Comments on: Lasers Speak to Subs

By: Career DoD

Career DoD — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 12:25:52 +0000

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

By: xshipdriver

xshipdriver — Mon, 02 Oct 2006 03:38:34 +0000

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.

By: Gary

Gary — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 20:48:53 +0000

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!

By: STEVE AQUININGOC

STEVE AQUININGOC — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 19:31:33 +0000

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

By: Frank H Rivers

Frank H Rivers — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 12:33:45 +0000

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.

By: Howard Evans

Howard Evans — Tue, 26 Sep 2006 02:08:29 +0000

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.

By: Junior

Junior — Mon, 25 Sep 2006 15:17:38 +0000

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.

By: jason

jason — Sat, 23 Sep 2006 15:22:36 +0000

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.

By: Cob MMCM(ss)

Cob MMCM(ss) — Sat, 23 Sep 2006 04:43:04 +0000

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.

By: DAN

DAN — Sat, 23 Sep 2006 01:50:54 +0000

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.