U.S. Submarine Collides With Japanese Ship

[rmmpe]

Re: U.S. Submarine Collides With Japanese Ship

For the record:
I served and "Qualified" on Submarines for 6 of 8 years. Consequently, aware of most facets of their operation. Also, I lived on, and dove in, the Persian Gulf for 5 years while in Saudi Arabia.

Also for the record:
A Submarine can't "Hide" in 150 feet of water. Especially so when the water is as clear as the Gulf is.

There is more to this story, which has been published.

 

[Daddy O]

Re: U.S. Submarine Collides With Japanese Ship

Qualified 2 subs 82-86

As with the military there is always more to the story than what you read. If you are referring to they can run submerged in 150 ft. of water that is all I stated. I didn't say anything about not being seen.

 

[steve201]

Re: U.S. Submarine Collides With Japanese Ship

a nuke sub running in the straights of hormuz is in tough area....alot of freighters and other boats running around making all kinds of noise....if he was in 150 ft of water...chances are he was about to surface...however...tankers are usually running at about 50ft of draft...so...basically he's only got about 100ft to play with..then give a safety of about 35 ft to the bottom...hmm..sounds to me that he got way too close and the sonarman manning a sonar panel didn't take some basic math into concideration....they usually will do a passive sonar sweep first then start coming to periscope depth.P-depth is about 50 ft......at that point they extend all masts including the periscope for a quick sweep and then surface....but...if the loaded tanker was closer than expected...a colision would occur.....I'd say that not only is the skipper out of a job..but so is the sonar tech and the sonar supervisor....there are too many systems at thier disposal to utilize to allow a collision....BQQ5- midas...trr355 topsounders..busy1....a major screw up for sure.......I used to design em for about 17 yrs.....

 

[rmmpe]

Re: U.S. Submarine Collides With Japanese Ship

Daddy-O,
No, you didn't say anything about not being seen. That comment was made by another in this thread.

Hey Steve,
We talked about Subs before.
I made to an Honorary "Brother of the Phin".

To the point:
The last explanation I heard was that the "Boat" was submerged, having no intention of surfacing. It was simply sucked to the surface by the prop-wash of the Tanker as it passed over the Boat.

This makes sense to me because the Boat, at 6000 Tons, was simply overpowered by the wheel of the 40,000 Ton Tanker.

Also, a Boat's depth is measured to the Keel, which is about 58-60 feet from #1 Periscope to Keel. #2 Scope is a bit more (Diesel-Electric Boats).

Also correct; there is a lot of noise that can confuse the listening ability.

As far as I know, noone has been relieved of their duties because this has been judged as an unavoidable accident.

 

[technostingray]

Re: U.S. Submarine Collides With Japanese Ship

Daddy-O,
No, you didn't say anything about not being seen. That comment was made by another in this thread...

...As far as I know, noone has been relieved of their duties because this has been judged as an unavoidable accident.

Being submerged at a depth that could allow you to be sucked into the wake of passing craft certainly indicates some kind of failure. Just for my edification what is a safe distance between a sub and tanker? RE: Down Periscope. At what position would you be in order to see something submerged while navigating a surface ship?

 

[rmmpe]

Re: U.S. Submarine Collides With Japanese Ship

Techno,
The Gulf is very clear and a smaller surface vessel could see a Sub at some distance. But, a Supertanker is a HUGE vessel and I'm sure it wouldn't be able to see a Sub because the visibility over the sides and bow would be severely restricted.

If the Sub was at Periscope depth, the top of the Sail would be less than 30 feet beneath the surface. I suspect that is less than the draft of a supertanker.
Consequently, I'd guess the boat went as deep as it could to avoid the Tanker.
Let's assume the Sub was at 150 feet on the bottom and the top of the Sail was 40 feet higher than that. This leaves approx. 110 feet of water beteween the top of the Sail and the surface of the water. If a Supertanker's draft is 40 feet, the distance between the lowest part of the Tanker and the top of the Sail would be something like 70 feet, yes?

That is not very much, considering the "Suck" of the Tanker's prop.

My original question was relative to why a sub would be submerged in only 150 feet of water. Especially when considering the RSN (Royal Saudi Navy) doesn't believe the Gulf's depth justifies having a Sub of their own.

In the Gulf, a Sub would have something like 90 feet of depth to play with when running at Perisope depth in 150 feet of water. Not a lot in my mind. It gets worse when considering 150 feet is the MAXIMUM depth. Most places are less than 90 feet.

I do know that I could see the bottom from a Dhow when we were traveling to a dive spot having a depth of 90 feet.

All conjecture from knowns, this.

 

[alden135]

Re: U.S. Submarine Collides With Japanese Ship

plus the water being murky. It was blind coming to the surface.

I've worked on that boat and don't recall any windows.

 

[technostingray]

Re: U.S. Submarine Collides With Japanese Ship

Techno,
The Gulf is very clear and a smaller surface vessel could see a Sub at some distance. ..
That is not very much, considering the "Suck" of the Tanker's prop.

My original question was relative to why a sub would be submerged in only 150 feet of water. Especially when considering the RSN (Royal Saudi Navy) doesn't believe the Gulf's depth justifies having a Sub of their own. ...
All conjecture from knowns, this.

And I think the substantive question is, what was the cause of the "accident"? The sub gets deployed with "operational orders" which are interpreted by the Captain who bears responsibility for all action.
All conjecture from knowns, this.
There is no conjecture as to the presence of the sub in these waters or to the fact that there was a collision. nes't pas?

 

[steve201]

Re: U.S. Submarine Collides With Japanese Ship

rmmpe:I remember the order of the phin...thanks
now...a 688 class sub is 35ft in dia. ....true..the depth of the boat is measured from the keel....so...35ft from the keel..add 20 ft to the top of the sail...then about 20ft for a periscope....gives you a periscope depth of 10ft below the surface to be half way up the periscope...subs don't want to show that much scope..so usually they only stick about 6 ft out...then...as rmmpe stated..the gulf is snot full of traffic....they have ways of listening passively and filtering out things but....you can't miss a 50,000 ton diesel pounding around in a body of water....now if he was close enough to get sucked up...then there are a thousand reasons that could cause that...water temp thermoclines...salinity....currents..etc....no telling what caused the nuke to get hit by that freighter....we certainly weren't there and doubt if we'll ever hear why...I'll have to wait and see where she goes for repairs and if one of my buddies can enlighten me on what happened.....8)


hey alden...didn't you see the screen doors???shipalt italia975....jk.....

 

[rmmpe]

Re: U.S. Submarine Collides With Japanese Ship

What I meant by conjecture was that it was mine, best-guessed from what I know of the region and Subs.

Correct, there is no conjecture regarding the presence of the sub in the waters way too near a Tanker.

But, as Steve points out, we may never hear the full story.

Steve,
If you hear anything, let me know at 'rmmpe "at" yahoo.com'.
Thanks.

 

[steve201]

Re: U.S. Submarine Collides With Japanese Ship

Roger!!!..wilco

 

[Daddy O]

Re: U.S. Submarine Collides With Japanese Ship

Sorry rmmpe

Should have reread the thread.

Also agree fully with last your last two threads.

 

[crunch]

Re: U.S. Submarine Collides With Japanese Ship

hey alden...didn't you see the screen doors

I should hope so, how else can you keep the flying fish out?

On a more serious note... When, in all Naval history has a collision Not been the Captains fault?... even if it was with the dock.

No one cares about mitigating factors, no one cares what the orders were or where they were to be carried out.... This Sub driver is dead.

 

[rmmpe]

Re: U.S. Submarine Collides With Japanese Ship

Crunch,
Not necessarily.
Unless "Orders" have been misinterpreted or deviated from, the Captain does not always fall victim.
I've seen 1 case where the Admiral issuing the "Orders" was censured for issuing them in the manner he did. The Skipper was held harmless.

Hitting the Dock always falls within the Skipper's responsibility and, depending on damage, reason for relief. One of the Boats I was on hit the dock, causing a bit of damage to it and the Boat. The OOD was reprimanded but the Skipper was not relieved.
That Officer (OOD) was thereafter called "Crash Corell" and lost any chance of becoming Skipper of his own Boat.