Jump to content
MaximT

Reducing the nuclear threat by reducing the tactical answer time

Recommended Posts

Is this concept acceptable for a non-nuclear atrocity believer?

 

HIGH BANDWIDTH CONVENTIONAL SUBMARINES CLOSE TRANSFER WITH THE GROUND


Undersea-Cables-image-for-website-1024x606.thumb.jpg.954c7d6cd1c34b8341f65a0d1b10f091.jpg

 

Maybe, we could achieved an international network, dedicated to nuclear submarines efficiency, that way reducing the response time, so the risk associated with such lag responses :() :() :()


 

The formidable investment, will be rewarded by a new era of stability :) :() :(


 

My first estimation, for a complete network mapping of all oceanic floor, in case of an alien invasion :


 

  • 361 132 000 km² of oceanic floor

  • 361 132 000 / 25 = 14 Millions km

  • 14E6 km * 132 USD/km = 1,8 Billions USD

  • Lets double this price to include receptor every km

  • The insignificant cost of the submarines modification (all the fleet? Yes, but this time the new submarine concept, I proposed, in case of aliens invasion...)

 

Submarine_Network_Living_Array.thumb.png.0a9e76271e586b2ba1046bbaffdf4a53.png

 

The principle is simple, the ship carry all the thing, and when she want a high debit connection, it send the thing at the bottom of the sea, and after the thing going back up with the link, and the connection is establish :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

$1.8bn/$3.6bn doesn't sound like much for the US. They're spending over $700bn on military. They could do this easy. They could use the new submarine drones to do it.

If it keeps away the aliens then it sounds good to me (you do mean the big green ones don't you?).:)

Edited by Curious layman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MaximT said:

My first estimation, for a complete network mapping of all oceanic floor, in case of an alien invasion :

In the event of an alien invasion the least destructive move would be to immediately surrender.  We would be defeated no matter what we did.  Think NATO in a war with ancient Egypt.  Chariots do not win against tanks and jets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MaximT said:

Is this concept acceptable for a non-nuclear atrocity believer?

...

The principle is simple, the ship carry all the thing, and when she want a high debit connection, it send the thing at the bottom of the sea, and after the thing going back up with the link, and the connection is establish :)

What concept? What “thing”?

What alleged problem are you allegedly solving?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, MaximT said:

Maybe, we could achieved an international network, dedicated to nuclear submarines efficiency, that way reducing the response time, so the risk associated with such lag responses

I can't help feeling that the last thing countries would do is cooperate on communication/control of their nuclear weapons. It rather defeats the object.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm talking about, the fact that a nuclear nation won't be allowed to change it's mind about a large scale attack, or have to wait a "lag" time period of many hour, staying submerge for detection purpose, because there is no transmission technique under the sea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MaximT said:

I'm talking about, the fact that a nuclear nation won't be allowed to change it's mind about a large scale attack, or have to wait a "lag" time period of many hour, staying submerge for detection purpose, because there is no transmission technique under the sea.

They use ELF signals to communicate with submerged subs. Slow, but it exists. How is sending this “thing” - that you have not explained - to the bottom and back faster?

Why is not changing your mind about an attack a desirable outcome? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, MaximT said:

I'm talking about, the fact that a nuclear nation won't be allowed to change it's mind about a large scale attack, or have to wait a "lag" time period of many hour, staying submerge for detection purpose, because there is no transmission technique under the sea.

Apart from the fact that this is nonsense, one of the strengths of nuclear subs is keeping their location secret. Sharing communication technology would destroy that key advantage. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, swansont said:

They use ELF signals to communicate with submerged subs. Slow, but it exists. How is sending this “thing” - that you have not explained - to the bottom and back faster?

Quote

Submarine communications[edit]

400px-Ground_dipole_ELF_antenna.svg.png
 
A ground dipole antenna used for transmitting ELF waves, similar to the U.S. Navy Clam Lake antennas, showing how it works. It functions as a huge loop antenna, with the alternating current I from the transmitter P passing through an overhead transmission line, then deep in the earth from one ground connection G to the other, then through another transmission line back to the transmitter. This creates an alternating magnetic field H which radiates ELF waves. The alternating current is shown flowing in one direction only through the loop for clarity.

The United States Navy utilized extremely low frequencies (ELFs) as radio band and radio communications. The Submarine Integrated Antenna System (SIAS) was a research and development effort to communicate with submerged submarines.[26] The Soviet/Russian Navy also utilized ELFs for submarine communications system, ZEVS.[27] The Indian Navy has an operational ELF communication facility at the INS Kattabomman naval base to communicate with its Arihant class and Akula class submarines.[28][29]

Explanation[edit]

Because of its electrical conductivity, seawater shields submarines from most higher frequency radio waves, making radio communication with submerged submarines at ordinary frequencies impossible. Signals in the ELF frequency range, however, can penetrate much deeper. Two factors limit the usefulness of ELF communications channels: the low data transmission rate of a few characters per minute and, to a lesser extent, the one-way nature due to the impracticality of installing an antenna of the required size on a submarine (the antenna needs to be of an exceptional size in order to achieve successful communication). Generally, ELF signals have been used to order a submarine to rise to a shallow depth where it could receive some other form of communication.

Difficulties of ELF communication[edit]

One of the difficulties posed when broadcasting in the ELF frequency range is antenna size, because the length of the antenna must be at least a substantial fraction of the length of the waves. Simply put, a 3 Hz (cycle per second) signal would have a wavelength equal to the distance EM waves travel through a given medium in one third of a second. Taking account of refractive index, ELF waves propagate slightly slower than the speed of light in a vacuum. As used in military applications, the wavelength is 299,792 km (186,282 mi) per second divided by 50–85 Hz, which equals around 3,500 to 6,000 km (2,200 to 3,700 mi) long. This is comparable to the Earth's diameter of around 12,742 km (7,918 mi). Because of this huge size requirement, to transmit internationally using ELF frequencies, the Earth itself forms a significant part of the antenna, and extremely long leads are necessary into the ground. Various means, such as electrical lengthening, are used to construct practical radio stations with smaller sizes.

The US maintained two sites, in the Chequamegon-Nicolet National Forest, Wisconsin and in the Escanaba River State Forest, Michigan (originally named Project Sanguine, then downsized and rechristened Project ELF prior to construction), until they were dismantled, beginning in late September 2004. Both sites used long power lines, so-called ground dipoles, as leads. These leads were in multiple strands ranging from 22.5 to 45 kilometres (14.0 to 28.0 mi) long. Because of the inefficiency of this method, considerable amounts of electrical power were required to operate the system.

Because of the inefficiency of this method: ELF

We could achieved Gbit/s by my "thing".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, MaximT said:

Because of the inefficiency of this method: ELF

Yeah, I told you it was slow. You said it didn’t exist. No need to detail it fir me: I told you about it.

8 minutes ago, MaximT said:

We could achieved Gbit/s by my "thing".

Are you ever going to detail what this “thing” is?

This is like listening to half of a phone call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, swansont said:

Are you ever going to detail what this “thing” is?

Yes, of course, there are two option available, one with radio wave, and the best one with a system that consist in a camera and a small screen, at both end, to encode the data with a memory compressed system. The bandwidth could be a lot more impressive, in the preferable option.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, MaximT said:

Yes, of course, there are two option available, one with radio wave, and the best one with a system that consist in a camera and a small screen, at both end, to encode the data with a memory compressed system. The bandwidth could be a lot more impressive, in the preferable option.

One what? Both ends of what?

You aren’t helping here, focusing on a detail when you haven’t explained the big picture. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

    I imagined a huge net of copper wires or optic fiber, depending on ratio cost/bandwidth you want to achieved, place at the bottom of the sea. At every kilometer of wire, there will be a wire that goes upward with a communication device on it. When the submarine, or the aircraft carrier or other, want a secure and very fast connexion, they send a probe with a wire, to the bottom of the sea, to get a connexion with the nodal network.

    So, I don't know what are the odd: could I develop such a system, in the interest of Human kind?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, MaximT said:

the best one with a system that consist in a camera and a small screen, at both end, to encode the data

So you are suggesting to take a picture of the message and then use image recognition at the other end to decode it?

That is a really daft idea. It will require far more bandwidth and be very error prone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Mordred said:

Military subs already have those 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_communications_cable

They also approved use of modems via STANAG in 2017 for underwater modems

Your link isn't about submarines (the vehicle), it's about cables that are under the surface of the ocean.

10 hours ago, MaximT said:

    I imagined a huge net of copper wires or optic fiber, depending on ratio cost/bandwidth you want to achieved, place at the bottom of the sea. At every kilometer of wire, there will be a wire that goes upward with a communication device on it. When the submarine, or the aircraft carrier or other, want a secure and very fast connexion, they send a probe with a wire, to the bottom of the sea, to get a connexion with the nodal network.

    So, I don't know what are the odd: could I develop such a system, in the interest of Human kind?

 

Average ocean depth is 2-3 km, and some parts are much deeper. So you'd have to spool up several km worth of communications cable inside the sub in order to connect. After you've finally found one of the nodes, which doesn't seem like it would be easy. Then you have to remain stationary while you talk, lest you rip everything apart. 

Now you're hooked into a party line, where the enemy can listen in or spoof your communications (like when the US tapped Soviet undersea cables during the cold war). I don't think anyone is going to buy into that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, MaximT said:

    I imagined a huge net of copper wires or optic fiber, depending on ratio cost/bandwidth you want to achieved, place at the bottom of the sea. At every kilometer of wire, there will be a wire that goes upward with a communication device on it. When the submarine, or the aircraft carrier or other, want a secure and very fast connexion, they send a probe with a wire, to the bottom of the sea, to get a connexion with the nodal network.

    So, I don't know what are the odd: could I develop such a system, in the interest of Human kind?

 

You can raise masts and antennas above the surface and remain submerged. VLF and the underwater telephone are also options used today.

I don't know for sure on this, but there could be transmitters attached to undersea cables acting as relays, in areas where  submarines armed with nuclear weapons frequent. Be a fairly logical fallback option.

I don't think it is necessarily a bad idea in general but between resources required, alternatives, and typical missions I don't think it'll see much traction.

Edited by Endy0816

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The premise of the title is false, if the only outcome of an attack is revenge, time has little to do with it...

Edited by dimreepr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another drawback of the node system is that if the enemy knows you are online and communicating, you have drastically reduced the uncertainty in your location, and are suddenly very vulnerable to attack.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.