Source: I went through one of these back in the day.
Source: I went through one of these back in the day.
It is hypothetically possible to have an active-detection process too, but presumably that would take the form of emitting a pulse of electromagnetic radiation and looking for its echoes, in other words it's just another form of vision. The standard problem applies: find a frequency at which water is mostly transparent. Unfortunately the absorption spectrum for water is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_absorption_by_... , it has a minimum in the visible range.
In addition to being one of the more stunning confirmations of evolution (of course our eyes are only sensitive to the least-absorbed wavelengths of light in water -- our ancestors evolved eyes in the ocean! there weren't many other useful wavelengths down there!) this has the nasty property that it's unlikely that we'd be able to detect a sub this way with any better approach than shining a bright laser or spotlight or what have you, and watching what's reflected back with our own eyes.
(Which is probably somebody's fetish)
"It still distorts the local geomagnetic field."
These two statements are trivially identical.
I'd think that the permeability of a submarine hull -- magnetized or not -- would be very different from that of the surrounding seawater.
Here is a degausser for the largest US submarines: https://www.google.com/maps/place/30°46'44.3%22N+81°29'30.6%...
Ah makes me remember large CRT monitors that went "bonk" when you turned them on (to degauss). I actually still have a Sony 30" TV that does the same thing (and it's quite loud actually).
Built-in degaussing circuits fire when you turn on the TV presumably because (a) it disrupts the image, so best to do it at turn-on than randomly while you are watching, and (b) because you are unlikely to move the TV while it's on.