie subs coming from the north). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOSUS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SOSUS

jebarker 3y ago
What's the first?
- scrlk 3y ago
  I assume it's: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GIUK_gap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GIUK_gap
- evgen 3y ago
  I would guess the gap between Iceland and the U.K. for the same reason.
  - 2OEH8eoCRo0 3y ago
    Yes

onesphere 3y ago

Would you ever give the enemy demonstration of your detection capabilities especially when they know you’re looking for something?

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

akira2501 3y ago

I thought that loss of communication was an expected part of the trip due to the depth.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
agumonkey 3y ago
I wonder if typical deep sea exploration use relay all along the descent, to ensure comms and raise rescue capabilities.
- civilitty 3y ago
  The three main methods are: acoustic using SONAR to receive data, tether or umbilical cord, and buoy based where the DSV releases a buoy that ascends to the top. Relays don't really work because you'd need a LOT of them and they'd all have to keep themselves positioned within like 30 meters of each other which is very hard with ocean currents. That's with very low bandwidth VLF radio.
  - moffkalast 3y ago
    Kinda weird that they didn't have an optical cable tether tbh.
    - bg46z 3y ago
      Would be extremely heavy and very brittle
      - rootusrootus 3y ago
        There are deep sea submersibles designed to go a good bit deeper than Titanic which have optical tethers.
    - denlekke 3y ago
      wouldn't it basically need to be the same as what they use for intercontinental cables ? tons of shielding and repeaters. maybe there'd be further risk bc if it breaks at the ship it could fall on or weigh down the submersible

Workaccount2 3y ago

Might explain why they denied offers from the British rescue sub (IIRC the only available one that could go to such depth) that wanted to come out to try to rescue the crew.

ranger207 3y ago

Possibly, but arguing against that are three factors: 1) the sub was tiny and its possible it wasn't actually loud enough; 2) the sub was at a depth that SOSUS doesn't listen at and sound propagation underwater is very complex; and 3) there's a lot of other potential sources of noise underwater, including both mechanical like ships and biological. Even if they did detect the Titan's implosion, there's enough sources of doubt that three days ago it would've been difficult to say definitely that it was gone.

rich_sasha 3y ago

I suppose to detect a noise is one thing, to know what it is is another. The ocean must be full of underwater volcano eruptions, tectonic activity, oil rigs banging and drilling, etc. One of the rescue boats was a commercial cable-laying vessel, presumably laying cables and making noise.