Talk:Communication with submarines

message: The movie Crimson Tide with Denzell Washington and Gene Hackman centered on an American ballistic missile submarine which received two messages: one, an order to launch its missiles, and another, partially received, which may or may not have been a cancellation of the first.  As presented it seems unrealistic to believe there isn't a standard procedure for this scenario, so it took away from my enjoyment of the film.
:There are standard procedures for this (and many other) possible scenarios.  (Said procedures are however classified.)  The general philosophy however is simple; If there is any doubt as to the validity of launch authority - the launch is witheld.  So far as the accuracy of Crimson Tide...  Down Periscope is far more accurate.  Elde 18:06, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Submarine Communications in film 

message: The article identifies Navy Seals as further reading, but they are mentioned nowhere in the article.  Why?  Anti-Submarine Warfare or maybe Torpedos might a more logical "next-step" than seals.  98.150.85.243 (talk) 05:14, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  SEALs 

message: Article says "Attempts to design a transmitter which can be immersed in the sea or flown on an aircraft were soon abandoned." TACAMO and Nightwatch articles say otherwise. Miken32 (talk) 02:03, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Airborne ELF

message: Is the discussion of army jargon and its potential for compression really appropriate in this context? Surely the transmissions would be encrypted so a transmission would never contain "officer", nor "off1" nor "cmdhq" etc, no? --flatfish89 (talk) 22:31, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I thought the same thing and expected to see some really interesting references added, though none have appeared so far.  I'd expect the transmission channel is used for something even more cryptic, like a full message containing "7328815" indicating in true codebook form who it is addressed to and particular context and message.  —EncMstr (talk) 22:59, 1 June 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I'd guess a pure codebook approach wouldn't be secure enough (an observer intercepting enough messages might be able to work out some of the codes), but a codebook message encrypted with an often changing key, precalculated or OTP even would work well in this low bandwith situation. But of course that's all just speculation. --flatfish89 (talk) 19:38, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

text: I would be surprised if this had any practical relevance, and think it should be removed, unless sources are given. Real messages are not only encrypted, but also likely to contain a significant amount of redundancy, particularly if there is no two-way communication, that could ensure error-correction. 86.145.250.191 (talk) 17:34, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

text: I've deleted the section as it's uncited, is unlikely to be true and adds little to the article. A more likely approach is something like Slidex, where you have a vocabulary card. ~Excesses~ (talk) 19:38, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Army Jargon/Compression 

message: The article says:
:The Extremely low frequency transmission employed was a 64-ary Reed-Solomon, meaning that the alphabet had 64 symbols[...]
This doesn't actually state the modulation type used in the transmissions, which would be relevant.  The Reed-Solomon is a data scheme applied prior to modulation, not a translation method.  I'm guessing it's a 64 MFSK (64 QAM seems quite a bit less likely), but we will need a confirmation.  --Merovingian (T, C, L) 01:02, 10 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  (ELF Transmission) type? 

message: Baud rate means symbols per second, not characters per second. Regardless of how many bits there are in a symbol, going from 8-bit character codes to 7-bit codes does not increase baud rate. 193.40.242.97 (talk) 11:57, 29 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Baud rate 

message: In case of communication failure, SSE permit to send pyrotechnic signal devices (smoke, illumination), distress beacons or canister containing messages written on a simple sheet of paper. --Pyrog (talk) 18:07, 22 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[Draft:Submerged signal ejector|Submerged signal ejector]] 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Communication with submarines. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061007110748/http://enterprise.spawar.navy.mil/UploadedFiles/fs_clam_lake_elf2003.pdf to http://enterprise.spawar.navy.mil/UploadedFiles/fs_clam_lake_elf2003.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:19, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: 76 and 82 Hz are SLF, not ELF.
The unit names are common names and must be written lowercase, hertz instead of Hertz (but the symbol is uppercase Hz because named after a man) 151.29.137.229 (talk) 14:49, 21 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  comment