Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

DARPA Hydra: An Unmanned Sub Mothership to Deploy Drones

Unknown Lamer posted 1 year,6 days | from the programmed-to-exterminate-commie-dolphins dept.

The Military 78

garymortimer tips more news about the rise of our robotic overlords. DARPA is now investigating military drone submarines as launch platforms for UAVs. Quoting John Keller at Military & Aerospace Electronics: "The Hydra program will develop and demonstrate an unmanned undersea system with a new kind of unmanned-vehicle delivery system that inserts UAVs and UUVs stealthily into operational environments to respond quickly to situations around the world without putting U.S. military personnel at risk. The Hydra large UUV is to use modular payloads inside a standardized enclosure to deploy a mix of UAVs and UUVs, depending on the military situation. Hydra will integrate existing and emerging technologies in new ways to create an alternate means of delivering a variety of payloads close to where they're needed, DARPA officials say."

cancel ×

78 comments

Video games are real!! Only this ones kill. (3, Funny)

m1ndcrash (2158084) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364045)

Soon years of playstation experience will be worth putting on the resume!

Re:Video games are real!! Only this ones kill. (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#44364199)

Yeah. This is just Arsenal Gear, right?

Re:Video games are real!! Only this ones kill. (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364733)

WE have seen SkyNet, and they are us.

What could possibly go wrong? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#44364063)

Right?

Japanese Subs (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#44364091)

This reminds me during WW2 Japenese developed subs that could surface and open a tiny hangar which launched 1-3 small planes. Sometimes scouts, sometimes bombers. The planes could land on water next to the sub, which had a crane to lift the plane back into the hangar.

Re:Japanese Subs (3, Informative)

gadget junkie (618542) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364277)

This reminds me during WW2 Japenese developed subs that could surface and open a tiny hangar which launched 1-3 small planes. Sometimes scouts, sometimes bombers. The planes could land on water next to the sub, which had a crane to lift the plane back into the hangar.

they were intended to drop incendiary bombs on forests.

Re:Japanese Subs (3, Informative)

Deadstick (535032) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364405)

they were intended to drop incendiary bombs on forests.

There was also a plan to attack the Panama Canal. One of the airplanes is preserved at the National Air & Space Museum.

Re:Japanese Subs (5, Informative)

Digital Ebola (29327) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364805)

There was a good story told at the National Air & Space Museum about that plane. One of the Japanese pilots came to the museum and looked the plane over. He was asked about the "optional" floats that would allow the plane to land. The researchers of the plane did not understand where the floats would be stored on the submarine, as the submarine was pretty small and packed very tightly. The pilot replied that they never took floats and that the plane was never supposed to ever come back.

Pretty sobering. I believe the example that's in the National museum was recovered from a factory just after the war.

Re:Japanese Subs (2)

Deadstick (535032) | 1 year,6 days | (#44365815)

the plane was never supposed to ever come back.

Well, in principle, the pilot could fly back to the boat and bail out.

The Brits did something like that on a trial basis in WW1: An airplane would be catapulted off a ship, fly a recon mission, then ditch in the water and the pilot would be fished out. Since the price of an airplane in those days was about the same as one 14-inch shell for a battleship, the economics weren't that bad.

Re:Japanese Subs (1)

cheesybagel (670288) | 1 year,6 days | (#44367655)

That Japanese submarine would be the I-400 class [wikipedia.org] . I do not see a recovery mechanism working properly on a submersible carrier without using VTOL craft. It would be a lot more practical for the UCAVs to be drone helicopters. The ideal situation would be if you could launch and recover the drones while submerged much like you can launch missiles while submerged.

Re:Japanese Subs (1)

BennyE (213190) | 1 year,6 days | (#44367611)

One of them was used in a successful reconnaissance flight over Sydney before Sydney was attacked with midget submarines in 1942

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Sydney_Harbour#Prelude

Quote "The aircraft was damaged or destroyed on landing, although its two crew survived"

Re:Japanese Subs (1)

khallow (566160) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364539)

they were used to drop incendiary bombs on forests.

FIFY. The purpose of those planes was primarily for recon. They could do ground attacks, but Japan was really desperate to use them for burning forests.

Air drop of fleas infected with bubonic plague ... (1)

drnb (2434720) | 1 year,6 days | (#44365343)

This reminds me during WW2 Japenese developed subs that could surface and open a tiny hangar which launched 1-3 small planes. Sometimes scouts, sometimes bombers. The planes could land on water next to the sub, which had a crane to lift the plane back into the hangar.

they were intended to drop incendiary bombs on forests.

There was also a plan to drop fleas infected with bubonic plague on U.S. cities. Test bombings were conducted on the Chinese cities of Ningbo and Changde by Unit 731 of the Imperial Japanese Army.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731 [wikipedia.org]

Re:Japanese Subs (3, Interesting)

flyingfsck (986395) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364497)

Some of those Jap subs were actually very large and sophisticated. One three hulled (3 tubes) sub surrendered of the East(!) coast of the US after the end of the war and was scuttled by the US Navy. I saw pics of it somewhere long ago. The centre hull held the fold wing plane.

Re:Japanese Subs (1, Funny)

datavirtue (1104259) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364529)

"Jap?"

Re:Japanese Subs (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#44364639)

Less work that writing out Japanese IIRC.

Re:Japanese Subs (2)

Scragglykat (1185337) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364693)

Sorry, he meant jalapeño subs... hope he didn't offend you.

Re:Japanese Subs (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364753)

Jalapeño subs? Wow. I've been settling for pepperocini on mine!

Not any more...

Re:Japanese Subs (1)

AvitarX (172628) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364563)

Except those subs were probably fairly autonomous.

This looks like something being invented that will only be useful against very low tech enemies (good luck sending control signals without giving away your location).

If perhaps it was able to get into a general area autonomously (or only receiving signals), and launch payloads that then themselves connected to the remote pilot it could work, but as I see it, it's going to be a sub shouting "I am here", which kind of defeats the purpose.

Yes, with perhaps 50% of the world's military budget most enemies are low tech, but if that's the case, I don't see the need to invent tech just to combat them. this just screams of graft.

Re:Japanese Subs (1)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364647)

(good luck sending control signals without giving away your location).

What, they stopped using satellites for that?

Re:Japanese Subs (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#44367041)

yeah satellites fix everything, then you use magic for the reply message and getting it through so much water.

Re:Japanese Subs (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#44367251)

Yeah, I watched that documentary this weekend too ya whore! :)

Proof! (2, Funny)

girlintraining (1395911) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364145)

Proof that the US government truly has gone evil: They've named their latest drone carrier after the terrorist organization in GI Joe.

Re:Proof! (5, Informative)

TeamSPAM (166583) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364181)

The terrorist organization in GI Joe is Cobra. Hydra is a terrorist organization in the Marvel Universe fighting SHIELD and Captain America.

Re:Proof! (2)

TheSpoom (715771) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364241)

Paging Joss Whedon...

Re:Proof! (1, Flamebait)

Sparticus789 (2625955) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364259)

I am so glad you corrected the OP. I am really sick and tired of people getting facts about fake things wrong! ./sarcasm-off.sh

Re:Proof! (-1, Troll)

girlintraining (1395911) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364375)

I am so glad you corrected the OP. I am really sick and tired of people getting facts about fake things wrong! ./sarcasm-off.sh

I'm so glad we can always count on a slashdotter to abjectly fail to have a sense of humor, just like those NSA agent that are watching them while they masturbate!

Re:Proof! (4, Funny)

Sparticus789 (2625955) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364633)

You must not have bash installed on your computer. My sarcasm-off.sh script generally compiles and informs users that sarcasm is no longer being used. Are you running a ksh system?

Re:Proof! (1)

girlintraining (1395911) | 1 year,6 days | (#44366217)

You must not have bash installed on your computer. My sarcasm-off.sh script generally compiles and informs users that sarcasm is no longer being used. Are you running a ksh system?

Disabling sarcasm requires recompiling the kernel. I don't want to reset my uptime just so I can run mod_nohumor.so

Re:Proof! (2)

ArcadeMan (2766669) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364379)

I'm also glad he corrected the OP. It's like the war between Vulcan and Endor*, never ending.

* I know what I did.

Re:Proof! (1)

Sparticus789 (2625955) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364649)

Ouch, now my head hurts. Nerd-aneurysm!

Re:Proof! (2)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364395)

M2: Everything is true.
GP: Even false things?
M2: Even false things are true.
GP: How can that be?
M2: I don't know man, I didn't do it.

Re:Proof! (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,5 days | (#44370887)

Dear Sparticus789,

Director Nick Fury of SHIELD here. Fake, my black ass, you motherfucker!

Re:Proof! (1)

girlintraining (1395911) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364627)

The terrorist organization in GI Joe is Cobra. Hydra is a terrorist organization in the Marvel Universe fighting SHIELD and Captain America.

Well... it's been awhile since I watched cartoons.

Re:Proof! (1)

runeghost (2509522) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364881)

I don't know if the original poster knew this or not, but he is correct in a roundabout way. When Hasbro relaunched G.I. Joe in the 80s, they wanted a comic book series to go along with it. Marvel had a plan for a SHIELD vs. HYDRA series kicking around. SHIELD was replaced with G.I. Joe, HYDRA got a pallet swap and a name change, and the rest was history.

Re:Proof! (1)

xevioso (598654) | 1 year,6 days | (#44366403)

Yes. Hydra featured prominently in the Captain America movie. The Nazis weren't evil enough, so they had a sub-group called Hydra, which was headed by Hugo Weaving/The Red Skull.

"Heil Hydra!!!"

Re:Proof! (1)

cold fjord (826450) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364423)

Proof that the US government truly has gone evil: They've named their latest drone carrier after the terrorist organization in GI Joe.

Either that or a small predatory water anima. Hydra [wikipedia.org]

Re:Proof! (1)

cold fjord (826450) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364461)

That should be: small predatory water animal.

Or was it a Jungian slip?

Re:Proof! (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364779)

Best joke of the day. Thank you, Sir!

Re:Proof! (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,5 days | (#44371565)

Can you provide some link spam for us APK?

Re:Proof! (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | 1 year,5 days | (#44372625)

I was tired of my lady
We'd been together too long
Like a worn-out recording
Of a favorite song
So while she lay there sleeping
I read the paper in bed
And in the personal columns
There was this letter I read

If you like Pina Coladas
And getting caught in the rain
If you're not into yoga
If you have half a brain
If you'd like making love at midnight
In the dunes on the Cape
Then I'm the love that you've looked for
Write to me and escape.

I didn't think about my lady
I know that sounds kind of mean
But me and my old lady
Have fallen into the same old dull routine
So I wrote to the paper
Took out a personal ad
And though I'm nobody's poet
I thought it wasn't half bad

Yes I like Pina Coladas
And getting caught in the rain
I'm not much into health food
I am into champagne
I've got to meet you by tomorrow noon
And cut through all this red-tape
At a bar called O'Malley's
Where we'll plan our escape.

So I waited with high hopes
And she walked in the place
I knew her smile in an instant
I knew the curve of her face
It was my own lovely lady
And she said, "Oh it's you."
Then we laughed for a moment
And I said, "I never knew."

That you like Pina Coladas
Getting caught in the rain
And the feel of the ocean
And the taste of champagne
If you'd like making love at midnight
In the dunes of the Cape
You're the lady I've looked for
Come with me and escape

The military likes the classics ... (1)

drnb (2434720) | 1 year,6 days | (#44365437)

Proof that the US government truly has gone evil: They've named their latest drone carrier after the terrorist organization in GI Joe.

Either that or a small predatory water anima. Hydra [wikipedia.org]

Both the DARPA project and this critter are named after the mythological water beast with many heads, a beast the Hercules battled.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lernaean_Hydra [wikipedia.org]

If only (4, Funny)

Sparticus789 (2625955) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364147)

Does it require 25 minerals to build these smaller drones? And can I set the "underwater carrier" to auto-build them?

Re:If only (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#44364231)

Great, now I've got that noise from the drones being launched stuck in my head for the next 10 years.

Re:If only (1)

tsotha (720379) | 1 year,6 days | (#44365257)

Sure, but no gas, so it's okay.

lazy (2, Funny)

maliqua (1316471) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364161)

Now you can't even be bothered to show up to your own wars.

Re:lazy (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#44366491)

Mission accomplished!

Hail Hydra (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#44364177)

Carrier subs are the future. Aircraft carriers would still have a place, but covert plane launches would be useful as hell.

Re:Hail Hydra (3, Insightful)

Culture20 (968837) | 1 year,6 days | (#44365675)

Shoot down one drone and two more will take its place.

Tired of this use of my taxes (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#44364189)

I'd like to get back to uses of taxes that will have some benefit rather than projects to aid in killing people whose leaders are not currently popular with us.

Re:Tired of this use of my taxes (0)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364471)

Sorry, "Ooh! Shiny!" appears to be more important to some loser with mod points.

Re:Tired of this use of my taxes (0)

gl4ss (559668) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364551)

I'd like to get back to uses of taxes that will have some benefit rather than projects to aid in killing people whose leaders are not currently popular with us.

they're also used in killing people who's leader is unpopular in his land but popular in limited USA circles.. I mean really, how popular was Saleh in USA anyways?

Re:Tired of this use of my taxes (1)

noh8rz10 (2716597) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364641)

what is seleh?

Re:Tired of this use of my taxes (1)

tsotha (720379) | 1 year,6 days | (#44365333)

Submersible drones are used almost entirely for mine clearing. There are much cheaper ways to destroy ships.

Re:Tired of this use of my taxes (1)

Hentes (2461350) | 1 year,6 days | (#44365429)

They can be used to detect other subs which could destabilize MAD.

Re:Tired of this use of my taxes (1)

tsotha (720379) | 1 year,6 days | (#44365511)

If that were the goal SOSUS-style sensor nets would be far cheaper and more effective.

Re:Tired of this use of my taxes (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#44365711)

Don't remember Benghazi or Fast and Furious. Remeber Obama's son, Trayvon.

Re:Tired of this use of my taxes (1)

GigG (887839) | 1 year,6 days | (#44365809)

We've always killed people that we don't like as have our enemies. At least with drones we don't have to risk our pilots life.

single point (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#44364273)

Great a Single Point of failure and a single target to destroy.

Re:single point (2)

jamiesan (715069) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364419)

Now if only it had an exhaust port that was about 2 meters wide.

Re:single point (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364843)

It does. Right below the main port. The shaft leads directly to the reactor system...

Re:single point (1)

Zontar The Mindless (9002) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364523)

Great a Single Point of failure and a single target to destroy.

Nobody seems to feel that way about a sub that's carrying enough ICBMs to vaporise a dozen good-sized cities.

One word... (1)

rtilghman (736281) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364427)

CobrAAAAAAAAAA!

Paraphrasing Orwell (4, Insightful)

mi (197448) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364439)

Those who ‘abjure’ violence can only do so because robots are committing violence on their behalf. -- George Orwell, "Notes on Nationalism" [orwell.ru]

Where will it land? (1)

koan (80826) | 1 year,6 days | (#44364767)

The UAV portion launched from this can not land on it, so it's disposable?

Re:Where will it land? (1)

tsotha (720379) | 1 year,6 days | (#44365481)

Yes. The USN has already demonstrated deployment of Aeroenvironment's Switchblade [navaldrones.com] drone from a Trident submarine. It sort of a cross between a drone and a cruise missile. It can loiter fifteen minutes after launch and has a tiny three pound warhead for attacking slow-moving targets.

Re:Where will it land? (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,5 days | (#44370603)

what is a missile but a suicide UAV with a solid rocket motor?

Anyone else terrified by this idea? (1)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#44365063)

Former US Navy submariner here,
      So imagine that we build 100,000 of these things and they all come with solar cells on top. We deploy them all over the world, along every coast line, and they just sit there, for years, waiting for us to need them. We could deploy them locally from our submarines or launch them from our bases in Guam, Hawaii, or the East Coast and let them swim to their destinations. Some of them are for surveillance, armed with UAVs, and some of them, like current aerial drones, are armed with missiles or torpedoes. Think of them as minefields that can dive and hide or go offensive if ordered to. It sounds like an awful idea to me.

Payload (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#44365107)

So, by payload, do we mean something like, enough dandelion seeds to cover my ex's lawn?

Re:Payload (1)

Deadstick (535032) | 1 year,6 days | (#44365835)

Wrong crop.

Re:Payload (0)

Anonymous Coward | 1 year,6 days | (#44366179)

I suspect that whenever anything like this is anywhere near fruition, the rest of the world will be well-armed with EMP weapons and other countermeasures to disrupt the control structure...

How long before... (1)

Adnonify (2964415) | 1 year,6 days | (#44365175)

... they give unmanned vehicles nuclear / ICBM capabilities? How long before we see a takeover by a hostile/terrorist state of such an unmannded carrier and actually resulting in a REAL war. Computers shouldn't be put in control of heavy weaponry. The good old finger on mechanical trigger should do the job. We here on slashdot should realize the implications of giving computers "control" over WMD (which include ICMB). Doesn't this worry anybody here on slashdot? Some of us are capable of finding a buffer-overflows (like you find water in your fridge), analyzing the memory, writing a good payload exploit... This is soo bad. Besides all this, its easier to make mistakes, hurt innocents when you are not in the line of fire. Its easier to press that enter/execute button and kill people. It takes away a lot of the moral issues. When war becomes a videogame, where is the moral oversight.... sigh..

Re:How long before... (1)

tsotha (720379) | 1 year,6 days | (#44365495)

If we were going to put computers in control of nukes we would have done it long ago with ICBMs. I don't think there's any appetite for nuclear armed autonomous drones.

Re:How long before... (1)

GigG (887839) | 1 year,6 days | (#44365829)

What do you think a cruise missile is. They've had the ability to have nuclear warheads since their inception.

Re:How long before... (1)

DarkTempes (822722) | 1 year,6 days | (#44366231)

To be honest, I trust well debugged and tested programming more than I trust people.

I, for one, welcome our future robotic overlords.

Let me be, hopefully, the first to say.. (1)

HockeyPuck (141947) | 1 year,6 days | (#44366275)

Carrier has arrived!

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...