Underwater Gliders

[Burt Compton]

Science - AP

New Robotic Gliders Can Soar Under Water
Sun Nov 23, 1:17 PM ET

By ANDREW BRIDGES, AP Science Writer

SAN DIEGO - A century after the Wright Brothers first took to the skies, the
world of flight is pushing to new depths.

Researchers are perfecting innovative gliders that can swoop and soar on
journeys covering hundreds of miles and lasting for weeks — all deep beneath
the ocean waves.

The fledgling technology, barely a decade old, has already produced robotic
submarine gliders that move slowly, with the nimbleness of a blimp. Now
next-generation gliders are being developed to fly just as gracefully as their
airborne counterparts, diving and climbing on broad wings that slice not air
but water.


"They're coming of age," said Clayton Jones, project engineer at Webb Research
Corp., an East Falmouth, Mass., company that has sold 21 of the $60,000 ocean
gliders it builds.


The submarine robots don't use propellers, jets or flapping wings to get about.
Nor do they swim.


Instead, they pump ballast water in and out to subtly change their buoyancy.
That enables them to alternately rise and fall through the ocean as they glide
forward.


The battery-powered gliders have quickly lured the interest of marine
scientists who have fitted early models with instruments that measure ocean
currents, salinity and temperature. Scientists hope that eventually the gliders
could be used to monitor pollution levels, keep tabs on plankton blooms and,
quite literally, "swim with the fishes" or other prey.


"They could follow schools of fish — or Russian submarines," said Scott
Jenkins, an engineer and glider expert at the Scripps Institution of
Oceanography in San Diego.


The gliders are as efficient as they are stealthy, which has drawn the interest
and backing of the U.S. Navy (news - web sites). Potential military
applications include mine detection, surveillance and patrol, Navy officials
said.


The Navy hatched the glider concept in the early 1960s but the idea soon lost
ground to propeller-driven submersibles. The idea was proposed again in the
late 1980s when engineers realized the technology could spawn thrifty gliders
that could embark on watery flights lasting months and miles at a time.


"What they bring to the table is a persistence, a long-term deployment
capability," said Thomas Swean, team leader for ocean engineering and marine
systems at the Office of Naval Research in Arlington, Va.


The aerodynamic principles that guide ocean gliders are the same that apply to
airborne gliders, except the underwater versions can climb every bit as
effortlessly as they dive.


An important stage in glider development came last summer, when scientists
deployed 15 of the robots in Monterey Bay in the first large field
demonstration of the technology.


"We've just handed the adolescents the car keys," Jones said. "They're driving
around the block and they're doing what are the first glimpses of what we hope
to accomplish."


Still, Jones acknowledges that expectations for these autonomous underwater
vehicles, or AUVs, have to be reined in for now.


Problems include the build up of barnacles on long flights, which create drag.
At the surface, ships, kelp and curious fisherman also pose risks, said Ralf
Bachmayer, a Princeton University glider researcher.


During the August experiments in Monterey, fishermen plucked four of the
gliders from the water after the robots briefly surfaced to communicate with
scientists by satellite. Three of the gilders were recovered intact; the fourth
was found on shore in pieces.





The first generation of gliders look like little more than 6-foot torpedoes
fitted with stubby wings that provide the lift needed to move them forward.

For now, experts concede the early robots, built by Scripps, Webb Research and
the University of Washington, are basically glorified underwater blimps capable
of flights measured in weeks and hundreds of miles.

But engineers designing the next generation of gliders promise huge gains in
efficiency, range and speed. Assisting them is the more than 100 years of
studies on aerodynamics undertaken since the days of Orville and Wilbur Wright.


"There are no new principles being invoked here," Swean said. "The sea is a
very, very harsh environment but it is a fluid. Air and water, except for their
densities, are very similar creatures."

The boldest new ocean glider is a large flying wing the Navy is developing with
Scripps that should be more B-2 than blimp.

Engineers hope to begin testing the 20-foot, delta-winged prototype this
February off the San Diego coast.

Preliminary analysis of the design suggests its shape should produce speeds up
to 10 times as fast as today's gliders, which fly at a pokey half-mile an hour.
It also should fly more efficiently than its torpedo-shaped predecessors.

Other varieties of glider, now being tested, will be even more efficient and
forgo the use of batteries altogether. Instead, they will draw their power from
the ocean itself, gathering energy from the warmth of the water around them.

"It's like an external fuel tank," Jenkins said. "It's everywhere you go and
you just have to sip from it."

Such self-sustaining gliders, according to the Navy, could undertake missions
that span as many as five years and thousands of miles.

___

On the Net:

Webb Research Corp.: http://www.webbresearch.com

Office of Naval Research: http://www.onr.navy.mil

[JJ Sinclair]

>
>Instead, they pump ballast water in and out to subtly change their buoyancy.

Would that be, *Air Ballast*?
>
>The battery-powered gliders have quickly lured the interest of marine
>scientists

Oh, Motorgliders.

> have fitted early models with instruments that measure ocean
>currents, salinity and temperature.

What, No Varios?


JJ Sinclair

[Nyal Williams]

A whole new level (I'm still looking for half a new
level!) of records for Steve Fossett to work on!


At 12:48 24 November 2003, Burt Compton wrote:


>Science - AP
>
>New Robotic Gliders Can Soar Under Water
>Sun Nov 23, 1:17 PM ET
>
>By ANDREW BRIDGES, AP Science Writer
>
>SAN DIEGO - A century after the Wright Brothers first
>took to the skies, the
>world of flight is pushing to new depths.
>
>Researchers are perfecting innovative gliders that
>can swoop and soar on
>journeys covering hundreds of miles and lasting for
>weeks — all deep beneath
>the ocean waves.
>
>The fledgling technology, barely a decade old, has
>already produced robotic
>submarine gliders that move slowly, with the nimbleness
>of a blimp. Now
>next-generation gliders are being developed to fly
>just as gracefully as their
>airborne counterparts, diving and climbing on broad
>wings that slice not air
>but water.
>
>
>'They're coming of age,' said Clayton Jones, project
>engineer at Webb Research
>Corp., an East Falmouth, Mass., company that has sold
>21 of the $60,000 ocean
>gliders it builds.
>
>
>The submarine robots don't use propellers, jets or
>flapping wings to get about.
>Nor do they swim.
>
>
>Instead, they pump ballast water in and out to subtly
>change their buoyancy.
>That enables them to alternately rise and fall through
>the ocean as they glide
>forward.
>
>
>The battery-powered gliders have quickly lured the
>interest of marine
>scientists who have fitted early models with instruments
>that measure ocean
>currents, salinity and temperature. Scientists hope
>that eventually the gliders
>could be used to monitor pollution levels, keep tabs
>on plankton blooms and,
>quite literally, 'swim with the fishes' or other prey.
>
>
>
>'They could follow schools of fish — or Russian submarines,'
>said Scott
>Jenkins, an engineer and glider expert at the Scripps
>Institution of
>Oceanography in San Diego.
>
>
>The gliders are as efficient as they are stealthy,
>which has drawn the interest
>and backing of the U.S. Navy (news - web sites). Potential
>military
>applications include mine detection, surveillance and
>patrol, Navy officials
>said.
>
>
>The Navy hatched the glider concept in the early 1960s
>but the idea soon lost
>ground to propeller-driven submersibles. The idea was
>proposed again in the
>late 1980s when engineers realized the technology could
>spawn thrifty gliders
>that could embark on watery flights lasting months
>and miles at a time.
>
>
>'What they bring to the table is a persistence, a long-term
>deployment
>capability,' said Thomas Swean, team leader for ocean
>engineering and marine
>systems at the Office of Naval Research in Arlington,
>Va.
>
>
>The aerodynamic principles that guide ocean gliders
>are the same that apply to
>airborne gliders, except the underwater versions can
>climb every bit as
>effortlessly as they dive.
>
>
>An important stage in glider development came last
>summer, when scientists
>deployed 15 of the robots in Monterey Bay in the first
>large field
>demonstration of the technology.
>
>
>'We've just handed the adolescents the car keys,' Jones
>said. 'They're driving
>around the block and they're doing what are the first
>glimpses of what we hope
>to accomplish.'
>
>
>Still, Jones acknowledges that expectations for these
>autonomous underwater
>vehicles, or AUVs, have to be reined in for now.
>
>
>Problems include the build up of barnacles on long
>flights, which create drag.
>At the surface, ships, kelp and curious fisherman also
>pose risks, said Ralf
>Bachmayer, a Princeton University glider researcher.
>
>
>
>During the August experiments in Monterey, fishermen
>plucked four of the
>gliders from the water after the robots briefly surfaced
>to communicate with
>scientists by satellite. Three of the gilders were
>recovered intact; the fourth
>was found on shore in pieces.
>
>
>
>
>
>The first generation of gliders look like little more
>than 6-foot torpedoes
>fitted with stubby wings that provide the lift needed
>to move them forward.
>
>For now, experts concede the early robots, built by
>Scripps, Webb Research and
>the University of Washington, are basically glorified
>underwater blimps capable
>of flights measured in weeks and hundreds of miles.
>
>
>But engineers designing the next generation of gliders
>promise huge gains in
>efficiency, range and speed. Assisting them is the
>more than 100 years of
>studies on aerodynamics undertaken since the days of
>Orville and Wilbur Wright.
>
>
>'There are no new principles being invoked here,' Swean
>said. 'The sea is a
>very, very harsh environment but it is a fluid. Air
>and water, except for their
>densities, are very similar creatures.'
>
>The boldest new ocean glider is a large flying wing
>the Navy is developing with
>Scripps that should be more B-2 than blimp.
>
>Engineers hope to begin testing the 20-foot, delta-winged
>prototype this
>February off the San Diego coast.
>
>Preliminary analysis of the design suggests its shape
>should produce speeds up
>to 10 times as fast as today's gliders, which fly at
>a pokey half-mile an hour.
>It also should fly more efficiently than its torpedo-shaped
>predecessors.
>
>Other varieties of glider, now being tested, will be
>even more efficient and
>forgo the use of batteries altogether. Instead, they
>will draw their power from
>the ocean itself, gathering energy from the warmth
>of the water around them.
>
>'It's like an external fuel tank,' Jenkins said. 'It's
>everywhere you go and
>you just have to sip from it.'
>
>Such self-sustaining gliders, according to the Navy,
>could undertake missions
>that span as many as five years and thousands of miles.
>
>
>___
>
>On the Net:
>
>Webb Research Corp.: http://www.webbresearch.com
>
>Office of Naval Research: http://www.onr.navy.mil
>
>
>
>
>

[dbrown]

1960's? Guess they must have read some of the model plane magazines
that were out in the 1950's.

Anybody other than me make an underwater glider from plastic models in the
50's? Most ended up as gliders, after you break the little props enough times.
You can make an ROG from the bottom of the pool, circle up, then glide down.
Lot's of fun. Never succeeded in making one air leak proof.






In article >,
(JJ Sinclair) wrote:
>>
>>Instead, they pump ballast water in and out to subtly change their buoyancy.
>
>Would that be, *Air Ballast*?
>>
>>The battery-powered gliders have quickly lured the interest of marine
>>scientists
>
>Oh, Motorgliders.
>
>> have fitted early models with instruments that measure ocean
>>currents, salinity and temperature.
>
>What, No Varios?
>
>
>JJ Sinclair

[Milton Hare]

I've done a bit of underwater gliding - really cool, but it's got a
few drawbacks... like constantly worrying about those little windows
imploding and tasting the water on the wall to determine if it's just
condensation or a little hint of your impending doom. I would say it
is about like flying for the first few decades after the Wright
brothers got off the ground - thrilling but dangerous. I'd rather be
going for a long cross-country flight here in Northern California than
gliding in the ocean, but I'm glad I tried it out once at least.

I'll stick to soaring above sea level till the technology improves a
bit. Anyway, I lived through it and here's some more info on that
little adventure...

I posted this on RAS a while back:

I know of a "sea-glider" that was operational for a few years called
C-BUG (Controlled by Buoyancy Underwater Glider).

http://www.stanleysubmarines.com/Photos.htm (sub photos at the
bottom).

A boy genius named Karl Stanley built it
starting at the age of 15, and after about eight
years he actually finished the thing. In January 2000 while on
vacation on the island of Roatan (off the north coast of Honduras) I
went for two dives in this small craft. We dove along the vertical
wall of the Cayman trench to a bit over 500 feet living out my Jacques
Cousteau dreams. The wildly improbable life forms we saw might as
well have been from another planet. Visibility was about 400 feet and
not as dark as I expected, especially looking up (it is surpisingly
clear that deep). I found the underwater 'sandfalls' to be noteworthy
- they looked very much like waterfalls as the sand fell down the
various overhangs of rock along the huge dark cliff face that seemed
to be right out of the movie 'Abyss'.

During a night dive out in open water we dove at a very steep angle
without lights, going very slowly to avoid damage if we hit anything
in the dark. Watching tens of thousands of glowing green
bioluminescent creatures go by as we descended into the absolute
darkness of the deep ocean at night was spectacular. Karl has
actually spent the night in the deep a few times - pretty wild stuff.

As a glider pilot I was quite interested in its method of propulsion,
which was 'gliding' both up and down using buoyancy control and short
'wings'. We were able to glide forward much like a
sailplane, including banking and pitch control of speed if I remember
correctly. It had two small electric props for manuevering around the
cliff formations and underwater caves, but gliding was the primary
means of propulsion for forward travel. I don't remember what the
glide angle was - not overly flat as I recall - maybe 10 to 1. Since
this thing can have zero or positive buoyancy it's not exactly like a
glider, but there are definitely similarities to gliding. The ride
down was a long glide along the cliff until we were down to about 550
feet or so - coming back up was another story! We came up very
quickly, using something like thermalling turns - very tight banking.
I think that was just for fun. We were on the surface in nothing
flat. We travelled some distance on our trip, but I have no idea how
far.

This homebuilt craft was far less 'hydrodynamic' than even the worst
2-33, and our forward speed was slow - maybe 5 knots at most, often
much slower as we 'hovered' while inspecting various unlikely
creatures. The fuselage was formed out of a converted pipe, with 2
foot long wings on either side (a bit shorter than the ASH-25 I'm used
to).

It had done about 200 dives prior to mine and it seemed to work quite
well on our dive. The initial descent mode was quite alarming as it
nosed straight down amidst a huge amount of bubbles - this feels more
like sinking than controlled diving, especially at night. An engineer
friend of mine who had built a small sub while at Stanford was
concerned about the number of cycles it could handle, which is why we
didn't go to its max depth of about 700 feet. We had enough info from
the local diving community to feel reasonably comfortable about the
safety aspects and history of the operation, but I can't say that it
was my shining moment of good judgement. Even with the numerous
redundant systems on this little sub, the risk of diving that deep are
serious indeed - absolutely not for the faint of heart.

Karl had tried unsuccessfuly to interest the Navy and various other
entities in his concept, but to no avail. I have heard that he
eventually sold the little sub as an anchor of all things, and it was
sunk somewhere in Honduras - not sure if that's true. He's working on
a new sub now.

I think he's on to something - sounds like others might agree.

I found some links for those interested. C-BUG (the yellow submarine)
was the glider I went for a ride in.

http://www.stanleysubmarines.com/
http://www.nationalgeographic.com/adventure/0211/q_n_a.html

Regards,

Milt

milt
at
soar ingnet (nospaces)
dot
org

[Greg Arnold]

Amazing. And I thought soaring was dangerous . . .



Milton Hare wrote:

> I've done a bit of underwater gliding - really cool, but it's got a
> few drawbacks... like constantly worrying about those little windows
> imploding and tasting the water on the wall to determine if it's just
> condensation or a little hint of your impending doom. I would say it
> is about like flying for the first few decades after the Wright
> brothers got off the ground - thrilling but dangerous. I'd rather be
> going for a long cross-country flight here in Northern California than
> gliding in the ocean, but I'm glad I tried it out once at least.
>
> I'll stick to soaring above sea level till the technology improves a
> bit. Anyway, I lived through it and here's some more info on that
> little adventure...
>
> I posted this on RAS a while back:
>
> I know of a "sea-glider" that was operational for a few years called
> C-BUG (Controlled by Buoyancy Underwater Glider).
>
> http://www.stanleysubmarines.com/Photos.htm (sub photos at the
> bottom).
>
> A boy genius named Karl Stanley built it
> starting at the age of 15, and after about eight
> years he actually finished the thing. In January 2000 while on
> vacation on the island of Roatan (off the north coast of Honduras) I
> went for two dives in this small craft. We dove along the vertical
> wall of the Cayman trench to a bit over 500 feet living out my Jacques
> Cousteau dreams. The wildly improbable life forms we saw might as
> well have been from another planet. Visibility was about 400 feet and
> not as dark as I expected, especially looking up (it is surpisingly
> clear that deep). I found the underwater 'sandfalls' to be noteworthy
> - they looked very much like waterfalls as the sand fell down the
> various overhangs of rock along the huge dark cliff face that seemed
> to be right out of the movie 'Abyss'.
>
> During a night dive out in open water we dove at a very steep angle
> without lights, going very slowly to avoid damage if we hit anything
> in the dark. Watching tens of thousands of glowing green
> bioluminescent creatures go by as we descended into the absolute
> darkness of the deep ocean at night was spectacular. Karl has
> actually spent the night in the deep a few times - pretty wild stuff.
>
> As a glider pilot I was quite interested in its method of propulsion,
> which was 'gliding' both up and down using buoyancy control and short
> 'wings'. We were able to glide forward much like a
> sailplane, including banking and pitch control of speed if I remember
> correctly. It had two small electric props for manuevering around the
> cliff formations and underwater caves, but gliding was the primary
> means of propulsion for forward travel. I don't remember what the
> glide angle was - not overly flat as I recall - maybe 10 to 1. Since
> this thing can have zero or positive buoyancy it's not exactly like a
> glider, but there are definitely similarities to gliding. The ride
> down was a long glide along the cliff until we were down to about 550
> feet or so - coming back up was another story! We came up very
> quickly, using something like thermalling turns - very tight banking.
> I think that was just for fun. We were on the surface in nothing
> flat. We travelled some distance on our trip, but I have no idea how
> far.
>
> This homebuilt craft was far less 'hydrodynamic' than even the worst
> 2-33, and our forward speed was slow - maybe 5 knots at most, often
> much slower as we 'hovered' while inspecting various unlikely
> creatures. The fuselage was formed out of a converted pipe, with 2
> foot long wings on either side (a bit shorter than the ASH-25 I'm used
> to).
>
> It had done about 200 dives prior to mine and it seemed to work quite
> well on our dive. The initial descent mode was quite alarming as it
> nosed straight down amidst a huge amount of bubbles - this feels more
> like sinking than controlled diving, especially at night. An engineer
> friend of mine who had built a small sub while at Stanford was
> concerned about the number of cycles it could handle, which is why we
> didn't go to its max depth of about 700 feet. We had enough info from
> the local diving community to feel reasonably comfortable about the
> safety aspects and history of the operation, but I can't say that it
> was my shining moment of good judgement. Even with the numerous
> redundant systems on this little sub, the risk of diving that deep are
> serious indeed - absolutely not for the faint of heart.
>
> Karl had tried unsuccessfuly to interest the Navy and various other
> entities in his concept, but to no avail. I have heard that he
> eventually sold the little sub as an anchor of all things, and it was
> sunk somewhere in Honduras - not sure if that's true. He's working on
> a new sub now.
>
> I think he's on to something - sounds like others might agree.
>
> I found some links for those interested. C-BUG (the yellow submarine)
> was the glider I went for a ride in.
>
> http://www.stanleysubmarines.com/
> http://www.nationalgeographic.com/adventure/0211/q_n_a.html
>
> Regards,
>
> Milt
>
> milt
> at
> soar ingnet (nospaces)
> dot
> org

[B Lacovara]

Check this out:

http://www.deepflight.com/subs/dfa.htm

I think it was a former astronaut who wrote a novel featuring a "flying"
submersable that used thermal currents and thermocline intefaces to soar around
the ocean.

Geez, am I going need another expensive toy?

Bob