Navy ELF to Be Scrapped 454
engywook writes "National Public Radio and The Daily Press of Ashland, Wisconsin (among others, I'm sure) are reporting that the US Navy plans to scrap the Extremely Low Frequency (ELF) system for communication with its fleet of nuclear submarines, both in Wisconsin and Michigan. The report states that the Navy no longer feels that ELF is necessary, and that they will now rely on 12 VLF systems. The system has been in operation since October 1989. The system has been protested nearly the whole time, both as a part of a Weapon of Mass Destruction and as a potential health hazard."
Superceded (Score:5, Interesting)
Also, having been on an earlier Australian sub (Oberon class), late model Australian submarine (Colins class), British submarine and several US subs, I might be tempted to say no other nation in the world can compete with the technology in the US subs. Everything else just buzzes through the water for all to hear while the latest Seawolf class is truly stunning with amazing amounts of technology layered upon layer that slips through the water with uncanny silence. Which brings up another issue: Why does the US need such a large submarine fleet? Perhaps to counter a possible naval conflict with China over Taiwan? I believe N. Korea has a few (ancient) subs...... More tactical boats perhaps would be prudent, but....
Re:Superceded - reality check (Score:5, Interesting)
A quick reality check here. In 2003, a "noisy" Australian deisel boat sunk two US nuclear attack subs [64.233.161.104] and an aircraft carrier during joint war games. The Dutch have done the same sort of thing. On a previous occasion, an Australian sub sat underneath a US carrier, inside the CBG cordon, and followed it around for some days. At the end of the exercise it surfaced next to the carrier to the horror and amazement of all involved.
The biggest danger the US navy faces is hubris [reference.com] my boy. That's the real thing you have to watch out for.
Re:Superceded (Score:5, Interesting)
According to the Museum of Mann in Ottawa, Canada which has broken whale eardrums on display, this is entirely possible.
Re:Superceded - reality check (Score:5, Interesting)
Don't confuse me with a conspiracy theorist when.. (Score:4, Interesting)
Years ago the military was highly interested in non-lethal weapons that were based on a wide number of bizarre technologies including wretched smells, sonic weapons (that would make you crap your pants, or knock someone over like a 'rubber mattress hit them'), electomagnetic frequences (that cause nausea, sleepiness) and all kinds of other reality-weirder-then-fiction technologies.
Then one day seemingly in the midst of much progress they just dropped the whole thing--the budget went poof.
Since then many of the technologies have been witnessed and it's not really too hard to find info about it on the web.
I picked an example that was more over-the-top sounding then neccesary, however my point is the military's perogative is to keep their cards hidden and have the upper hand. I wish there was a way to say that more matter of factly and still drive in that point.
Conspiracy Theories (Score:5, Interesting)
The basic recurring premise ranges anywhere from a single person to an entire town (Eugene, OR) being bombarded with V/ELF and studying the effects. The results are hardly "mass-destructive", but rather annoying: nosebleeds, headaches, premature arthritis, sore throats, unexplainable bruised, etc. Supposedly, a US official working in the US Embassy in Moscow contracted a fatal rare blood disease, and hidden V/ELF transmitter was found hidden in the walls, aiming right for his desk.
The theories allege the military and intelligence agencies were interested to see if purposefully exposing subjects would be effective as a form on mind control. I don't mean mind control in the literal sense where someone says "Go kill your neighbor" and the subject says ok and snaps to it. More like putting someone's mental state into disarray, hoping in the confusion the person would be more susceptible to suggestions and persuasive tactics.
These "experiments" flat out don't work. There's no science to back it up. But the point is someone with authority believed they could work and spent a lot of taxpayer money trying. And that's the real shame.
Please take this with a grain of salt. There's no need to go into a huge exposition trying to debunk these stories. You save it. I'm just repeating these unsubstantiated tidbits. Reports like these fueled many an X-Files episode. The producers/writers didn't come up with these things out of thin air. They're interesting to read. Not to "find out what happened", but to get an insight into the background stories X-Files sometimes use.
Free electric fencing anyone? (Score:4, Interesting)
B.2.2 Extremely Low Frequency Biological/Ecological Monitoring and Interference Mitigation
The ELF ecological monitoring program is an independent evaluation of the possible hazards ELF RF transmissions may have on the environment. Sampling and gathering of data was completed at the end of FY93 with review and comments on the resultant data by the National Academy of Sciences expected during FY96. The ELF interference mitigation efforts fund the procurement and maintenance of devices used to ground electrical voltages induced in long metal inductors (e.g., wire fences, cable lines) in areas adjacent to the Wisconsin and Michigan ELF radio transmitters.
Re:Conspiracy Theories (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Superceded - reality check (Score:5, Interesting)
After attending militar excersises with US personell, I can confrim this. In one excercise, our home guard [www.mil.no] kicked the ass of the USMC. I find that incredible, but not if you analyse the mentality of the USMC. They fly in on choppers, equipped with the baddest and coolest in military technology. They are big fellas with kick-ass war faces. Then their chopper lands and they jump out. And fall into 2 meters of fine grained snow. The the Norway Home Guard (Maybe even that cute girl on the picture) come loafing around on their cheap-ass skis (The skis are called "NATOboards", guess why. See them here: picture [hvungdom.net]). The USMCs are thouroghly stuck in the snow, not able to reach their equipment, and all of the team are killed by headshots, according to MILES.
Also, the american forces are a bit naïve. On another excercise, navy SEALs were to rescue 2 prisoners from a building on the top of a hill. They left a bunch of equipment behind, as the excercise did not allow for CS gas to be used. The Norwegians responded by having only a couple of gunmen in the building, while digging the others into the ground at the foot of the hill. As the SEALs passed the soldiers by 50 meters, the ones in the building pounded the SEALs with CS, and the dig-in soldiers ran up and shot the confused SEALs in the back. The SEALs complained that they iddin't excpect CS to be use and had no ABC equipment with them. Their colonel apparently gave them a chewing out, becaus they were so incredibly naïve to think that every force in the world would obey the rules...
Re:Superceded (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Superceded - reality check (Score:5, Interesting)
Nonsense. The us navy is painfully aware of the dangers posed by quiet -- be they ultra quieted SEAWOLF class nukes, DE's (diesel electrics) or the new generation of european AIP (Air Independant Propulsion) boats.
Oh, and there were 3 DE's, not one. Oh, and your "noisy" comment: a DE is only noisy while it's snorkeling. When she's on battery propulsion, she's as quieter than a nuke, generally speaking. Trust me, nobody in the US Navy thinks DEs are rattle buckets.
And the Navy knows, having been taught this lesson by its own submarine fleet, that a quiet boat is a fearsome, almost invincible enemy. The purpose of the excercise was to help the Navy figure out how to take out a DE operating in the littorals. It ain't easy.
The one and only reason the Collins's survived is because the engagement orders required the CVBG to enter into her backyard, where the DE's advantages were best put to use.
No one was surprised, only highly irritated.
The biggest danger to the navy is littoral DE and AIP submarine proliferation, mines, and high speed small boats packed with explosives, manned by the willing-to-die. The biggest danger to the navy isn't hubris, and frankly, i find the implication offensive.
from a former seawolf (SSN-575) sailor.
They don't need it anymore... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:ELF/VLF (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Superceded (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Superceded (Score:2, Interesting)
Its's more likely they run on the principle of if transmitting then all is well. What might happen if they had stopped transmitting is scary....
Also remember that the data rate is very very slow. They probably only transmit a command to come towards the surface and initiate another form of communicion.
But all this is speculation.
Re:Superceded (Score:3, Interesting)
The US generals pride themselves on being able to go up against same-size or larger fleets and still win. Must have been a shock (or lucky) to find australiens as well trained.
Re:ELF/VLF (Score:3, Interesting)
This has been used in a sculpture "Field" [boxyit.com] by Richard Box, artist in residence at the University of Bristol.
It looks great. Has anybody here seen it?
Re:ELF/VLF (Score:4, Interesting)
I think there is a big difference in a real antenna designed to produce EM waves and powerlines where the sum of the currents equals zero. Despite the US generating a huge amount of power in the 60 Hz range you will have a very hard time picking up the signal in Europe. This in contrast to the ELF signal from a specially constructed antenna.
Nyh
ELF, the science thereof (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Superceded - reality check (Score:1, Interesting)
I know a carrier group can travel roughly 35-45 knots, there is no diesel submarine in the world that can even come close to that pace. Maybe about 1/2 that speed in very short spurts but they would never be able to stay on battery that long. For a diesel sub to maintain a close proximity to a carrier group for "days" and not be detetcted (stay running on batteries), the carrier group would basically have to be standing still. In that case I could probably hit the carrier myself from a raft with a pistol.
On a side note, I recall our sonar men tracking a fishing boat for several hours, when we finally came to periscope depth, a visual determined it was an aircraft carrier. I assume Sonar men on a boomer were much different then what would be on an attack sub. A boomer hears a noise and turns the other way and gets quiet, no engagement at all. I'd hope the attack guys would be much better.
Re:Superceded - reality check (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Conspiracy Theories (Score:4, Interesting)
During the cold war the Russians embedded all kinds of devices inside the US embassy in Moscow. Some were remotely powered by microwaves (I can't remember the details): they secretly surrounded the embassy with dozens of very high power microwave transmitters. There may be a link between this and the death of the US ambassador from a very rare form of leukaemia.
This is according to the Mitrokhin Archive, a pretty legit source (and an excellent book - highly recommended for anyone interested in the history of spycraft, the KGB or the Soviet Union).
Re:Superceded (Score:2, Interesting)
A good story about this (Score:5, Interesting)
There's used to be an annual NATO tank competition called the "Canadian Army Trophy".
When the M1 first came out, it caused quite a stir, as it was far faster and quieter than had been expected. But the thermal sights also gave the Yanks a huge advantage on the pop-up target range.
It seems that the motors used to raise/lower the popups were hot enough to show up on the thermal sights, and the thermal load from raising a target made the motor glow hotter before the target was fully raised and visible. Accordingly, the M1 kicked ass on the popup range, and overall swept the competition.
The following year, the Canadians (who hosted the competition) placed a large number of thermal dummy motors out on the popup range - and the M1 placed miserably. They also adjusted their own tactics to deal with the M1's strengths, and soundly defeated the Yanks.
The lesson here is that while a technological advantage can indeed give you the upper hand, such an advantage is fleeting. Properly motivated and creative soldiers can devise ways to defeat your tech anvantage and can and will hand you your ass.
DG
Personal Experience (Score:5, Interesting)
Keep in mind that I'm generalizing here.
The American Army is huge, has a lot of really good and impressive kit (not necessarily the best stuff, but the average iquality level is pretty good and they have a LOT of it) and undertrained.
By "undertrained" I mean that the average American soldier is very heavily specialized and is often explicitly forbidden to branch out. Each soldier has a specific job and a specific purpose.
Whereas in smaller armies like the Canadian or the Isreali, soldiers are expected to do much more and are encouraged (within certain limits) to improvise.
A quick example: let's say you are a commander, on top of a ridgeline, advancing with an armoured brigade towards an objective a few km away. On the next ridge up is a wooded area you think might be harbouring an enemy infantry position.
If you are Canadian, you will send forward your very highly trained and impressively skilled brigade recce troop. They will sneak forward, scout out the woods, and report back on what they found without the enemy (if he is there or not) ever noticing that they were there. If the enemy is in the woods, you will then quickly plan out a brilliant and innovative quick attack that takes the enemy completely by suprise (and in the flank too) eliminating the enemy with the minimum amount of own losses and ammo expenditure.
If you are American, you call up two more brigades out of your division, and the three of you pound the wooded area flat with direct fire, while divisional artillery fires in indirect support, and the Air Force adds a squadron of B52s. Once the fire mission stops, you will send a patrol of junior privates up to the matchstick pile to see if they can find any fragments of the enemy. If they don't, there was a company in there; if they do, it was at least a division.
Which technique is more effective? *shrug*
What does wind up happening though is that any time you fight the Yanks size-on-size, they Yanks typically get the short end of the stick. The counter-argument is that the Yanks NEVER fight size-on-size, so it doesn't matter.
I will say this though - any time we schooled some Yanks, they were typically VERY enthusiastic about how we did it, and wanted to learn. They weren't stupid or unprofessional, just undertrained and overmanaged.
DG
Re:No more nuking the whales... (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Superceded (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Conspiracy Theories (Score:3, Interesting)
Sometimes to their detriment ... (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not in the military (now or ever), but a friend in the Canadian forces tells me this can be so rigid that a mechanic for one type of vehicle can not, does not, and will not work on another type of vehicle.
So much so that in one operational theatre an humvee could not be made to go because no humvee specific mechanics were present (or they only had a humvee mechanic, I can't remember which). The underlying problem was something common to all forms of internal combustion engine, but the only US mechanic present was not allowed/capable of applying the fix to a different kind of vehicle.
My friend had the vehicle moving in under 2 minutes.
It's been my understanding this undertraining/overspecialization within the US forces can sometimes lead to a bunch of people standing around with no idea what to do next.
Scary stuff.