Submarine Officer 101: Too fat for SEALS, too socially awkward for Pilot

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Internet VFW > Submarine Officer 101: Too fat for SEALS, too socially awkward for Pilot

almighty: Mar 9, 2011

ded posted:

Maybe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Scorpion_(SSN-589)

I actually just went through All Hands Down: The True Story of the Soviet Attack on the USS Scorpion. Author's theory of Soviets sinking Scorpion doesn't make much sense. There are a myriad of discrepancies in author's account on what happened.

IMHO, the most rational explanation is that the crew faced catastrophe they were unable to handle, depth control was lost and the boat imploded beyond crush depth.

I'd appreciate if insiders posting here can elaborate their own views on the subject.

# ¿ Aug 7, 2013 11:08

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 16, 2024 08:33

almighty: Mar 9, 2011

Sacrilage posted:

I'm convinced it was a hot-run in the forward torpedo room. The MK-45 had a known problem with it's batteries, and it's much more likely than a Soviet attack in the middle of the open Atlantic. Plus, if I remember correctly, when they were able to get video of the ship, most of the forward section was blown out, not in.

Indeed, forward section was just as you said in the visual footage that was released and can be freely found on the interwebs.
Hot running torpedo seems to me as the most plausible explanation.

However, I just don't get one thing.

AFAIK, the procedure crew applied in the case of a hot running torpedo was to

1) Flood the tube to prevent any flammable gas build up (such as hydrogen)
2) Execute a 180 degree starboard turn to activate the safety mechanism for the torpedo's warhead
3) Let the battery of the torpedo to discharge
4) Take the torpedo out and disarm it

Since this is drilled in the crew's head through training, I'm almost certain that crew of Scorpion would have applied the procedure correctly. With doing that, they'd have precluded the hot running fish causing an explosion.

As a nuke, do you think it's plausible that the procedure was not applied correctly or was not applied at all so that the hot running fish led to an explosion?

# ¿ Aug 8, 2013 18:02

almighty: Mar 9, 2011

ded posted:

I've never even looked up the conspiracy theory stuff. It was a sea story told to me by a 'special' rider. Likely BS since well it was a sea story and sounded cool. Especially when he said a Russian boat went down a few days later.

Looking at the pics on wikipedia the bow section does not look blown out at all.

Nukes have absolutely nothing to do with torpedoes. It does not take much time at all to flood a tube and the torpedoman on watch would have done it right the gently caress away as he was calling it out to control. The other 3 things would have been up to the OOD to call/execute.

All in all a hot run torpedo is one of the most scary things possible, only a fire or getting a torpedo shot at you are more serious events.

edit : since I was a sonar tech I was part of all the load ons/offs of all of the torpedos/mines/ect we did and had to know a bit about them.

I was under the impression that a nuke would be generally knowledgeable about those things, that's why I relied on OP being a nuke.

# ¿ Aug 9, 2013 06:27

almighty: Mar 9, 2011

Third World Reggin posted:

Put some lipstick and a pretty dress on it.

BZ. Somehow, I could tell this was coming. :tipshat:

# ¿ Aug 10, 2013 22:07

almighty: Mar 9, 2011

Saga posted:

Thanks to this post I have switched from shower gel to semen. Will report results.

This here, is the curse of all Navy related people in the world. Semen jokes.

# ¿ Sep 23, 2013 16:14

almighty: Mar 9, 2011

Mortabis posted:

How hosed are you if you have a fire on a submarine?

Let me put it this way: A nuke once told me a difference between a submariner and a skimmer is the fact that when a fire is called on board, skimmers are trained to let the firemen deal with it and stay out of their way, on the other hand a submariner immediately moves toward where the fire is called and tries to contain the situation no matter what his rating or actual job on board is.

# ¿ Sep 27, 2013 08:49

almighty: Mar 9, 2011

ded posted:

Two main reasons for that. One, everyone is trained in damage control. Two, there isn't enough dudes for dedicated DCmen like on a skimmer.

Well also it's nice to be alive and not OH GOD IM BURNING.

Never not damage control is the bread and butter of a submarine sailor, from what I gather.

# ¿ Sep 27, 2013 12:09

almighty: Mar 9, 2011

Sacrilage posted:

Interesting little post on tradition in the Navy:

Death of Tradition

While I think there are some traditions that are worth keeping (crossing the line, etc), I think his argument that all traditions are good is asinine.

I wholeheartedly agree.
Tradition for tradition's sake is a ridiculous idea, when it involves shoving somebody's face into a urinals.
In that thought of line, one might argue segregation should continue in the Navy as well as it was the case nearly a century ago.
Physically abusing a shipmate in the name of tradition is stupid.

By the way, do you guys have any good sanitary tank catastrophe stories?
Even some KOG stories would be perfect to hear, however most goons are way younger to have personally experienced the honor of being in attendance of KOG himself.

almighty fucked around with this message at 19:09 on Oct 25, 2013

# ¿ Oct 25, 2013 19:06

almighty: Mar 9, 2011

Sacrilage posted:

Cool NSL presentation, for those interested; it's been going on all week.

I saw that at Joel's blog. I'm quite curious as to what direction Ohio replacement program is going to take. If you ask me, just strip USAF of all the nukes and have USN handle it with boomers. You can't beat the element of surprise, both for deterrence and second strike capability.

# ¿ Nov 11, 2013 22:40

almighty: Mar 9, 2011

Snowdens Secret posted:

Having warheads other countries can aim at reliably is to some degree a net positive for deterrence. How long deterrence matters is a different question.

There are still people drumbeating the idea of putting nuke SLBMs on Virginia classes, which I think is a completely blockheaded idea for a variety of reasons.

Yeah, well I live in a country that benefits from USAF B-62s being present in joint bases under Nuke sharing program.
It's a pretty smart incentive to prevent non-nuke nations to develop their own weapons, but then again, I believe minimizing the nuclear arsenals is the key trend to the zeitgeist, especially for the superpowers.

I believe in US superiority in Nuclear capability and the deterrence that brings about.

# ¿ Nov 11, 2013 23:15

almighty: Mar 9, 2011

CommieGIR posted:

Eh, ICBMs were what basically neutered our bomber forces, and it'd be kind of weird for the Navy to manage all our nuclear missile bases inland.

Bombers are quite useless in our age IMHO, except for gimmicks such as B-2.

# ¿ Nov 11, 2013 23:16

almighty: Mar 9, 2011

Snowdens Secret posted:

The Air Force isn't exactly awash with glory over missile management right now, and putting a couple seamen and officers in a hole and locking the door for a week has closer analogues to shipboard life than anything else the USAF does. Also in the long run it makes more sense to associate Space Command stuff with the Navy (again, because deep space ops are closer to deep ocean ops than anything atmospheric) and those rockets and the doomsday ones go somewhat hand in hand.

Crimson Tide anyone? :siren:

# ¿ Nov 11, 2013 23:21

almighty: Mar 9, 2011

CommieGIR posted:

True, but whose to say the Navy will manage it any better? The officer corps of the Air Force just needs a swift kick in the pants.

Yeah, true. However, if your entire nuclear missile force is submarine bound and the country you face has decent anti-submarine forces, you've just lost all your nuclear deterrent forces.

And which country has 'pretty decent' ASW forces right now?

# ¿ Nov 11, 2013 23:51

almighty: Mar 9, 2011

CommieGIR posted:

Russia, I don't know about China, but they regularly hold ASW drills.

AFAIK, holding drills barely equals to having a competent counter to the US submarine force.
However, I'm a little bit worried about the waning USN ASW capabilities.

# ¿ Nov 11, 2013 23:55

almighty: Mar 9, 2011

Koesj posted:

drat, you were in during the salad days.

Any Blind Man's Bluff-esque stuff you are able and caring enough to talk/brag about?

I too would like to hear about any such stories Submariners might be able to share here without violating anything.

# ¿ Nov 15, 2013 00:02

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ May 16, 2024 08:33

almighty: Mar 9, 2011

ded posted:

I know what the fathometer of an Oscar II sounds like.

Kursk came to my mind for some reason.

# ¿ Nov 15, 2013 18:33

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Internet VFW > Submarine Officer 101: Too fat for SEALS, too socially awkward for Pilot