back to article US military readies drone submarine hunter

Early next year a 140-ton warship will slip from its Pacific berth and sail out to patrol US coastal waters for up to three months, all without a single sailor on board. The Anti-Submarine Warfare Continuous Trail Unmanned Vessel (ACTUV) is a 132-foot ship packed with sensors designed to hunt down signals from diesel-electric …

  1. gerdesj Silver badge

    This is a game changer

    I wonder if the following has been thought about.

    Enemy sub owning country (ESOC) is a bit upset at this new capability. In the past eg during cold war, brinkmanship was the name of the game but in general, threats were made but no or minimal action was taken and certainly lives were not taken if it could be avoided. That simplifies things somewhat but these drone thingies have no people aboard or if they do then they are no longer drones.

    ESOC arranges for a rock to appear under the water line in the Atlantic/Pacific. Shame but no person was killed so not a problem. Many drones start hitting "rocks" or whales or something and sink with no hands but the public don't care.

    So you put people aboard and make ESOC well aware of the fact. Your drones stop sinking for odd reasons but you no longer have properly autonomous drones and you have to keep the baby sitters happy and they want to control the thing and they insist on eating and having water and/or booze and time ashore and so on.

    Never mind, your drone contractors have a healthy profit margin and very happy shareholders. Lovely.

    1. phuzz Silver badge
      Facepalm

      Re: This is a game changer

      Any ideas on how this hypothetical rock of your is supposed to appear without being visible on sonar? You know, the big active sonar that's on the drone boat?

      Anything solid enough to sink a boat will show up from miles away.

      1. Wommit

        Re: This is a game changer

        "Any ideas on how this hypothetical rock of your is supposed to appear without being visible on sonar? You know, the big active sonar that's on the drone boat?"

        No one uses active sonar, that's like broadcasting a few megawatts of "WE ARE RIGHT HERE!" to the world. Active sonar can be detected far further away than it's own echo detection range. So passive sonar is usually used. It's very hard to detect some one listening for you.

        And there are far stranger things in the worlds oceans than floating rocks.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: This is a game changer

        Actually, some decades ago, I was officer of the watch when our variable depth sonar hit a French submarine. Possibly the sonar was looking in the wrong direction and did not see it before hitting it.

    2. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

      Re: This is a game changer

      Never mind hypothetical rocks, just have a fleet of little underwater drones equipped with big hifi systems capable of emitting sound signatures of all kinds of submarines, enemy and otherwise. Send them out into the oceans with a drunkards-walk course and watch the sub-chaser drones running in circles. Naval Robot Wars :)

      1. PNGuinn
        Trollface

        Re: little drones and big hifi...

        Wouldn't that sort of thing work equally well for annoying a manned vessel?

        Anyways, we have a power problem. If it's going to be big hifi it'll have to use valves, Big 'uns - ask any hifii buff.

        Wouldn't want to be chased by the rainbow worriers for warming the ocean, now would we?

        1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

          Re: little drones and big hifi...

          " If it's going to be big hifi it'll have to use valves, Big 'uns - ask any hifii buff."

          ....and think how much those long and expensive pure gold, oxygen free Monster cables are going to cost

      2. YARR
        Thumb Down

        Re: This is a game changer

        Re. "have a fleet of little underwater drones equipped with big hifi systems capable of emitting sound signatures of all kinds of submarines"

        Bad idea. Whales and other sea life already suffer stress and navigation problems due to the noise pollution from shipping. They can do without more unnecessary noise, in particular outside of shipping sea lanes.

        Following a "drunkards-walk course" would be a bit of a give away unless the submarines operated in the same manner.

    3. Robert Helpmann?? Silver badge
      Childcatcher

      Re: This is a game changer

      ...these drone thingies have no people aboard or if they do then they are no longer drones.

      I believe it is more a matter of who or what was piloting the thing that defines it as a drone, regardless of crew, passengers, cargo or payload.

    4. Fungus Bob Silver badge
      Facepalm

      Re: This is a game changer

      gerdesj, you really ought to be fined or spanked with a piece of wainscotting or something for using the term "game changer".

  2. ckm5

    Steal me

    Some will just steal it using the Liparus or some such.

    Seems like a perfect target - tons of tech, unmanned and floating on the surface.

    1. Ken 16 Silver badge
      Pirate

      It's not stealing, if you find an abandoned vessel in international waters

      I did think it was salvage but no, there's a separate "Law of Finds", as in Finders Keepers.

  3. Mark 85 Silver badge

    Pass the popcorn. I'm waiting for the first (probably many) script-kiddies or state type actors to hack into it and take control*. This should be interesting to watch. I'd lay odds that after the first one, it would be manned by if nothing else than some armed guards who have access to a master control switch.

    *It's not "if" anything IT related gets hacked, it is "when" and it will happen.

  4. frank ly Silver badge

    Where there's a will ....

    "... controlled via satellite by landlubbers in air-conditioned cubicles, ..."

    I used to work a couple of desks away from a man who kept a bottle of rum in his desk. You could catch a smell of it when he added it to his tea. It was an open plan office so he couldn't have sodomy or the lash.

  5. Kharkov
    Pirate

    And what about Somalian Pirates?

    Unmanned ship, filled with expensive goodies... meets small fishing boat, with three guys as supercargo. They board, one with programming knowledge, one with hardware knowledge and, as the saying goes, another one, probably with a gun, to keep an eye on these two dangerous intellectuals.

    Hacking remotely (don't use 'pASSword' as your password guys, that's too easy, put 'passWORD', much safer...) is always possible of course, but if you know what you're doing, and you have uninterrupted physical access to the beast, then hacking becomes somewhat simpler.

    And the next round in this cycle is for an opposing nation (O.N.) to have a small submersible drone follow the good-guy-drone (G.G.D.) and... pump out lots of noise. I recommend the 1812 Overture.

    Yes, I know I created two acronyms and didn't use them again, I just like making acronyms...

    1. g e

      Re: And what about Somalian Pirates?

      Not even that.

      Steel nets to foul props (assuming it's not an impellor), tow rope & maybe a wideband jammer to interrupt C&C self-destruct, which presumably it has.

      Tow it to a big metal box and get the screwdrivers out.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: And what about Somalian Pirates?

      Hmm - haven't you ever watched one of those bait car shows, where they enable the remote locking after the thief enters? Maybe the whole point is to catch Somalian hackers?

      And if anyone else is sad enough to have watched the Aussie navy soap - Sea Patrol, they will know that this immediately removes the number 1 threat to navies, which is the weekly kidnap of members of your crew by deranged psychopaths on yachts.

    3. fedoraman
      Stop

      Re: And what about Somalian Pirates?

      ...

      warning: acronym ON is defined but never used

      warning: acronym GGD is defined but never used

      ...

      compilation finished.

      2 warnings, 0 errors

      1. LucreLout Silver badge

        Re: And what about Somalian Pirates?

        2 warnings, 0 errors

        "Warnings are errors" - Scott Allen

      2. This post has been deleted by its author

    4. TheOtherHobbes

      Re: And what about Somalian Pirates?

      >Unmanned ship, filled with expensive goodies... meets small fishing boat, with three guys as supercargo.

      I doubt there's a problem. It's probably running Windows 10.

      Also hacking is kind of useless unless you also have access to the DARPA satellite network - which I'm guessing Somali pirates don't.

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: And what about Somalian Pirates?

      ...you'd have thought the designers would have that sort of scenario in mind, given its potential role in our rather volatile political climate.

      I honestly wouldn't be surprised if such a vessel wasn't fitted with an emergency self destruct which could be either triggered remotely by the humans in the air conditioned cubicle, or perhaps a dead mans trigger which would be initiated if the use of jamming were deployed against it to block comms from the air conditioned cubicle and internal sensors detected attempts to gain access to the vessel.

      1. PNGuinn
        Go

        Re: ... or perhaps a dead mans trigger ...

        Which would be SUCH a nice way for TNEOTD* to get a free firework show to go with their Ginntonnix.

        *OK - it late. Give me one good reason why I need to define the B****y acronym.

    6. PNGuinn
      Joke

      Re: And what about Somalian Pirates?

      "I recommend the 1812 Overture"

      That presumes that they can get the gramophone on board without getting the spring all rusted up with the salt water.

    7. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: And what about Somalian Pirates?

      Repeat

      $Elevation = $Elevation - 10'

      until $pirates == 0

      Muahaha!

      But yes, as with all automated things, if you can beat the automation, you own it.

      As it is automated is there any reason it needs to operate above sea-level? Five feet below the surface for normal running at 20 knots should be fine.

  6. Known Hero

    WTF, ok i may be a little late to the party but !!!

    i had never though of the military / navy in cost per day.

    700.000 per day .......

    I am floored by this ?fact? it really hammers home how much it really costs.

    1. John Robson Silver badge

      Re: WTF, ok i may be a little late to the party but !!!

      Alot of salaries on a destroyer..

      Random destropyer picked on wikipedia - 35 officers, 218 men.

      And that ignores any consumables...

      1. confused and dazed

        Re: WTF, ok i may be a little late to the party but !!!

        still seems hellish high,

        say the boat costs a billion - over 20 years, officers ~100K a year, crew 40K a year ....

        my super military grade calculator still comes nowhere near ..... they must eat a lot ..

        1. pstiles

          Re: WTF, ok i may be a little late to the party but !!!

          I gather, from Masterchef The Professionals(*) the per-person budget in the UK is £2.88 a day.

          (*) Depressingly not a very clever remake of the 70s 80s CI5 show..

        2. Fungus Bob Silver badge
          Boffin

          Re: WTF, ok i may be a little late to the party but !!!

          "my super military grade calculator still comes nowhere near ....."

          Did you factor in the toilet seats? A manned vessel will need a lot of crappers and toilet seats cost the US military around $700 apiece.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: WTF, ok i may be a little late to the party but !!!

        And that ignores any consumables...

        And it ignores the cost impact of R&R downtime, shore based support, training, pensions for the meatsacks etc etc.

        There's some missions that would be very difficult to replace servicemen with automation, but submarine and mine hunting are just the start. Attack submarines, and surface missile platforms could easily be automated - why have a meatsack crew to launch autonomous missiles, or fire ballistic weapons that are wholly dependent upon automated guidance and targeting? Even the big stuff like aircraft carriers could be almost fully automated (and launch only UAV and cruise missiles), although the complexity of the systems would mean that they'd undoubtedly need a skeleton crew of techs and mechanics.

        In fact, not too much different to the vast container ships that now can operate with minimal crews (eg Emma Maersk, 170,000t with a crew of 13) the only thing with naval vessels is whether the communications links can be secure enough and long distance enough for the actual attack decisions to be made by a few petty officers sitting in a shed in Arizona.

        This will be a re-run of the drone debate: The Navy will of course fight back, just as the Air Force maintain that they can't possibly replace fast jets flown by officers and gentlemen with drones controlled by NCOs. So long as these vessels replace the dull stuff like mine sweeping and coastal patrol, the Navy top brass will be more than happy. As soon as the technology threatens to remove the opportunity for glamorous derring-do on the high seas, the culture of the Navy will start to argue why unmanned boats are a bad idea.

        1. xeroks

          Re: WTF, ok i may be a little late to the party but !!!

          given that one of the advantages of a submarine is it's secrecy, I'm pretty sure a drone sub would have to be able to operate - and complete any attack - while under conditions of radio silence. Meaning the people in those air conditioned cubicles would be blind and deaf at the critical points in a mission.

          So still possible, but those subs need to be a bit more autonomous than the airborne ones.

          1. Dave 126 Silver badge

            Re: WTF, ok i may be a little late to the party but !!!

            "US military readies drone submarine hunter" should be read as "US military readies a surface-based crewless ship that hunts submarines".

            The headline was a little ambiguous, but reading the article cleared it up.

          2. PNGuinn
            Mushroom

            Re: WTF, --- submarines

            Of course, that's the real problem. With current comms technology the data rate to subs with VLF is extremely low.

            So you either do a google and let it decide for itself or have at least 1 meatsack on board to make the decisions. For security reasons ( doolally meatsack) you need more than one.

            See icon.

          3. Wommit

            Re: WTF, ok i may be a little late to the party but !!!

            "given that one of the advantages of a submarine is it's secrecy, I'm pretty sure a drone sub would have to be able to operate - and complete any attack - while under conditions of radio silence. Meaning the people in those air conditioned cubicles would be blind and deaf at the critical points in a mission."

            Not really, the meatsacks in the air-conditioned offices are OK, the enemy know where they are. The can broadcast commands to the drone and it can reply via laser to a satellite quite safely. Haven't you read any Tom Clancy manuals?

      3. pxd

        Re: WTF, ok i may be a little late to the party but !!! (alert - missed point here)

        IANAS (I am not a sailor) but I suspect the real savings in running costs would come from the ability to build the drones without all the support systems required to keep the relatively poorly-paid officers and ratings warm, fed and protected - the savings in volume and weight would be significant. Less kit on board = less weight to propel = less fuel required = lovely virtuous circle leading to lower running costs. Plus the salary savings on shore - driving and fighting the drone would require fewer men/women than driving/fighting a full sized vessel. Plus the ability to make the little whatsits go really really fast, compared to other vessels, for the same fuel expenditure. Those bursts of speed would see off the Somalian pirates referred to in other posts, and would probably even give some ability to avoid airborne threats.

        Isn't this is the same sort of argument used to argue for unmanned space exploration? pxd

  7. gaz 7
    Mushroom

    Skynet

    Have none of these feckers ever watched Terminator.

    1. Efros

      Re: Skynet

      Marvelous documentary, definitely a must see.

    2. GitMeMyShootinIrons

      Re: Skynet

      I, for one, welcome our slightly damp naval Overlords.

      Complete with Blue Squid of Death.

  8. casaloco

    Salvage?

    Under the laws of the sea, isn't any unmanned vessel eligible for salvage? Couldn't someone just turn up, board the ship and make off with it... perfectly legally? You couldn't even cover it with guns to keep salvagers away as the right to defend yourself against pirates wont apply against salvagers?

    1. DwarfPants

      Re: Salvage?

      Interesting question, So interesting I have had to look it up on the fountain of truth and accuracy that is Wikipedia, and it says the for the law of salvage to be used the subject has to be in danger (not necessarily immediate). I guess an army of military lawyers would rush to court to explain it was under autonomous control and not in any danger, thus you owe them time in a location of their choosing and/or plies of cash.

      1. Known Hero
        Trollface

        Re: Salvage?

        and it says the for the law of salvage to be used the subject has to be in danger (not necessarily immediate).

        The laws of salvage only apply to a vessel that is somehow damaged or 'stricken'

        So Ram it first, or say your about to ram it :D

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Salvage?

        .... I guess an army of military lawyers would rush to court to explain it was under autonomous control and not in any danger...

        Oh, so all you need is to point a torpedo at it, then you can salvage it?

    2. frank ly Silver badge

      Re: Salvage?

      The laws of salvage only apply to a vessel that is somehow damaged or 'stricken' in some way. Salvaging military vessels (without the owner's permission) is against international law.

      1. PNGuinn
        Pirate

        Re: Salvage?

        Ooh Arr, me harties, t'was in mortal danger of being stricken (by me broadsides) so t'was legal salvage right enough.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Salvage?

      The vessel in question has to be in danger/peril first.

      I don't advise attempting salvage claim without checking the appropriate legal code, and whether vessel owner is a superpower.

    4. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

      Re: Salvage?

      " the right to defend yourself against pirates wont apply against salvagers?"

      The salvagers that tried to take the scrap metal from South Georgia got a shock when The Empire Struck Back.

  9. Tom_

    Drone Submarines

    I imagine the counter to this is to make heaps of drone submarines that swim around on their own. Basically, just to hide the real ones in the noise.

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    It solves the looming obesity problem..

    If US soldiers can now spy, surveil and kill from the comfort of their air conditioned offices with all manner of remote controlled kit there is no real reason to keep them fit anymore. Might be cheaper too.

    1. Roland6 Silver badge

      Re: It solves the looming obesity problem..

      If US soldiers can now spy, surveil and kill from the comfort of their air conditioned offices homes with all manner of remote controlled kit there is no real reason to keep them fit anymore. Might be cheaper too.

      Fixed it! :)

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: It solves the looming obesity problem..

        If US soldiers can now spy, surveil and kill from the comfort of their air conditioned offices homes

        From what I read about the US pretend-competitive market I suspect that's not going to happen as they won't be able to get enough bandwidth for the job.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: It solves the looming obesity problem..

      If drones can be operated remotely, then control can be outsourced to a cheaper country. Train the operators by rote then it's box ticked: yes our drones defer judgement of attack to a human operator.

  11. a_mu

    sub hunting

    Sounds great,

    wunder why its got those pontoons on each side ?

    Pity its not a sub, best place to hear a sub I thought was from deep under water, below the thermo cline,

    as its disposable, it can ping away to its hearts content I guess,

    pity the whales etc, the sea is going to get very noisy

    1. Chris G Silver badge

      Re: sub hunting

      I suspect the pontoons are there for at least two reasons, to allow a narrower hull because there is no need for crew space, in which case the pontoons add stability while maintaining reduced wetted surface area (less drag).

      Also the extra width will give forward or rear facing sonar better resolution if the sensors are outboard on the outriggers. Could also be extended range fuel tanks.

      1. PNGuinn
        Pirate

        Could also be extended range fuel tanks.

        Ooh - look - easy access free fuel......

    2. Potemkine Silver badge

      Re: sub hunting

      Making it a sub would be more complicated (= more expensive, more prone to failures), when deploying a variable depth sonar fits the need to listen below the thermocline.

    3. fishman

      Re: sub hunting

      "wunder why its got those pontoons on each side ?"

      Stability. The ship is narrow enough and tall enough that without them it would want to roll over too easily.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: sub hunting

        My hydrodynamics is a little rusty but I would say its a wave piercing hull design, so good for cruising at speeds in excess of fifty knots no matter what the weather and that's definitely going to make submariners nervous. However this turn of speed could be a bonus and a bugbear for with no appreciable bow wave if it encounters floating debris then the hull may become damaged.

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    With nature's scents of artificially-synthesised lavendar, rose and peach

    US military hires Glade Air Fresheners' marketing department to give their submarine photos a more female-friendly makeover?

  13. Dwarf Silver badge

    Ship ?

    Isn't a warship without any weapons just called a ship ?

    1. Throatwarbler Mangrove Silver badge
      Trollface

      Re: Ship ?

      I believe the English call it a Type 45 Destroyer.

  14. x 7

    sitting duck for an aircraft armed with even just a basic anti-ship missile, even more so against a ballistic missile. With the correct jamming techniques the ship's sensors wouldn't even register the attack until its already happened

    I assume anyway that any defensive weapons release would have to be human-authorised to prevent a repeat of the USS Vincennes incident. Jam the datalink and the droneship is helpless

    1. Dave 126 Silver badge

      The jamming itself would be noticed, thus bringing attention to the attacker.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Yes, sitting duck for a pre-emptive strike when no hostilities are declared, and better so than an equally sitting duck ship with live humans on board. But once you start shooting, you change the rules, broadcast a message that basically says 'fly near me and I'll shoot first, ask questions later', and set the switch that says 'if jammed launch anti jamming homing missile'.

  15. CrazyOldCatMan Silver badge

    And thus..

    .. the Berserker Fleet is coming into being.

    Are you GoodLife?

  16. fishman

    Damage control

    Big problem for this ship is that without any people on board if anything goes wrong, no one is there to fix it. And if it is far enough offshore it may take a couple of days to get someone out to fix it. Weather permitting.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Damage control

      But without any one on board there is no idiot to break anything. Like the plane with an autopilot, a pilot in case the autopilot fails and a dog to bite the pilot if he tries to take over. But without the costs in beer and dog food.

      1. Vic

        Re: Damage control

        a pilot in case the autopilot fails and a dog to bite the pilot if he tries to take over

        Nah. The pilot is there to feed the dog...

        Vic.

  17. Zog_but_not_the_first Silver badge
    IT Angle

    Software algorithm?

    B4 - Miss

    G7 - Hit

    Etc.

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Missing the point

    I think most here are missing the point and getting lost in the ways such a ROV/USV could be disabled.

    As it stated in the article, it would patrol US coastal waters looking for submarines. If there were enemy surface vessels or aircraft (which would be unlikely that close in to shore), then there would be a full naval response. Also, any attempt to use jamming or ES counter measures against the USV would give away their location.

    The aim, from what I can see is for a semi-autonomous means of patrolling coastal waters looking for any sneaky attempts by an enemy to breech the 12-mile territorial sea limit. So a full defensive capability would be completely unnecessary.

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    and when a hostile fires upon this "drone"

    it gives our government yet another excuse to not react since "no lives were lost" and the enemy proudly declares to the world how it can destroy America's greatest technological assets with impunity, gaining lots of local support, which emboldens them and other leaders needing positive political support to do the same, or start attempting to outdo each other for international bragging rights.

    But that would never happen, because too many people actually believe all political and martial stupidity only exists in America, and sometimes Britain, and everyone else in the world is a paradigm of common sense, and therefore all sectarian or international violence is caused by America/Britain or made up by State Controlled Media to force us to support "jingoistic" and "imperial" ideals...

    I guess that explains why internet scams work so well, no need to try to sell a bridge anymore.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: and when a hostile fires upon this "drone"

      I think you may need to adjust the dosage of whatever you're on.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: and when a hostile fires upon this "drone"

      Or alternatively we can happily decide that (fill in name of country here) is within (insert random time period, 45 minutes usually works) of being nasty to a poor defenceless drone, and invade the s*** out of them.

    3. Uffish

      Re: and when a hostile fires upon this "drone"

      If this drone just pootles up and down the coasts of the US it will be "friendly fire" from hunters and other gun toting Americans that they will have to look out for. (Blimps over there regularly get shot at).

  20. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    USS Marie Celeste?

    The comment is allowed but is as full of life as the crew of this ship

  21. unix.beard

    How does it communicate? It would need to tow a buoy on the surface that can talk to satellites if it wants to stay submerged and continually stay in touch.

  22. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Finally some good news

    This is good news for democracy and bad news for Russia.

    1. x 7

      Its not a submarine: Its a submarine hunter, i.e. its a fast mobile vessl that HUNTS SUBMARINES

  23. x 7

    " if jammed lunch anti jamming missile...."

    not always that easy - all the attacker needs to do is block the comms link, not jam the onboard sensors, and blocking the comms link can be done remotely as it will involve a satellite uplink

  24. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken Silver badge

    The article mentions that its role would be to 'look' for diesel-electric subs. What about those that run on fuel cells (and of course nucs)? AFAIK the USN doesn't operate any diesel-electric subs anymore, so any diesel-electric sub spotted is 'nor one of ours'. So far, so good - but some potential 'not-friendlies' have nucs. And a lot of those nations operating diesel-electric subs are at least considering phasing out their diesel-electric subs for fuel cell powered ones.

    1. x 7

      North Korean subs are diesel, so are Iran's.......this is a cheap risk free way of patrolling hostile coastal waters Pick up the subs with these drones as the subs leave harbour. Productionised versions will be fast, quiet, stealthy and possibly semi-submersible. Remember this particular machine is a technology demonstrator, service vessels will be harder to locate/track

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        and so are drug runners' submarines...

      2. Wommit

        "Productionised versions will be fast, quiet, stealthy and possibly..."

        Productionised, is that even a word?

        1. Chris G Silver badge

          I suppose if 'leveraged' can be a word ( in Leftpondian) so can Productionised.

      3. allthecoolshortnamesweretaken Silver badge

        @ x 7

        Good point. Especially the Kilo types (and derivates) should be easy to spot.

  25. southen bastard

    Charge up the lasers on the sharks

  26. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    glimpse of the future

    "submarine detected; trying to report..."

    "please wait while your windows operating system is being patched with essential security updates"

    "please reboot"

    "welcome to Windows13"

    "Sorry but that website 'navy.us.com' is not reachabe with this licence, would you like to listen to Rick Ashley ?"

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019