SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the ..and-then-the-submarine-sinks-it dept.
In 2010, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, or DARPA, announced that they were building a 132-foot autonomous boat to track quiet, diesel-powered submarines. The program was dubbed Anti-submarine Warfare Continuous Trail Unmanned Vessel, or ACTUV.
To little notice, the system earlier this year passed a critical test, moving much closer to actual deployment and potentially changing not just naval warfare but also the way humans, ships, and robotic systems interact across the world’s waters.
In six weeks of tests along a 35-nautical mile stretch of water off of Mississippi, testers at engineering company Leidos and DARPA put the ACTUV’s systems through 100 different scenarios. The test boat, equipped with nothing more than off-the-shelf radar components, a digital area chart and some proprietary software, was able to complete an autonomous trip without crashing into rocks, shoals, or erratically behaving surface vessels. In future tests, the ship will tail a target boat at 1 kilometer distance.
Reminds me of an old STNG episode, prompting the question, yet again, "Does Man learn *nothing* from Star Trek?"
(Score: 2, Touché) by aristarchus on Saturday March 28 2015, @07:44AM
Oh, wait, yeah, that was Moira, the sentient living ship of Farscape fame, that one submerged herself on the bottom of an ocean. Star Trek? Well, certainly there must have been a similar plot device, since all science fiction copies all science fiction. But then, the real question is, to you designers of nuclear attack submarine vessels, just how many drone tracking boats can you handle? And they do not have to be 100 per cent effective. Wow, the high seas are full of opportunities for techies, as long as they do not mind working in international waters with a risk of unilateral not-attributable death from above. Subs. Capitan Nemo! The Nautilus will rule all!
(Score: 3, Touché) by maxwell demon on Saturday March 28 2015, @08:31AM
I don't see how Moira submerging in an ocean is relevant for this. If you had followed the Wikipedia link, you'd have learned that the episode is about an autonomous weapons system that has gone rampant against its creators (and everyone else who enters its range, including the Enterprise).
Yes, that's not exactly an original idea either. And I honestly don't see how it is relevant for this article (after all, the system here is not an automatic weapons system, but just an autonomous submarine that can follow another submarine; it's about as close to an autonomous weapons system as Google's self-driving car). However your Moira reference manages to be completely unrelated to both the article and the linked Star Trek episode. Maybe you reserve it for the day someone proposes to use Whales as submarines …
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
(Score: 4, Funny) by aristarchus on Saturday March 28 2015, @08:55AM
Sneaky bastards, the submarines. All real sailors despise them, because they hide beneath the seas, and then strike without warning. Rather unsportsmanlike. So really, no honorable navy would have any of the bastards, except they are so darn useful. Now here is the point: sneaky stealthy submarine ships buggered by even more stealthy zero-noise anti-sub drones? What is not to like? There is not even an ethical argument to be made. But a bit of advice: Avoid service in Neptune's Navy in the near future!
(Score: 3, Informative) by c0lo on Saturday March 28 2015, @12:44PM
Better still, start 3D-printing and send in/under your own [usf.edu] fleet of autonomous microsubs.
Some are doing it as a hobby [wikipedia.org] (seems that even manned subs could be built for $15k in 2004 [latimes.com]), others for profit [wikipedia.org].
You really thought the MilInd complex is original?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @08:36AM
Obviously you do not remember, because her name was Moya and she only landed on the surface of an ocean, because the pressure of submersion would have killed her. If you're going to pretend to be a sci-fi nerd, get your details straight, you fucking poser.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Saturday March 28 2015, @08:46AM
No, she submerged. Citation needed, oh challenger of my geekiness!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 28 2015, @11:52AM
Thank you for correcting her name.
(Score: 2) by tibman on Saturday March 28 2015, @07:16PM
Still wrong : ) She landed in a swamp to use the mud/water to dampen a Peacekeeper beacon. Another stupid/brilliant idea from that primitive John Crichton. No Leviathan had landed on a planet before. Though they skimmed atmospheres for fun as young ships.
SN won't survive on lurkers alone. Write comments.