DefenseTech Military.com
  • Categories
  • Full Archives
  • Monthly Archives
  • About Defense Tech
Subscribe to RSS

About Defense Tech

Defense Tech examines the intersection of technology and defense from every angle and provides analysis on what’s ahead.

Tip Us Off

Tip for Defense Tech?

SEND IT!

It’s Confidential!

Categories

  • ‘Canes
  • Af-Cam
  • Afghan Update
  • Ammo and Munitions
  • Armor
  • Around the Globe
  • Av Week Extra
  • Axe in Iraq (and Elsewhere)
  • Bizarro
  • Blimps
  • Blog Bidness
  • Body Armor Blues
  • Bomb Squad
  • Brownshoes in Action
  • Bubbleheads, etc.
  • Cammo Green
  • Catch the “Buzz”
  • Chem-Bio
  • Civilian Apps
  • Cloak and Dagger
  • Commandos
  • Comms
  • Contingency Ops
  • Cops and Robbers
  • Crazy Ivan
  • Cyber-warfare
  • Data Diving
  • Defense Tech Poll
  • Defense Tech Radio
  • Dissent Tech
  • Door Kickers
  • Drones
  • DT Administrivia
  • Eat DT’s Dust
  • Extra! Extra!
  • Eye on China
  • F-35 Watch
  • Fast Movers
  • FCS Watch
  • Fire for Effect
  • FOS Files
  • Friday Funnies
  • Gadgets and Gear
  • Going Green
  • Grand Ole Osprey
  • Ground Vehicles
  • Guns
  • Homeland Security
  • In the Bubble with Joe Buff
  • In the Weeds with Eric
  • Info War
  • Iraq Diary
  • Jarhead Jazz
  • JSF Watch
  • Just War Theories
  • Lasers and Ray Guns
  • Less-lethal
  • Logistics
  • Los Alamos and Labs
  • M4 Monopoly
  • Medic!
  • Mercs
  • Missiles
  • Money Money Money
  • Most Wanted
  • MRAP Edge
  • Net-Centric
  • Nukes
  • Old Skool
  • Our Shrinking Planet
  • PEO Soldier
  • Planes, Copters, Blimps
  • Podcast
  • Politricks
  • Polmar’s Perspective
  • Popular Mechanics
  • Rapid Fire
  • Raptor Watch
  • Red Team
  • Retro-Futuro
  • Robots
  • Roll Your Own
  • Sabra Tech
  • Ships and Subs
  • Snipertech
  • Soldier Systems
  • Space
  • Special Ops
  • Star Wars
  • Strategery
  • Stray Trons
  • Tactical Development
  • Terror Tech
  • The Deadlies
  • The Defense Biz
  • The Peoples’ Site
  • The Sunday Paper
  • The Tanker Tango
  • The View from Av Week
  • Those Nutty Norks
  • Training and Sims
  • Trimble on the Case
  • Uncategorized
  • Video Lounge
  • War Update
  • Ward’z Wonderz
  • You can run…

Archives

  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • February 2003
  • January 2003

Home » Comms » Lasers Speak to Subs

Lasers Speak to Subs

Communicating with subs underwater is beyond tough. Sound moves through seawater in very strange ways, with water temperature, salinity, and density speeding up and slowing things down — garbling conversations in the process. Electromagnetic transmissions (like radio) are no better — the sea has some funky electrical conductivity. During the Cold War, sub authority Joe Buff notes, the Navy managed to get super-simple, one-way messages to its subs, with a pair of giant (28-mile!) extremely low frequency transmitters, based in the Midwest. But those transmitters were shut down, a few years back.
DPPS_Beam_Fan.JPGThe Navy’s new idea is to get specially-tuned lasers to handle the job, instead. The service has handed out a pair of small business innovation research contracts to Bothell, WA’s Aculight Corporation and Bedford, MA-based Q-Peak to build blue-green, quick-burst lasers for transmitting messages across the deep. Acluight, for example, wants to use a combination of semiconductor and fiber lasers to produce a low power beam (around 10 watts) at about 532nm spectrum range. The idea is to get pulses as quick as half a nanosecond, repeating as much as 10 million times per second.
Blue-green lasers have been discussed for a while as potential sub-talkers, with good reason. Seawater has a lot of organic junk floating around inside, which makes it “turbid” — “nearly opaque to light over much of any distance,” Buff explains.

Blue-green light’s frequency is best at penetrating through this turbidity, given the mix of sizes in microns of the particles and other stuff that prevents seawater from being transparent. (Of course, some areas such as the Bahamas are famous for the clarity of their water, but this is very much the exception, not the rule, globally speaking.) This same turbidity is essential to giving submarines their invisibility while submerged, so it’s a double edged sword.

Share |

September 19th, 2006 | Comms, Lasers and Ray Guns, Ships and Subs | 331094 Comments »http://defensetech.org/2006/09/19/lasers-speak-to-subs/Lasers+Speak+to+Subs2006-09-19+17%3A28%3A03noahmax You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

« « Rapid Fire 09/19/06 | Hez Hacked Israeli Radios » »

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Robot.Economist says:
    September 19, 2006 at 1:29 pm

    I could see lasers as a useful transmittal medium under the thermocline (where light no longer penetrates the water). In a pitch black environment, recievers could afford to be hypersensitive to light, which would improve message fidelity.
    On an unrelated note, has one seen reporting on laser-emitting microchips that surfaced in the media yesterday? That seemed like a pretty big breakthrough.

    Reply
  2. DS says:
    September 19, 2006 at 4:05 pm

    If the source of the laser communication were a stealth satellite, you’d have a completely secure method of communication which would bypass alot of ‘middlemen’. In addition, I’m sure the laser light would become somewhat diffuse upon hitting the surface of the water, so the sub would not have to have super sensitive sensors to pick up a ‘flickering’ at a particular frequency in the water surrounding it. That ‘flickering’ frequency would be another layer of security. Cool stuff.

    Reply
  3. DS says:
    September 19, 2006 at 4:07 pm

    orrrrr…you could just have sharks with freakin lasers mounted on their heads. :)
    (comeon’, you knew someone was going to say it…)

    Reply
  4. Matthew says:
    September 22, 2006 at 4:03 am

    I like the guy’s comment about the security aspect of having lasers that flicker.

    Reply
  5. lawrence stanley,sr. says:
    September 22, 2006 at 5:30 am

    As a Signal Corps.—member in early 50’s. We could have used»””“laser weapons”””—Someone design weaponry for our military–NOW–!!! IF COMMUNICATIONS–via Laser–WORKS OUT–?? I say this–”“GIT HER DONE””–yessiree—acer28

    Reply
  6. c. a. miller says:
    September 22, 2006 at 9:05 am

    IF this was going to be a viable option Still at this point… we would NOT be hearing about it NOW

    Reply
  7. N. R. Glenn says:
    September 22, 2006 at 9:14 am

    If we have the tech. capability to aim lasers both from space to the ocean, and the reverse, I say go for it. Unfortunately, this seems somewhat like hitting a golf ball with a b-b gun at 10 miles distance, even allowing the b-b gun the ablility to do this. Adding the effect of water waves, this now appears extremely difficult.

    Reply
  8. Bill Eichner Nobel Nominee says:
    September 22, 2006 at 9:43 am

    A solution of chromium dioxide (inert) and carbon sulfate will prolixly yellow dilithium crystals equally and allow them to them to radiate equally in all directions to infinite distances thus turning the turbid ocean waters into a crystal clear environment suitable for laser communications.

    Reply
  9. K Goetowski says:
    September 22, 2006 at 12:30 pm

    George, dilithium and higher numbers of covalently bonded lithium atoms do exist in the real world, albeit in small quantities. It has been observed, for example, that 1% of lithium in the vapor phase (by mass) is in the form of dilithium. Clusters of lithium atoms also exist; the most common arrangement is Li6.

    Reply
  10. George says:
    September 22, 2006 at 1:59 pm

    I’m glad K. Goetowski that you can copy and paste from Wikipedia​.com.

    Reply
  11. Clayton says:
    September 22, 2006 at 2:19 pm

    Thermocline has to do with temperature not where light stops penetrating the water..
    ther?mo?cline? /???rm??kla?n/ Pronunciation Key — Show Spelled Pronunciation[thur-muh-klahyn] Pronunciation Key — Show IPA Pronunciation

    Reply
  12. J. Yale says:
    September 22, 2006 at 2:32 pm

    George’s first comment is about the only one that even worthwhile. I actually work on submarines for the US Navy. So just know he is more on the dot than your crazy little sci-fi babble could ever be. That is all..

    Reply
  13. George says:
    September 22, 2006 at 2:42 pm

    I’m glad K. Goetowski that you can copy and paste from Wikipedia​.com. You obviously did not understand what you’ve read. Bill Eichner Nobel Nominee wrote “dilithium crystals.” If you would have read that and understood what you plagiarized from Wikipedia, then you would know and I’ll qoute Wiki. “This article is about a fictitious substance”(in reference to the crystals of course), “Dilithium is a fictional crystalline mineral in the universe of Star Trek.” Bill wrote “dilithium crystals” refering to a “solution” (liquid, not gas).

    Reply
  14. Chuck Haas says:
    September 22, 2006 at 5:18 pm

    Hmmmm, seems that floating a really small sensor to the surface that could receive laser and radio transmissions would be easier, and probably a whole lot cheaper. Now it would be even better if the sensor was disguised as some flotsam and jetsam. Drift wood or plastic items would work nicely and would not arouse suspision, unless foreigh navies want to start worriying about all the drift wood out there. Of course, the sub could not be going 30 knots at the time, but what the heck. Seems like they don’t need to be going 30 knots all the time anyways.

    Reply
  15. Frank ETC(SS/SW) Ret says:
    September 22, 2006 at 7:32 pm

    What you all seem to missing is that this is a one way solution right now — the laser is not aimed at a submarine but is swept across the ocean. The light from laser is diffused out from it’s impact point by the turbidity of the sea. External sensors detect the laser and in a mere fraction of a second would get all the info needed ( higher frequency = higher data rate ). Yes — high power lasers are required but the article is talking in the 10’s of watts — totally achievable by bundling output from multiple solid state lasers. This technology has been in development for YEARS people. In conclusion 1. the submarine does not have to surface to get comms with this method and 2. next time please read and reread the article you are commenting on until you UNDERSTAND IT before you give comments F. R. H. ETC(SS/SW) Retired Electronics Technican Chiefg Petty Officer — Submarines Qaulified and Surface Warfare Qualified — Retired — Been There — Done That _Wore the T-Shirt ouit years ago

    Reply
  16. DAN says:
    September 22, 2006 at 8:50 pm

    i think what george said avout you guys sounding like idiots was really on the dot. Im an electronic student, and don’t know a whole lot, but still thought most of you sounded like you didnt have a clue about what you were saying. with some exceptions. and it is true that new technology does take some time to perfect, or better, and it would take some time, with costs and ideas to come up with, but i think that in the near future, that this not only would work out, but be used at least on a small scale.

    Reply
  17. Cob MMCM(ss) says:
    September 22, 2006 at 11:43 pm

    Your article on the lasers and submarines is “old hat”. As someone who has earned his way through Uncle Sam’s Canoe Club, I can speak specifically that this is something which was under development MANY years ago. What’s MORE important is do not try to figure out what we are doing now. We are called the “Silent Service” for a reason. For my shipmates’ protection, focus on other places. We’ll deal with the needs of the boats.

    Reply
  18. jason says:
    September 23, 2006 at 10:22 am

    Actually, one technology that was recently tested was one that involved Einstein’s “spooky action at distance” theory. Simply, there were two particles that had some unique attraction between them and regardless of the distance between them if one was interacted with then the other responded likewise. Imagine instaneous digital communication that dosn’t transmit a signal that we can currently intercept, but nevertheless if one particle is interacted, then the other responds as well and there is no EM signature. Hmmmmm spooky…
    Just a thought from an old ex-nuclear knuckle dragger from the IKE.

    Reply
  19. Junior says:
    September 25, 2006 at 10:17 am

    Not bad. I think I will do some research on these two companies. I’ve been itching to expand my portfolio. This could work.…in theory.

    Reply
  20. Howard Evans says:
    September 25, 2006 at 9:08 pm

    There are “only” two problems that must be solved to communicate with deep subs moving at speed: (1) get a large enough signal with sufficient bandwidth to reliably detect and receive meaningful messages; (2) encrypt the signal in a manner that defeats all interception and decryption attemps as well as “spoofing” by foes attempting to send fake messages. It is pretty safe to say that the Navy, with help from the NSA, has the encryption problem “nailed” so now the only thing left is how to get the message through. Forget quantum entanglement, a laboratory curiosity that does not solve the communcations problem. Blue-green laser light? Certainly, if the peak pulse power is large enough, the spectral emission line is narrow enough, and a synchronous detection system is employed to reject all the surrounding optical “noise” while accepting only the “signal” component. This doesn’t have to be a one-way sky-to-sub system like ELF either. Nor does it require satellites in geosynchronous orbits. What it will require is a heck of lot of engineering and a substantial amount of time and money to develop, field, test, and qualify before putting it on the fleet. It does take the Navy about twenty years to float a new boat, or the Air Force to launch a new plane, or the Army to field a new tank. Who knows where we are in the production cycle for this “new” concept? I do know that thirty years ago we were looking at copper-vapor “blue-green” lasers to do this job. Since then there has been a microelectronics sea change in technology that has enabled stuff most people cannot imagine. So it may not take another “twenty years” to put this “new” concept into practice because we have already been working on it for at least thirty years.

    Reply
  21. Frank H Rivers says:
    September 26, 2006 at 7:33 am

    I built one of the transmittal devices that your speaking about,over 30 years ago. I tryed to sell it but did not have any luck(even to a private school.

    Reply
  22. STEVE AQUININGOC says:
    September 26, 2006 at 2:31 pm

    Has anyone thought about the effects of this laser on marine mammals, like the Orcas??

    Reply
  23. Gary says:
    September 26, 2006 at 3:48 pm

    Jason:
    Nickoli Tesla,early 1910’s, communicated instantaneously across vast distances (globally).
    Lazer is nice; but Mr. Tesla, talked to anyone at anytime; he wanted to; if they had his equipment.
    Even underground.
    So I’m not so sure that the use of lazer is so unique; if not outright too expensive and technically backward!

    Reply
  24. xshipdriver says:
    October 1, 2006 at 10:38 pm

    The Submarine Laser Communications Program (SLC) was terminated in 1986/7. It was ended not because it was impossible but because the state of art was not sufficiently advanced to be able to use “off the shelf” electronics and the cost of developing the equipment as well as confirming the science (not to mention solving the inevitable “program stoppers”) was too high for the Navy to bear at the time. Other forms of communications were available which met USN requirements. It is apparent that these other forms are not as private as they once were. The compelling feature of the SLC program was its pinpoint connectivity. It didn’t need to scan the whole ocean, it pointed a pencil beam where the sub looked at prearranged times. Intercepting the beam means the intercepting unit has to be within the beam’s downlink footprint, a very small area. If the opposition is in the same space as the sub, the sub knows it. Therefore, no covert intercept.

    Reply
  25. Career DoD says:
    November 29, 2008 at 7:25 am

    This website continues to attract more than its fair sure of whack jobs; so does submarine laser communications.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Click here to cancel reply.

Spam Protection by WP-SpamFree

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement

    Recent Articles
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
    • EADS Tanker, Not Dead Yet
    • JFCOM’s Mattis Pushes Light IW Aircraft
    • And, the Vertical Landing
    • NLOS-LS Missile Fail Could Impact Navy’s LCS
    • JFCOM’s JOE Whacks Defense Industry
    • New F-35B Hover Video
    • China’s Shipbuilding in a Regional Context
    • Debating the Pros and Cons of LCS
    • Bigger, Badder IEDs in Afghanistan
    Recent Comments
    • EADS Tanker, Not Dead Yet
      As an European living in Germany I would have love to see...
      fightingirish
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
      Gees the price is on the roof already. Maybe we just...
      roland
    • Ft. Irwin, Where You At?
      I was the driver for BoB Gaygos, B Co 6/31st Commander....
      Ricky houltzhouser
    • Ft. Irwin, Where You At?
      Luis, I was Captain Gaydos, driver Sgt. Houltzhouser in...
      Ricky Houltzhouser
    • Bigger, Badder IEDs in Afghanistan
      If you really want to win the war permanently, it will...
      steven
    • Cover Your Computer Mics and WebCams
      Another question, how would I physically obstruct the...
      Curious
    • Cover Your Computer Mics and WebCams
      whats a good way to physically cover my laptop webcam?...
      Curious
    • EADS Tanker, Not Dead Yet
      But, the Eurotrash airplane ISN'T better… The Boeing...
      WillyPete
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
      Gee, I wonder why? Oh! Maybe it's because the...
      WillyPete
    • JSF Price Tag Jumps to $135 Million
      It would also help, a LOT to 'limit' excess...
      WillyPete
  • Channels:Military.com | Military Benefits | Military News | Off Duty |Join the Military | Military Education | Veteran Jobs | Military Money |Military Deals | Military Family | Military Community
  • Military.com Network:Military.com | MilBlogging | Defense Tech | DoD Buzz |SpouseBuzz | Fred's Place | GI Bill Express
  • Services: Army | Navy | Air Force | Marine Corps |Coast Guard | National Guard | Military Spouse
  • About Military.com About Us | Advertise With Us | Press | Affiliate Program |Monster Network | Help | Feedback | Privacy Policy |User Agreement| © 2010 Military Advantage