[HN Gopher] Manta Ray UUV prototype completes in-water testing
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Manta Ray UUV prototype completes in-water testing
        
       Author : Luc
       Score  : 139 points
       Date   : 2024-05-03 15:22 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.darpa.mil)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.darpa.mil)
        
       | heyflyguy wrote:
       | There was a giant NOTAM in the pacific a few weeks ago. The title
       | of the TFR was "MUTANT MEGALODON". A1396
       | 
       | I am curious if these two things were related.
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | I am and am not at the same time surprised that humor is
         | allowed in this mode of communications.
        
         | IncreasePosts wrote:
         | Why would airmen need to know about a submersible?
        
           | timdiggerm wrote:
           | because they don't want anyone observing the testing
        
         | quercusa wrote:
         | Somebody on X caught it:
         | https://twitter.com/SeanMoodyNews/status/1776676474407297224
        
       | Scene_Cast2 wrote:
       | I wonder why it needs wings underwater.
        
         | hamandchris wrote:
         | Something about this? "Once deployed, the vehicle uses
         | efficient, buoyancy-driven gliding to move through the
         | water..."
         | 
         | Sounds like it gets around by changing buoyancy, which is
         | pretty cool and also probably completely silent.
        
           | causal wrote:
           | It's still much wider-bodied than any glider I've seen. I'm
           | guessing this is because of the need for larger payload bays.
        
             | ryanisnan wrote:
             | The answer is probably explosives, but are there other
             | payloads you think this thing might carry?
             | 
             | Comms? SIG-INT equipment?
        
               | causal wrote:
               | Given the autonomous nature I'd be surprised if it were
               | used offensively anytime soon, so I'd guess the latter.
        
             | marcosdumay wrote:
             | You don't need as much wing-area underwater as you need on
             | the air.
        
           | zardo wrote:
           | The real benefit is it works well with harvesting energy for
           | propulsion from the depth based thermal gradient.
        
         | EA-3167 wrote:
         | The same reason that rays and skates have wings, they're useful
         | in any fluid medium, even when they aren't generating lift.
        
           | krisoft wrote:
           | > even when they aren't generating lift.
           | 
           | Yes. But these do generate lift. This is basically an
           | underwater glider[1]. It can change it's buoyancy which would
           | make it sink/raise straight down/up. It uses then its wings
           | to turn this vertical speed into horizontal propulsion. It
           | basically flies underwater in a sawtooth pattern (when seen
           | in a side view).
           | 
           | This is a very energy efficient way to go the distance. These
           | machines can loiter for months on a single charge typically.
           | They only need to spend energy on the top and bottom points
           | of their vertical swoops to change their buoyancy.
           | 
           | 1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underwater_glider
        
         | ceejayoz wrote:
         | Same reason fish, marine mammals, submarines etc. need fins.
        
         | sigzero wrote:
         | To look like a manta ray?
        
       | erikig wrote:
       | I was wondering how this UUV was powered and all that DARPA was
       | willing to divulge was "Novel energy management techniques" and
       | "undersea energy harvesting" [1].
       | 
       | Anyone have any insights?
       | 
       | [1] https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2024-05-01
        
         | causal wrote:
         | I saw an Instagram Reel where someone claimed it could loiter
         | on the seabed for extended periods powered by geothermal, but
         | that sounds pretty fanciful to me.
        
           | runjake wrote:
           | This is an inaccurate take. It loiters on the bottom in an
           | energy-efficient sleep mode.
           | 
           | Separately, it collects small amounts of energy via
           | geothermal means similar to something like regenerative
           | braking. This, of course, allows it to sleep for longer
           | periods.
        
             | causal wrote:
             | That definitely makes more sense but where did you learn
             | this?
        
               | runjake wrote:
               | From both a defense publication article, written by the
               | Program Manager, Kyle Woerner, and reading up on the
               | company purportedly behind the geothermal research. They
               | go into a bit more detail.
               | 
               | If I can find online links, I'll post a follow up comment
               | with them.
        
               | petesergeant wrote:
               | WarThunder forums[0]
               | 
               | 0: https://www.eurogamer.net/war-thunder-players-leak-
               | military-...
        
         | zardo wrote:
         | https://www.whoi.edu/oceanus/feature/green-energy-powers-und...
        
         | 2rsf wrote:
         | The article mentions Seatrec that have more information:
         | https://seatrec.com/technology/
        
           | conradev wrote:
           | It's an underwater heat pump!
        
             | ttul wrote:
             | I remember reading about this concept in a kids book about
             | "the future" published by Usborne in the mid-1980s.
        
             | tomphoolery wrote:
             | someone at Northrop Grumman has been watching Technology
             | Connections...
        
         | great_psy wrote:
         | Does not 'seem' like the right shape for it, but could it use
         | ocean currents ?
         | 
         | Similar idea to those weather balloons we were talking about
         | last year ?
         | 
         | Is that even possible in the ocean ?
        
           | JKCalhoun wrote:
           | There are definitely underwater gliders:
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underwater_glider
        
         | jauntywundrkind wrote:
         | It's afaik the only glider type UUV (ed: being looked at by
         | .mil. and production intended. and bigger than the research
         | gliders by far.), afaik. Which is super interesting in itself,
         | for endurance purposes. But perhaps this depth-changing mission
         | profile is also key to its energy harvesting?
         | 
         | Just guessing here, but... it's sinking and rising. Well,
         | perhaps it can take some mass of water onboard & run
         | temperature differential energy harvesting off that. Take on
         | warm surface water, slowly glide down 1000 ft (while going much
         | further forward), then run a thermo-electric generator against
         | the cold deep. Swap water & take 300 gallons of cold water,
         | glide up 1000 ft (and forward), then run a thermoelectric
         | generator against the warmer surface water or the air and/or
         | solar. Repeat ad-infinitum. No idea what kind of power you
         | could pull here but maybe, and it fits with the glider core
         | concept.
         | 
         | And yeah, maybe if you do find an underwater vent you can
         | supercharge? :)
         | 
         | Shout out to The War Zone (TWZ)'s coverage over time. The
         | recent is decent but links their previous which looked about
         | some. https://www.twz.com/news-features/manta-ray-underwater-
         | drone...
         | 
         | TWZ talk about something mentioned elsewhere in the comments,
         | yes, the data-linking challenges are partly tackled by having a
         | _" data bubble_" that can float to the surface & uplink, who
         | knows, maybe downlink relay too (unspecified). I definitely
         | want to imagine the data bubble as a recursive system, as
         | itself a smaller glider drone, but I'm 100% making that up, is
         | my sci-fi impulse.
        
           | JKCalhoun wrote:
           | Is this not a glider?
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Underwater_glider
        
           | rjeli wrote:
           | You can do it without a TEG: https://sci-
           | hub.se/10.1109/48.972077
           | 
           | Essentially you use a fluid which freezes at the bottom of
           | the ocean and loses volume (some kind of paraffin)
           | 
           | And then you hook it up with some actuated valves and N2
           | accumulators so the volume change and energy harvesting
           | happens "out of phase" - at the surface, you can deflate an
           | external bladder and sink, and at the bottom, you use some
           | stored energy to reinflate the bladder
           | 
           | With a large enough volume you get near infinite range, only
           | have to pay for payload and any onboard electronics
           | 
           | this report has some more info on the absurd efficiency of
           | thermal gliders: https://escholarship.org/content/qt1c28t6bb/
           | qt1c28t6bb_noSpl...
        
             | nick7376182 wrote:
             | Great explanation, of a very cool concept.
        
             | onlypassingthru wrote:
             | > Essentially you use a fluid which freezes at the bottom
             | of the ocean and loses volume (some kind of paraffin)
             | 
             | So you build a sperm whale UUV.
        
               | rjeli wrote:
               | hm yeah i wonder if you could use the phase change tanks
               | as an acoustic antenna to communicate with buoys on the
               | surface
        
         | wolverine876 wrote:
         | This article covers it in more detail:
         | 
         | https://www.defenseone.com/technology/2024/05/giant-military...
         | 
         |  _"One thing that you notice in underwater vehicle design is
         | you typically can have either a vehicle that lasts very long
         | periods of time but can 't really carry anything with it,"
         | Woerner said on a podcast in 2022. "But if you want something
         | that can carry a sensor or payload that is perhaps a larger
         | size or mass, or has a larger energy draw, you tend to need a
         | more traditional underwater vehicle, propeller driven in most
         | cases. And those tend to not have anywhere near the endurance"
         | that the military is looking for.
         | 
         | The ocean itself is full of potential sources of energy, such
         | as currents, waves, and even subtle differences in water
         | temperature or salt levels. But there's no single perfect
         | source of ocean energy for what DARPA is trying to accomplish.
         | 
         | "If you're interested in maybe closer to surface transport,
         | wave energy is a really great resource, most of the wave energy
         | is distributed near the surface. If you want to go into deeper
         | water, right? That means that wave energy wouldn't be a great
         | resource for that," Sandia National Laboratory engineer Kelley
         | Ruehl, an advisor on the program, said on the podcast.
         | Similarly, current energy is a very localized resource, where
         | we have tidal streets-- those are unique locations in the
         | world. So it's a very specific place that one would need to
         | harvest tidal-energy resource."
         | 
         | DARPA said PacMar Technologies, another contractor on the Manta
         | Ray program, will spend the rest of this year testing a full-
         | scale energy-harvesting system._
        
           | moffkalast wrote:
           | So... it's a glider? The top fin does make it very likely.
        
       | jfaulken wrote:
       | I read that as "Manta Ray Unscrewed ..." and could not process
       | the rest of the sentence.
       | 
       | Are manta rays attacking underwater vehicles now?
        
         | 0x457 wrote:
         | Glad I'm not the only one. Tooke me awhile to figure out.
        
         | pineaux wrote:
         | Same here
        
         | alistairSH wrote:
         | Same. I had to read your comment and title several times each
         | before it clicked.
        
         | manuelkehl wrote:
         | Came here to write a comment along those same lines haha
        
         | nielsbot wrote:
         | Same. I was like "oh, so we have caterpillar drive in real life
         | now?" (assuming screw = propeller)
        
         | aaroninsf wrote:
         | I wonder if there is a name for garden-path sentences which
         | emerge from mis-reading or typos; or, more interestingly
         | perhaps, a name for a garden path candidate sentence--which is
         | being optimistically projected during reading-- _forcing_ a
         | misreading.
         | 
         | An interesting sort of confirmation bias, which it is easy to
         | interpret as "pressure from more abstract model layers,
         | informing the word recognition layer"...
        
           | hammock wrote:
           | It's been studied.
           | https://osf.io/preprints/psyarxiv/w53k8/download
           | 
           | "Rational inference and good-enough processing actively trade
           | off with each other during reading."
           | 
           | A slightly broader term would be "illusory inferences"
        
           | quercusa wrote:
           | "Crash blossoms" (2010) [0]
           | 
           | "Noun piles" (2011-) [2,3]
           | 
           | [0] https://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/31/magazine/31FOB-
           | onlanguage...
           | 
           | [1] https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=4418
           | 
           | [2] https://languagelog.ldc.upenn.edu/nll/?p=29803
        
         | zwieback wrote:
         | Same, and now I'm fantasizing about the Netflix movie about
         | manta rays unscrewing submarines
        
         | not_your_mentat wrote:
         | I was thinking, "That's a rude way to describe manta rays
         | having reproductive problems."
        
         | jpm_sd wrote:
         | "Uncrewed" is the gender-neutral replacement for "Unmanned" in
         | the robotics industry these days.
        
           | jtms wrote:
           | Unmanned was already gender neutral, but hey... whatever
           | makes people feel like they are virtuous
        
             | sangnoir wrote:
             | Thank you for your service in the culture wars.
        
       | patrickhogan1 wrote:
       | This thing is giant I wonder what a whale will do to this.
        
         | jeffbee wrote:
         | It appears to be "giant" in the way that a small private
         | airplane is "giant". It is larger than a sandwich but
         | significantly smaller than all other underwater craft.
        
           | nick7376182 wrote:
           | Looks a decent bit bigger than a Cessna
        
           | grogenaut wrote:
           | https://www.viator.com/North-America-tours/Submarine-
           | Tours/d.... Looks as big or bigger than all of these
        
       | josefresco wrote:
       | Another article on this: https://www.twz.com/news-features/manta-
       | ray-underwater-drone...
       | 
       | Title: Manta Ray Underwater Drone Even More Enormous Than We
       | Thought
        
       | causal wrote:
       | Biggest issue for AUVs is how water attenuates radio, meaning
       | this will have to surface to phone home. Guessing it will mostly
       | be used for surveillance.
        
         | tiahura wrote:
         | Given its size, it could hold a number of cheap small satellite
         | communicators (ie garmin inreach) that could be deployed to
         | slowly float to the surface and phone home as needed.
        
         | lupusreal wrote:
         | Bouyant antenna cables are old tech, no need for the entire
         | craft to surface.
        
         | ranger207 wrote:
         | Although the US (allegedly) no longer operates them, they (and
         | Russia and China) have used extremely low frequency
         | communications stations spread out over miles to communicate
         | with submerged submarines. Tensions are much lower now so
         | submarines can take the risk of surfacing for communications
         | checkins but I'm sure that the ELF stations could be
         | recomissioned fairly quickly if the need arose
        
           | jandrewrogers wrote:
           | By all accounts the Jim Creek Naval Radio Station [0] in
           | Washington State is still active and operational.
           | 
           | [0]
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Creek_Naval_Radio_Station
        
             | 01100011 wrote:
             | Jim Creek is VLF, which is well above ELF frequencies.
        
       | lupusreal wrote:
       | Heh, kinda looks like Arsenal Gear.
        
       | pineaux wrote:
       | This thing is going to be absolutely encrusted with barnacles af
       | some point. How cool is that?
        
         | mc32 wrote:
         | That's going to be a drag.
        
           | 082349872349872 wrote:
           | When there's no crew to keelhaul, why even bother with the
           | barnacles?
        
         | jtriangle wrote:
         | Navy has very, very good antifouling tech. It'll be far less of
         | a problem than you'd think.
        
       | bitlevel wrote:
       | Saw the headline, immediately thought of Voyage to the Bottom of
       | the Sea with Seaview and the smaller Manta craft.
       | 
       | Fewer humans onboard though...
        
       | erksa wrote:
       | > Manta Ray vehicle being towed in preparation for testing
       | 
       | Find it funny that they have to tow the prototype for some
       | reason. Good to know DARPA also releases half-done prototypes.
       | 
       | Lighthearted fun this morning, and not to be taken serious.
        
         | knowaveragejoe wrote:
         | Every prototype of anything large like this would be towed
         | around, why would this be different?
        
         | its_ethan wrote:
         | I know it's pointless pedantry and there's no reason to argue
         | it, but aren't prototypes inherently "half-done"? If something
         | was "fully done" it wouldn't really be a prototype anymore, but
         | more of a gen 1.
        
         | luma wrote:
         | Large ships regularly leverage tugs to get in and out of
         | harbor, this isn't even a little unusual.
        
           | erksa wrote:
           | Neither is having a prototype being assisted by external
           | forces when demoing. :D
           | 
           | All in good fun and all of this is way outside of my area.
           | It's been exciting to see, just thought it was funny that the
           | first images are the thing being towed.
        
       | ItCouldBeWorse wrote:
       | Not really drone-lego yet, but at least partially modular..
        
       | briandw wrote:
       | Sounds like they are using a
       | [Buoyancy_engine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buoyancy_engine).
       | The large wings are there to provide efficient forward motion
       | when going up or down the water column.
        
       | holoduke wrote:
       | I always wonder how these aircraft deal with sea life and debris.
       | The first 0 to 20 meters of sea is the most dense populated zone
       | in the world. How do you deal with collisions? I think therefor
       | this will never be a success.
        
         | dylan604 wrote:
         | What the huh? This has to be a joke, yeah? Those things in the
         | sea move out of the way when things that appear threatening
         | move through the area. Why would this be any different to that?
         | Or to any other man made vessel in that same area. I only typed
         | this out in case you're having a brain fart, otherwise I really
         | feel like there should be cameras around like I'm being punk'd.
        
           | zardo wrote:
           | Catching floating kelp would be a real concern. I doubt the
           | plan is to spend much time near the surface though.
        
         | dgfitz wrote:
         | Have you ever tried to catch a sea-faring animal, with your
         | hands, or a fishing rod, or a net?
        
       | neeleshs wrote:
       | UUV (Uncrewed Underwater Vehicle) is a meh acronym. CrewL(l)ess
       | Underwater Boat would've given them CLUB or CUB!
        
         | dgfitz wrote:
         | It is just part of the same vernacular as: UAV (Unmanned Aerial
         | Vehicle), USV (Unmanned Surface Vehicle), and UGV (Unmanned
         | Ground Vehicle). So UUV (Unmanned Underwater Vehicle) lines up.
        
       | Razengan wrote:
       | Carrier Command (1988) can finally be a reality:
       | 
       | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carrier_Command
        
       | dvh wrote:
       | Why it needs vertical control surface? Why manta ray don't need
       | one?
        
         | tambre wrote:
         | I'm guessing, but manta rays are flexible and can form vertical
         | surfaces by how their wings flop. Or maybe they just can flop
         | their wings different amounts to generate differing thrust for
         | turning.
         | 
         | Neither is possible with todays technology. Adding a vertical
         | control surface is a pretty easy solution though.
        
       | braymundo wrote:
       | Major X-COM: Terror from the Deep vibes.
        
       | mattmaroon wrote:
       | I feel like at some point, UUVs will be able to disable one part
       | of the nuclear triad. A submarine with nuclear warheads is such a
       | big ticket item that no country can reasonably have a lot of
       | them. The US has 14, Russia 11. The entire world fleet is
       | probably in the 30s.
       | 
       | A UUV that can find one and follow it indefinitely could be able
       | to neutralize it and would be, presumably, much cheaper and
       | easier to build. How hard could it be to eventually find and
       | track every ballistic missile submarine with them?
       | 
       | I'm sure there are things I'm not understanding (how
       | communications work, whether such a sub would be able to launch
       | ICBMs even after being torpedoed, etc.) but it seems like this
       | should have major strategic ramifications eventually.
        
         | chatmasta wrote:
         | I think what you're missing is that a nuclear submarine
         | wouldn't let a UUV "follow it indefinitely." Also, the
         | submarine can have its own fleet of UUVs.
        
           | mattmaroon wrote:
           | Possibly. Everyone so far since the advent of nukes has
           | generally abided by not shooting each other's surveillance
           | down in international territory (water, space, etc.) But
           | perhaps that would change if UUVs are following subs.
           | 
           | Also I suppose the sub could re-enter its own coastal waters
           | and then do it too, much as we shot down China's spy balloon.
        
           | gattr wrote:
           | That, and also, as pointed out in e.g [1], a "boomer"
           | submarine can launch all its SLBMs in 60-90 s. Faster than it
           | could be torpedoed. And even if you manage to disable it very
           | quickly, just a few launched missiles mean multiple times
           | that number of warheads (MIRV).
           | 
           | [1] Annie Jacobsen, "Nuclear War: A Scenario"
        
       | hcarvalhoalves wrote:
       | Manta Ray... Unmanned Vehicles... DARPA...
       | 
       | Is this Metal Gear?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-05-04 23:01 UTC)