Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

anonguest

Sonar/sound Surveillance Of Oceans And Mh370 Disapperance

Recommended Posts

In a conversation the other day talking current affairs, etc....

Discussion briefly touched on mysterious disappearance of MH370. Friend comments that bigger mystery, for him, is why no mention has been made of locating the wreck/ocean impact site via sound/sonar detection.

In essence....he claimed that there are sufficient 'network' of underwater sound surveillance/sonar monitoring of the oceans globally - such that any object the size of MH370 hitting the ocean at speed will leave at least some sort of sound signature?

Whilst no doubt most of this technology is likely employed by the military, and thus very top secret, there will likley also be plenty of sources of petential data from various civilian research establishments (e.g oceaonographic research units, etc).

In short he claims that someone somewhere must have, even if they don't realise it yet, sound data that could be used (perhaps painstakingly) to better deduce where MH370 hit the ocean.

That is, of course, IF it ever crashed in the ocean. :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a conversation the other day talking current affairs, etc....

Discussion briefly touched on mysterious disappearance of MH370. Friend comments that bigger mystery, for him, is why no mention has been made of locating the wreck/ocean impact site via sound/sonar detection.

In essence....he claimed that there are sufficient 'network' of underwater sound surveillance/sonar monitoring of the oceans globally - such that any object the size of MH370 hitting the ocean at speed will leave at least some sort of sound signature?

Whilst no doubt most of this technology is likely employed by the military, and thus very top secret, there will likley also be plenty of sources of petential data from various civilian research establishments (e.g oceaonographic research units, etc).

In short he claims that someone somewhere must have, even if they don't realise it yet, sound data that could be used (perhaps painstakingly) to better deduce where MH370 hit the ocean.

That is, of course, IF it ever crashed in the ocean. :ph34r:

You need to read Tom Clancy's 'SSBN'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In a conversation the other day talking current affairs, etc....

Discussion briefly touched on mysterious disappearance of MH370. Friend comments that bigger mystery, for him, is why no mention has been made of locating the wreck/ocean impact site via sound/sonar detection.

In essence....he claimed that there are sufficient 'network' of underwater sound surveillance/sonar monitoring of the oceans globally - such that any object the size of MH370 hitting the ocean at speed will leave at least some sort of sound signature?

Whilst no doubt most of this technology is likely employed by the military, and thus very top secret, there will likley also be plenty of sources of petential data from various civilian research establishments (e.g oceaonographic research units, etc).

In short he claims that someone somewhere must have, even if they don't realise it yet, sound data that could be used (perhaps painstakingly) to better deduce where MH370 hit the ocean.

That is, of course, IF it ever crashed in the ocean. :ph34r:

it's a good argument.

I heard somewhere once that sonar detection is so sensitive they can hear a cruise liner start up its engines from across the altantic. How they do this, and how they distinguish it from other ships that may also be running I have no clue.

I think regarding that section of the ocean where the plane was hypothesied to go down, there is very little strategic advantage in that space. Most of the sophisticated listening devices are probably employed by the yanks trying to track russian and chinese subs. So they are probably in the north atlantic and north pacific. Given a choice I think they would want to concentrate listening devices on regions where subs are likely to go and have more there, rather than in places where they are very unlikely to go, such as the south indian ocean. Also the detection range might be compromised by the local topograhy (sea bed and land).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can a plane crash in the ocean if nobody observes it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't be daft. It's on Alpha Centauri now.

:rolleyes:

The plane never existed and/or they were all paid actors, sillybilly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

:rolleyes:

The plane never existed and/or they were all paid actors, sillybilly.

Oh come on everyone.I was looking for a (semi) serious discussion. :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This kind of question/discussion is why everyone should watch

Physics for Future Presidents

It gives you a really simple grounding, in physical things that are likely possible vs impossible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it's a good argument.

I heard somewhere once that sonar detection is so sensitive they can hear a cruise liner start up its engines from across the altantic. How they do this, and how they distinguish it from other ships that may also be running I have no clue.

I think regarding that section of the ocean where the plane was hypothesied to go down, there is very little strategic advantage in that space. Most of the sophisticated listening devices are probably employed by the yanks trying to track russian and chinese subs. So they are probably in the north atlantic and north pacific. Given a choice I think they would want to concentrate listening devices on regions where subs are likely to go and have more there, rather than in places where they are very unlikely to go, such as the south indian ocean. Also the detection range might be compromised by the local topograhy (sea bed and land).

That was the sort of point he was making.

But the fact that the southern indian ocean may well be very sparsely 'monitored' with such sound detection systems/equipment would be mitigated by teh fact that sound travels vast distances in water. He was basically saying that either;

(a) the military, or such like, from one or more countries has data/done analysis and likely knows eher it crashed - but can't say cos it would reveal the secret technology/make the activities too public,

or

(B) there are a number of non-military science organisations that, at least indirectly and likely unkowingly, have sufficient sound data that, with some collaboration from other sources or similar researchers with other data, could process it to reveal a presumed crash site.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was the sort of point he was making.

But the fact that the southern indian ocean may well be very sparsely 'monitored' with such sound detection systems/equipment would be mitigated by teh fact that sound travels vast distances in water. He was basically saying that either;

(a) the military, or such like, from one or more countries has data/done analysis and likely knows eher it crashed - but can't say cos it would reveal the secret technology/make the activities too public,

or

( B) there are a number of non-military science organisations that, at least indirectly and likely unkowingly, have sufficient sound data that, with some collaboration from other sources or similar researchers with other data, could process it to reveal a presumed crash site.

Well, you might be able to revise "very little" to none at all.

Antartica is not like the North Pole. It's a landmass. Putting your boat in the Southern Indian ocean puts it almost as far as it is possible to get to any strategic target. Ballistic missile subs don't have unlimited range and if you are going to launch you want to be as close to the target as possible to give minimum warning signs. Operating out there poses significant hazards, because if something did go wrong you would be a long way from any sort of support.

Assuming no conspiracy theory, I think if the military did know they would inform the search indirectly. ie they would contact the Oz government and say, we think maybe you should try searching here. And then maybe the Oz government might point them in the right direction and offer some misguidance as well, like for example say the commercial satellite data suggests this etc. So if they had "secret" information there could be many ways of making it available without making it obvious it came from a military underwater search network.

Regarding other sound recordings, yes I guess it is possible. but someone needs to trawl through them and maybe that hasnt been done. Also the transducers that are designed to pick up stuff like whale calls might not be as sensitive to a big splash.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest eight

Oh come on everyone.I was looking for a (semi) serious discussion. :(

The quality of tin foil hattery on this site has really taken a nosedive in recent times. I mentioned black triangle spacecraft the other day, to no response. Couldn't get any takers on the McCann/CEOP thing (which still rumbles on, BTW, beyond the range of investigative journalists) either.

I blame it on the demise of Erranta.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There used to be widespread monitoring during the Cold War, to track Soviet submarines. But that was shut down some years ago.

They've looked at the systems that are still monitoring for scientific purposes, and found nothing consistent with the satellite data.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the plan landed flat in a controlled crash landing, as has been suggested as a reason why no debris has been found (it landed in virtually one piece and then sank) then would the splash be that big?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Azorian

After the Soviet Union performed their unsuccessful search for the K-129, the U.S. undertook a search, and by the use of acoustic data from four AFTAC sites and the Adak SOSUS array located the wreck of the submarine to within 5 nautical miles (9.3 km). The USS Halibut submarine used the Fish, a towed, 12-foot (3.7 m), 2-short-ton (1.8 t) collection of cameras, strobe lights, and sonar that was built to withstand extreme depths to detect seafloor objects. The recovery operation commenced covertly (in international waters) about six years later with the supposed commercial purpose of mining the sea floor for manganese nodules under the cover of Howard Hughes and the Hughes Glomar Explorer.[5] While the ship did recover a portion of K-129, a mechanical failure in the grapple caused two-thirds of the recovered section to break off during recovery.

This is hardly classified material so it seems strange that this network didn't pick it up, unless it fell in part of the ocean where this system isn't operating. Are there any blind spots?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There used to be widespread monitoring during the Cold War, to track Soviet submarines. But that was shut down some years ago.

They've looked at the systems that are still monitoring for scientific purposes, and found nothing consistent with the satellite data.

SOSUS is still running, not sure what the coverage is like nowadays though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SOSUS is still running, not sure what the coverage is like nowadays though.

I'm sure I read they handed it over what remained to marine scientists some years ago?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have the sightings of a low flying white plane with a red stripe, just to the south of the Maldives, ever been attributed to anything?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There used to be widespread monitoring during the Cold War, to track Soviet submarines. But that was shut down some years ago.

You believe that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the military (anybody's military) had the tech to spot the plane then it would have been found. If you want to be discrete about it you just send out a "spotter" plane like we did in WWII to hide the fact that Enigma was cracked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   37 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.