Technology and Operations  
This forum is for discussing technological & operational matters pertaining to U-boats. 
Re: Single transducer
Posted by: J.T. McDaniel ()
Date: February 01, 2002 11:27PM

I suspect the fact that the most effective way of finding a target was to listen in on the enemy signals and then go wait for them to come to you went a long way toward slowing more complex hydrophone development in the U.S. Navy. For most of the war the American subs also had radar and the Japanese escorts, mostly, didn't, so running on the surface with the emitter going wasn't nearly as risky as it would have been in the Atlantic. After the war, when the "enemy" became a power we couldn't listen in on as easily, there were tremendous advances in passive sonar/hydrophone technology, ultimately leading to the massive phased array systems in modern boats. (Not to mention permanent hard-wired hydrophone arrays set up along the coasts and at natural choke points.)

The American JP hydrophone was a very simple device. Just a long iron bar with copper wire wrapped around it, and sound absorbing material covering the rear of the bar to make it directional. You plugged the coil into an outlet on the panel and ran a DC current through it, which magnetised the bar. This turned the whole thing into a great big microphone. (You had to remagnetise the unit frequently when under attack, since the concussion from the depth charges tended to demagnetise the bar -- a problem with most permanent magnets.) Then you shifted the plug to the amplifier input to listen. It was trained with a hand wheel, located in the forward torpedo room. It also used one of those old "magic eye" tubes you used to find in FM radios to fine-tune the bearing.

There were also two supersonic sonar head that could be extended out from the bottom of the hull. These were also mostly used passively, particularly to listen for enemy sonar. The equipment associated with these was located in the conning tower. Used on single-ping setting, this could be used to get a much more accurate range than was possible with the stadimeter in the periscope, which required knowing the exact masthead height for accuracy. You'd have three men on the sonar suite during an attack, two in the conning tower and one in the forward torpedo room.

J.T. McDaniel

Options: ReplyQuote


Subject Written By Posted
Submarine quality in WW2 bernardz 01/21/2002 12:31PM
Re: Submarine quality in WW2 J.T. McDaniel 01/21/2002 09:04PM
Re: Submarine quality in WW2 kurt 01/22/2002 09:17PM
Re: Submarine quality in WW2 sniper 01/24/2002 07:21AM
Sonar SuperKraut 01/31/2002 07:54PM
Re: Sonar J.T. McDaniel 02/01/2002 01:22AM
Just a small note Leif... 02/01/2002 10:57AM
Re: Sonar sniper 02/01/2002 07:05AM
Single transducer SuperKraut 02/01/2002 03:31PM
Re: Single transducer J.T. McDaniel 02/01/2002 11:27PM
Re: Single transducer sniper 02/06/2002 10:25AM
U 570 SuperKraut 02/06/2002 11:42AM
Re: U 570 sniper 02/06/2002 11:58AM


Your Name: 
Your Email: 
Subject: 
Spam prevention:
Please, enter the code that you see below in the input field. This is for blocking bots that try to post this form automatically.
 **      **  **    **  **    **  **    **  **     ** 
 **  **  **  ***   **  **   **    **  **   **     ** 
 **  **  **  ****  **  **  **      ****    **     ** 
 **  **  **  ** ** **  *****        **     ********* 
 **  **  **  **  ****  **  **       **     **     ** 
 **  **  **  **   ***  **   **      **     **     ** 
  ***  ***   **    **  **    **     **     **     **