# Submarine hits freighter



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Anyone who has read my threads in the past knows that I am passionate about our military and the people that serve our country, period. Thank you all.

However, I have to ask a question: How does a submarine, A US Submarine that has to be the most advanced vessel in the entire planet, hit a bloody freighter? Notice, it had to be a Japanese one again, didn't you? I can see the Japanese starting to put fenders on the BOTTOM of their boats.

Oh well. I guess I am just ignorant of how you steer a submarine.

- CD

Again, no disrespect at all to the awesome men and women that are out there risking their lives to serve our country... I guess I just don't understand naval vessels.


----------



## seabreeze_97 (Apr 30, 2006)

Sounds like someone doesn't know the rules of the road......a la
"Gray Lady Down".


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Let's see....

Our submarines have hit TWO Japanese surface vessels while themselves surfacing in the past few years, resulting in several deaths and injuries.

Recently, a Chinese submarine surfaced only 5 miles away from one of our carriers which, reportedly, didn't know the sub was there. Whaaat??????

A little over a year ago one of our nuclear subs ran into an undersea mount near Guam and was very seriously damaged.

Last week four crewmen were washed off the deck of one of our nuclear subs shortly after clearing port in England. Two died.

Hmmm... think it's about time for CNO to begin asking some hard questions?

Bill


----------



## SailorMitch (Nov 18, 2005)

Let's just say that a few more Navy careers have been cut short.


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

"Is it a political world?"

Naah, we just allow the ONLY senior, experienced Army commander who speaks native Arabic to step down so we can replace him with a Navy admiral. No doubt a good guy, but I doubt he knows much about counterinsurgency and civil war situations, since these are fairly rare at sea. But, hey, HE didn't oppose this genius "surge and accelerate" strategy.

But, there's good news: latest CBS poll shows that only 21% of Americans are now brain dead. That's down 8% in a single month


----------



## stlcat22 (Nov 19, 2006)

Just out of curiosity, are submarines explicity taken into account in the official Regs?


----------



## Johnrb (Sep 21, 2002)

The news report I read about this incident also mentioned that a Japanese submarine had collided with a surface vessel recently.


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

btrayor- (interesting handle) I thought we were talking about submarines, not politics.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

That's it Bill...it's all about Bush...he must have caused that collision at sea. Too bad Pelosi wasn't in charge...with all the subs in dry dock that collision would never have happened! ...and Hillary doesn't like anything cigar shaped either!


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

If this happened with the only (of 3) sea worthy Portuguese submarine, the news would be:

"Japanese boat hits and sinks PortugEese Submarine"

...... see we still keep making everything simple, and avoid argument!!


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Hey, don't blame me. Jones2r brought up the politics angle.

And, he's right. These days, it DOES seem to be all about politics. Covering your butt, and all that.

Cam...with talk like that (YOU raised the BUSH/PELOSI/HILLARY stuff, not me), you could be a candidate for that remaining 21% 

T34c,

It's btrayfors, with an "s". It may or may not be interesting, but it's my real name: Bill Trayfors. and my email address: btrayfors at wdsg dot com 

If that matters.

Bill


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Must be that both of the vessels were in super secret silent mode?


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Rick...

EXACTLY!

Sort of like, "double secret probation" in Animal House )

Bill


----------



## DeepFrz (May 9, 2006)

Oh man, I love a good fight...<VBG>


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Sorry to say but.....accidents happen for one of two reasons. Either someone isn't paying attention, or someone does something stupid.

<Rant>As to Vietnam....errrr, I mean Iraq (funny how people think they are the same), I think we should cut and run (of course, calling it something much fancier, like "redeployment", so we don't really admit what we're doing), then we can fight them here instead of over there. God knows, we shouldn't really try to succeed over there, it might make somebody upset, and we can't have that now, can we?<End of Rant>


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

Sorry Bill, I wouldn't have poked fun had I know it was really your name.

PB- Good rant. Now if we're really going to get political we can throw down.


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

Perhaps we should look into why the damned Japanese keep parking their boats in the way!!!! Maybe we should give them the radar and sonar capabilities that Clinton GAVE the Chinese then they could not only stay out of the way, they too could sneak-up on our carrier groups.
"But, hey, HE didn't oppose this genius "surge and accelerate" strategy." FYI that was a "genius" Pelosi "Madam Speaker" idea in May of 2004. How is that it was OK then as long as Bush didn't bring it up???


----------



## btrayfors (Aug 25, 2006)

Gee, let's see....

What's different between May 2004 and January 2007?

This really is too hard for third-graders.

In May 2004 Pelosi joined Murtha in saying that the war in Iraq was likely "unwinnable" without a major escalation in troop size, and a major international involvement.

Funny, that's what Gen. Shinseki said. And General Zinni. And most of the other military commanders. Only Rumsfeld, Cheney, Perle, Wolfowitz, and their cronies resisted, insisting that a small force would do the trick.

Fast forward. Let's see. Three years later it appears that Murtha and Pelosi were correct. As were Shinseki, Zinni, and other military commanders. 

Things have gone to hell. We're in the midst of a civil war (by any other name). No one can define what "winning" really means. Bush has said "we're not winning (but we're not losing)". Whatever that means. Every informed opinion is against a troop surge. General Abizaid and General Casey and ALL OTHER MILITARY COMMANDERS in the theatre have been against a troop increase. The Joint Chiefs of Staff have been unanimous in opposing an increase, saying that there's no military solution.

Unfortunately, most informed observers believe there probably is no political solution, either. We're fuc--d, big time.

And, yes, why not blame this on the Dems? After all, they've been in office for, what, 2 days now?

Bill

And, oh yes, lest we forget: IRAQ HAD ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH 911. How do I know that? Because our Commander in Chief said so. Belatedly.


----------



## vega1860 (Dec 18, 2006)

I know Adm. Fallon. He seems to be a good guy and he has a solid reputation among his suboordinates. Why a Navy man? Possibly because if we attack Iran, it will be with carrier-based aircraft.

I know quite a few submariners, one former weapons officer at Subbase Pearl Harbor is a close friend as are several recently retired officers and CPOs with submarine service. I haven't talked with any of them regarding this, most recent, incident but they had plenty to say about the incident near Hawaii with the Japanese training ship and the sub that hit the under-sea mountain near the PI. Subs are dangerous, especially in surface operations, and they train and operate in all conditions. They train hard and push the envelope as far a possible. They also are young men with big huevos and they tend to show off a bit and take chances. Subs are dangerous, especially in surface operations, and they train and operate in all conditions. This is necessary.

Yes, carreers will be adversely affected if not terminated outright.


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

O.S. Bill is at it again. Can't make a valid, or invalid, point without insulting either the poster or bringing up such relevant factors as the "trilateral commision". So it goes.

Have not read the news on this instance but may have some pertinent info. Submarines obviously depend a great deal on sonar for collision avoidance. Periscope depth is generally sixty to ninety feet beneath the surface-much too shallow for determining whether surfacing is safe or not. At those depths the boat may have already collided with a tanker. So sonar and an accurate plot on same is required. As can be imagined, the Navy is rather good at this. They tend to submerge 5 miles offshore and do not resurface until prior to re-entering port. They navigate submerged through areas such as Pentland Firth where a good quartermaster is required at the helm of surface ships. Due to the listening devices at such constrictions as the Strait of Gibralter s.o.p. is to find a merchant ship and pass through the strait underneath the merchant ship thus masking their prop signature and remaining undetected. Yes, I know the Brits control the listening devices at the Gib. but the silent service has a thing about nobody but the right people knowing where they are at any time.

The problem with sonar is that you cannot hear directly above you. There is in essence a dead spot above the boat that cannot be distinguished from the boat. If the sonar plot is not accurate, particularly in a congested waterway, it is possible to lose a target and that target is going to be lost close aboard to the submarine. I'd hazard a guess that most submarine collisions involve surfacing under another vessel.

Many years ago a Sea-Land ship was transiting the Strait of Gibralter when the entire ship shuddered as if they'd collided with something or touched bottom. Since they were in 900' of water the latter could be ruled out. The strait's traffic is of a volume to rival the Long Island Expressway, although in my experience it is moving much faster, <G> and so a sharp lookout is kept and they knew they had not hit another vessel. The Chief Mate began checking the holds and found they were taking water in one hold. They got the pumps going and diverted to Barcelona where they ended up in the ship-yard. Upon dry docking, six feet of periscope was removed from the double bottom and lower hold.
The US Navy was contacted and Sea Land was assured that the Navy had not collided with them. In fact, the Navy was careful to point out that had such a collision taken place, THEY would have notified Sea-Land first. The story held up until Sea-Land informed them that they possessed six feet of US Navy periscope. And given the wont of the Navy to stamp everything they own with "Buships" and a bunch of numbers it became impossible to deny. Sea-Land got some free welding done.
Apparently the sub commander decided to do some sight-seeing at the wrong time and place. Un-official Navy policy is that you don't want to be the cook on a ship that does that, let alone the captain. It tends to be a career ender for all involved.

As far as subs getting close to carrier battle groups, it's the easiest thing in the world. I've personally seen sail boats get within 7 miles of a carrier battle group undetected. Picked him up on the old Raytheon 3 cm at six miles, couldn't see him visually until 5 miles-called over to the carrier and they said, "what sail-boat?". Sail-boats and sub periscopes have much the same echo on radar and six miles is about where you pick them up. Each carrier battle group is accompanied by an attack sub because subs find subs much better than surface ships do. When it comes to subs versus surface ships alone the sub always wins, unless it is a very old and very noisy sub.

As far as seamen being washed overboard-it happens all the time. In 10-15' seas you don't go out on the forward decks of a destroyer-you're taking boarding seas. Back in the 70's the President Johnson rescued a Navy seaman in the Strait of Formosa. He'd been washed overboard three days before during refueling at sea ops on a tin can. The Navy looked for him for two days in 6-10' seas. This was a perfect example of how tough it is to find something at sea. The third mate on the President Johnson was out on the bridge wing, having his ten o'clock cup of coffee and glanced down to see a man in a lifejacket going by about a hundred yards off. Since the man was waving at him he waved back and set about turning the ship around. 150 miles from land. If he'd been another hundred yards off or the mate had decided to drink his coffee in the wheelhouse he would never have been rescued. I think if you look in the dictionary under 'lucky sucker' they have his picture.

If one compares the relative hazards of going to sea to driving an automobile I think automobiles would be found to be relatively safe; and yet 50,000 people a year die in them.


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

B- No one said anything about 911. No one EVER said anything about Iraq and 911. Iraq and terrorism yes, Iraq and 911 no. Next your going to start complaining that Gore should really be president.  Get a hold of yourself man! 

Dems B**** (read whine) that they aren't getting their way, not that we know what it is, we do something they should agree with and then they whine about that.

Agreed, it's only been two days (very very loooong days) so exactly how long until they stop whining now that they hold both houses of Congress.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Simple fix ....................curb feelers.


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Vega...exactly.. a military issue...not a political one! 

Bill...I am not getting into this here again. We both vehemently disagree on not just Iraq but on politics in general and neither of us is about to change our opinion. But if you're gonna take thinly veiled shots at Bush when discussing a sub collision...expect one back! I took my shot and am done.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

What's this cam......didn't you know that Bush was the cause of the Original Sin? Of the dinosaurs dying off? The extinction of life on Mars? The sinking of the Titanic? You know that time your anchor drug....yep, you guessed it, it was Bush.

So can we be done with the Bush bashing now? The only connection between politics and sailing has nothing to do with naval accidents or other at sea accidents. (Just for the record, I'm no Bush fan, but consider him the lesser of two evils.)


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

Ditto your whole post John!


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

PB- Well put, start to finish.


----------



## sailortjk1 (Dec 20, 2005)

Can a sub see whats on the surface before surfacing?
(Getting back to the original question)

Doesn't sonar give some indication that something is up there?


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

You would think, that they would be aware of any boats in the area before they get to a point where they could be beneath one. I would think they employ AIS, so if they don't "see" a boat they know is close, where else could it be but on top of them? I don't know this from a technical standpoint, but logic suggests it.


----------



## Johnrb (Sep 21, 2002)

Sailaway:

Nice post - thanks. Regarding the sonar dead spot directly above submarines, the collisions that I can recall reading about seem to have been caused by a sub surfacing under a ship.

Regarding submarines approaching surface warships, various military blogs I have read all mention how quiet the new diesel submarines are. Much more difficult to detect than the nuke powered ones. This new German one is very quiet apparently:

"The propulsion system combines a conventional system consisting of a diesel generator with a lead acid battery, and an Air-Independent Propulsion (AIP) system, used for silent slow cruising, with a fuel cell equipped with oxygen and hydrogen storage. The system consists of nine PEM (Polymer Electrolyte Membrane) fuel cells, providing between 30kW and 50kW each."

"Performance of the AIP system has been increased with two Siemens PEM fuel cells which produce 120kW per module and will give the submarine an underwater endurance of two weeks. A hull shape which has been further optimised for hydrodynamic and stealth characteristics and a low-noise propeller combine to decrease the submarine's acoustic signature."

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/type_212/


----------



## Culinary411 (Oct 20, 2006)

**

Its that cloaking device the Japanese are using. Top secret naval technology...makes freighters invisible and uses a magnet to catch subs. As a matter of fact, the one on my boat is broken....does anyone have a manual???

-Nick


----------



## svs3 (Jun 23, 2006)

Here's a couple of interesting quick reads:

What Al Gore Hasn't Told You About Global Warming

Intersesting Piece of Short Fiction

BTW, Q: How do you a politican is lying? A: Their lips are moving.

IMHO, if you want to affect real change vote Green or Libertarian. As sad as this may sound I have come to the believe that most major political parties in the world are FAR more part of the problem than the solution. Remember the immortal words of Jim Hightower, "the only thing in the middle of the road is a yellow stripe and a dead armadillo."

Sam (a very green libertarian)


----------



## messenger (Oct 21, 2006)

CD;All, you might be interested in this link, relating to the NewNews incident.

http://content.hamptonroads.com/story.cfm?story=117352&ran=77484&tref=po


----------



## cockeyedbob (Dec 6, 2006)

ah yes ... stealth technology against the suck defense ... what a fascinating modern age we live in.


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

I am not saying accidents at sea do not happen, and maybe this was one of them, but you would think the Captain of the sub would have known there was one of the worlds largest freighters approaching and that there would be the Venturi effect? Wouldn't you? Don't they teach them that stuff in "How to drive your submarine" school?

Kinda like a Class C drivers license where they tell you dont get in a trucks blind spot when he is turning... some basics. I am not even insinuating that driving a sub is as simple as driving a car... but I took a few hours of drivers education and jumped behind the wheel... not years and years and years of experience 24-7 before commanding a boat.

I sound harsh and do not mean to be. The men and women that serve our country are top notch and there are none better. Just makes you say, "Crap, guys... come on now?!!"


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

messenger said:


> CD;All, you might be interested in this link, relating to the NewNews incident.
> 
> http://content.hamptonroads.com/story.cfm?story=117352&ran=77484&tref=po


Yes, and Elvis is with Adolf Hitler here in Portugal. They live together in in Hoffa's summer house here in our pristine coast.


----------



## Culinary411 (Oct 20, 2006)

The absolute best would be a GEICO commercial spoof on this with the Gecko.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

SVS,

I really liked that second one. As I read it, to avert disaster befalling our descendants we must go out and subdue and kill as many Muslims as possible as quickly as possible. Iran, right? 

As a friend once reflected, "Two bombs."


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

"Two Bombs"....Bob...that's only 2 words! What's the third??


----------



## cockeyedbob (Dec 6, 2006)

Ouch! Let's kill the innocent along with the guilty. Tacky! The mate and I lost a family member last year in Iraq and my son still serves. Killing Muslims is not the answer. The Catholics and Protestants tried that on each other for years. We're better than that. We're sailors not murderers.

Cockeyed doesn't say let it slide, but if Americans are going to start wacking the innocent, then we're no better then they.


----------



## orthomartin (Oct 21, 2006)

Hey CD, thanks for you previous help. Military guy ha. Same here. I am recently retired F-16 Pilot. Never hit a freighter, that's those navy guys


----------



## svs3 (Jun 23, 2006)

Do I agree everything in both of the pieces I linked to? No definately not, particularly with regard to the second piece. But the point I was alluding to in the context of this discussion was the danger our leaders put this and other countries in by intentional understating the cost and effort required for the desired outcomes. It will take a lot sacrifices than going shopping to defeat the Jihadist movement and a lot more discomfort and more than just buying a few hybrid cars to reverse global warming. 

Sam


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

Sam- There are sooo many ways to go with that... but I won't. One thing to keep in mind, a submarine operates as if they are at war ALL the time. Regardless of current events and geo-poitical issues they are on a war stance at all times.


----------



## svs3 (Jun 23, 2006)

T34C,

Sorry my post was really refering to brewing political squabble on this thread rather than the actual subject. I know so little about submarine ops. I that would not persume to able to intelligently comment on it. But I have read The Hunt for Red October  

Sorry for the confusion,
Sam


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

Good book! I think they should solve the whole problem and just put a window in the top of those things!!!!


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Cam, 

Sorry I'm so long long in replying; I've been concocting a PM.

"Two Bombs..." Blow up both sides. No more war. Simple.


----------



## wlcoxe (Jan 26, 2001)

Collisions between subs and surface vessels are more common than you would think, I don't know why. The SSN 699 (Jacksonville) had at least three encounters of the worst kind. These often occur with both ships surfaced, tracking each other, in decent weather. Subs are very agile below the surface, not so much on top. FWIW.


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

Maybe refering to it as a navigational aid would be better.


----------



## cockeyedbob (Dec 6, 2006)

jones2r said:


> Cam,
> 
> Sorry I'm so long long in replying; I've been concocting a PM.
> 
> "Two Bombs..." Blow up both sides. No more war. Simple.


Naw, just hang the coaches of BOTH team, let the players watch from the stands. I'm no pacifist, but after a few thousand years of war, you'd figure it didn't work so well and perhaps try something else. If we're not real careful, this thing will get out of hand and spoil all of our retirements.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

"window in the top of those things"
On an OLD boat, that's called the Gray Lady, aka the periscope. On a new boat...that's a fairly sophisticated video display system.

If I had to make a rash guess, it would be that a gung-ho skipper was trying to tail the freighter by sitting up close under him, practicing a military maneuver. No one was using the "window" because they were practicing being a shadow, 100% subnerged and silent.

And then, someone screwed up. Or, as even civilian sailors have been known to say, **** happened.

Captain's gonna have to answer for that one, last time I heard the USN had a zero tolerance policy about denting the good toys.


Bob-
"Let's kill the innocent along with the guilty." Hmmm...When a crowd of 50-100,000 "innocents" comes out to dance in the streets to celebrate the victories of the 100-1000 "guilty" that they have been harboring and sheltering...Are they still so innocent? And I don't say that just of any one side, it took Americans long enough to pull our forces out of the illegal combat actions in Vietnam. 
British "school" justice (punish everyone if you can't figure out who's guilty among them) may not be good or right, but it sure does reduce the tolerance for the guilty if you can't figure out any other way to get them "unharbored". Bullies and tribal children don't understand the concept of "NO!" unless you physically beat them down to get their attention. Western Christian logic just won't work there.


----------



## cockeyedbob (Dec 6, 2006)

Logic doesn't apply. Gonna be your basic tit for tat 'till the last one is snuffed. I don't have the answer and am not certain there is one, but poppin' the big one will finish us as a country. Everyone in the world will hate us. Don't want my grandchildren to thank me for that.


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

Let's make this simple...for the past 20 years....long before we were in Iraq and gave them an "excuse", the jihadists have been trying to kill Americans. Not soldiers or other military targets, but civilians. That doesn't make it right to kill their civilians, but at what point do you decide between them killing ours or us killing theirs? And that doesn't take in to account the extrodinary measures that most of our military, at risk to themselves, take to avoid civilian casualties.

To paraphrase the old Fram commercial.....you can kill em now, or kill em later......but you're gonna have to kill em, cause they aren't going to be satisfied with anything less than our destruction. They have said that from the start, and they still say it now. I can't help but wonder when people are going to realize, they mean it.


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

They have, and we did. It is a fundemental difference in philosophy. 
Just a side thought, Why is it OUR job to "get the message". Is it our responsibility to make sure everyone else likes us? No offence Jones, just a talking point since we are headed that way.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

I guess some people have to have a building fall on their heads. No. That didn't work either.


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

Wow.

If we are the sole super power in the world, don't you think maybe they should be trying to make sure we like them, not the other way round? Maybe instead of questioning your own country and its leadership with things like, "why don't they like us", you should be asking why can't they live peacefully with their neighbors and the rest of the world. Maybe you should ask, "Why are they slaughtering innocent civilians on a daily basis?" Or maybe, "Why do they want to try and kill anyone that doesn't beleive what they do?" And lets not forget, "Why is killing and violence their answer for everything?"

If you want to ask some tuff questions start with thoughs.


----------



## svs3 (Jun 23, 2006)

Unfortunately, being the sole hyperpower (an increasingly popular word these days) guarantees us nothing.

Sam


----------



## Goodnewsboy (Nov 4, 2006)

Among nations, respect is engendered by fear. I am afraid that our present problems arise not from our strength, but from the fact that we have repeatedly demonstrated, by running away from adversity, that there is nothing to fear.


----------



## chris_gee (May 31, 2006)

Ever thought of reading some history?


----------



## svs3 (Jun 23, 2006)

*A little history from my perspective*

May I reccomend as a little light bedtime reading:
The Looming Tower

The remainder of this post has been moved to the "Fight Club for Sailors" thread. A more appropriate home for it.

Sam


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Goodnewsboy hits her right amidship at the waterline. Much as in child-rearing international respect amoung nations depends not so much on the nature of the response as on the certainty of a response. Israel, while not quite universally hated IS universally respected. Apparently the American colossus, perhaps over-fed a diet of Dr Benjamin Spock and self-image psycho babble, is more concerned with being liked than in acheiving peace in the age old way peace has always been acheived. Peace is imposed. Until the next time the lesson is forgotten.


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

svs3,
Better check with your optometrist soonest possible. Rarely have I read such a succinct and yet, wide ranging distortion of history. While I am glad you confined it to mostly the twentieth century, I am somewhat befuddled that you managed to ignore any possible influence, let alone existence of, the cold war in your summation.

I was particularly amused by your in depth, and detailed, analysis of how the Democrats aren't the answer either!

Good luck in school, I'm sure you're looking forward to high school next year.

(if this seems harsh, remember that politics ain't bean bag. Sailing, on the other hand, is fun for all ages)


----------



## PBzeer (Nov 11, 2002)

The one thing the rest of the world learned from Vietnam, but evidently was overlooked here, is that you don't have to defeat the US militarily, just win the battle for "world opinion". In light of that (and no, I'm not going into a long essay on why it's true) the last thing the jihadists want to do at this point is launch another 9/11 style attack, because that would incite the American people to favor digging in, rather than cutting and running. They are currently winning the public relations battle, and know that if they can just hang in long enough for the American public to lose sight of what's at stake, then they will be able to attack on our soil rather than be attacked on theirs.

All one needs to do is look at what happened when Israel gave back the land in Lebanon and Gaza. That would bring peace....supposedly. But we all know what happened....they were attacked from those very same areas they gave up for peace. There is no way to negotiate with someone who has no interest in living up to their side of the bargin. And if anyone thinks that by leaving Iraq, that everything will be rosy and bright, then they are not reading their history, current or past.

There is no simple solutions here, and violence is never the best way to resolve things, but, sometimes it is the only way.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

"Why do they want to try and kill anyone that doesn't believe what they do?" And lets not forget, "Why is killing and violence their answer for everything?"

Tough neighborhood. 

Israel Shahak has some ideas. Benjamin H. Freedman (anyone remember his having been mentioned somewhere?) is very interesting. 

If you want it straight from the horse's mouth, radioislam.com is fairly direct.


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

jones- Some of those were retorical.

svs- Recruiting, and Ice Bergs, and Halliburton, Oh MY! While it is obvious that you have put more thought and even some facts into this the majority of those that share your opinion, your argument is so broad and rambling it's mind boggling. Unfortunatly most of your valid points are intermixed with myth, urban legand, and down right falasies. I'm afraid we are going to have to disagree other wise this would just get ugly. 

I personally, as a Great Lakes sailor, am a big fan of global warming and I'm going to go drive my SUV around the block a few more times to see if I can relaunch my boat a little sooner!


----------



## svs3 (Jun 23, 2006)

Note to forum administrator,

Below is a copy of a request I have submitted to sailnet via the "contact us" link. In case this not the correct way to request this action please me tell how do it or please feel free to move it yourself.

Thanks,
Sam



> Please move my post, #61, in the "Submarine hits freighter" thread to the "Fight Club for Sailors" thread which is the more appropiate thread for the post. Both threads are located in the in the General Discussion sub-forum of the General Interest forum.
> 
> Thanks,
> Sam


----------



## svs3 (Jun 23, 2006)

Hi all, 

I look forward to reading responses to my post, #61, in the Fight Club thread. In the future I will endeavor to keep my post a just a wee bit more topic.

Sam


----------



## camaraderie (May 22, 2002)

SVS3...you could just cut and paste your own post to the right forum...then delete your existing post throught the edit function.


----------



## svs3 (Jun 23, 2006)

Post moved. Until a few minutes ago I had never bothered to look at the fight club thread. Having thread of that nature makes a lot sense.

Sam


----------



## cockeyedbob (Dec 6, 2006)

Sub skippers ... only the best ... we pay 'em to be agressive ... if they aren't, what good are they ...
Gui better slow down ... might suck up a Portuguese sub ...


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

cockeyedbob said:


> Gui better slow down ... might suck up a Portuguese sub ...


Ehehehe, or worse... sink it with my torpedo!!!


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

tj-
"Can a sub see whats on the surface before surfacing?"
Well, the annual Local Notice to Mariners here used to have a page devoted to "If you're in the middle of nowhere and a big smoke bouy pops up near you? Make lots of noise and get the hell out of the way, there's a submarine coming up!" 
In theory a sub will launch a smoke flare to warn surface vessels it is coming up. IIRC vaguely green and black are "normal" and orange means SOS, all I need to remember is get the hell out of the way and look it up afterwards.
In practice? Heck, smokes cost money and using them mean you weren't really sure what was up there, so who would want to use them?


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

*From personal experience......*

I don't post on this board, but I dream to cruise once the kid is out of college and I really enjoy the information shared by all you old salts.

Regarding submarines and surfacing, I can tell you that it's always a dicey situation. It's not so much that the boat's sonar doesn't "look up", but rather that the ocean is full of thermoclines, or layers, which act like a mirror to sound. For example, a surface ship could be putting along at 10 knots and transmitting sound from its screw in all directions, but say there is a strong thermal layer some 100' down (a shallow zone where water temperature is signficantly different on either side). The ship's noise signature would be mostly reflected by this layer, leaving a diffused and reflected sound for a submarine at 400' to not be clear on where the surface ship is.

Every submarine comes up near the surface every day to uplink with military and commercial satellites, and often has to come to "periscope depth" (PD) to raise various masts for different reasons. When a submarine nears the layer that is inevitably there, the crew is very careful in going through the layer and on up to the surface. Considering the size of a typical submarine height-wise, there isn't much time to see what is around before getting part of the boat shallow enough to strike a surface ship, even if the sub doesn't surface completely. In fact, as the boat approaches periscope depth (around 60', typically), the officer of deck is looking up through the periscope as he spins in 360 degree circles looking for shadows as the ship continues to near the surface. Believe me, there are plenty of new gray hairs every time a submarine comes to PD. More often than not, collisions occur either at night or when a sub skipper is in too big a hurry.

Georgiavol
USS Grayling SSN-646 
('82 - '86)


----------



## Kernix (Oct 5, 2006)

Cruisingdad said:


> Anyone who has read my threads in the past knows that I am passionate about our military and the people that serve our country, period. Thank you all.
> 
> However, I have to ask a question: How does a submarine, A US Submarine that has to be the most advanced vessel in the entire planet, hit a bloody freighter? Notice, it had to be a Japanese one again, didn't you? I can see the Japanese starting to put fenders on the BOTTOM of their boats.
> 
> ...


You would think some kind of radar would be available to them - I mean what is radar other than a sound wave that bounces off a solid object and comes back telling you it's size and distance? Two solutions:

1. Put a window on top of the sub and have a seaman look out - kind of like turning around when backing out your car 

2. Get one of those "beep-beeep-beep-beep" thingies like for trucks backing up - send it to the surfaceas a warning for any vessels above - assuming they could here it.

Even if they are stupid suggestions, there should be a solution - otherwise think of the huge costs involved in reapiring a nuclear sub, or the cost of losing a highly trained submarine seaman - let alone the useless waste of life of both seaman and civilians!


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Interesting to know, Georgiavol. I can appreciate that it is not as easy as it would seem to a civilian. Still, I wonder how much of the technology has changed? As you are travelling along, whether 60' or 600... aren't you keeping track of all contacts? It would seem that something as loud as one of the worlds largest freighters would leave one heck of a signature. I mean, if it was a sailboat or something small or quiet, I can see there being problems... but such a huge freighters... you would think they would have known it was there and stay clear.

It was also pointed out earlier in the thread that subs intentionally track close to civilian ships to practice their stealth manuevers. I wonder if that might have something to do with it? I am not saying the Captain of the sub did anything right or wrong... but you would think they would show a little more caution or be more attentive... especially around Jap ships that seem to be a US sub magnet.

Just my observation.


----------



## TSOJOURNER (Dec 16, 1999)

Us Subs and Jap ships have had an ongoing relationship for some 66 years. 

Regards,
Red


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

"2. Get one of those "beep-beeep-beep-beep" thingies like for trucks backing up - send it to the surfaceas a warning for any vessels above - assuming they could here it."

Uh, they have something like that. Have had for many years. Since "beep" isn't easy to hear at sea, they can and sometimes will pop a smoke marker before surfacing.

But last time I heard, no one in the submarine service was chosen for being slow and conservative. I'll bet there's some quartermaster who published a blog just to embarrass the skippers that come home needing replacements for expended smoke pots.<G>

Or, the skippers might say something like "Why waste a perfectly good smoke pot when there's no one on watch on those ships anyway?" since commercial traffic is, sadly, often unmanned or manned by the cheapest possible bodies.

http://www.adi-limited.com/pdfs/2-01-050-030-063.pdf
One link from an Australian manufacturer.

"The following signals, although not part of the Rules of the Road, are prescribed for submerged submarines in emergency situations involving rising to periscope depth or surfacing: A white or yellow smoke flare fired into the air from a submarine indicates the submarine is coming to periscope depth to carry out surfacing procedures. Ships should clear the immediate vicinity but should not stop propellers. A red smoke flare fired into the air from a submarine is a signal that the submarine is in serious trouble and will surface immediately if possible. Smoke flares of any color, fired into the air at short intervals, mean the submarine requires assistance. All ships in the area should clear the immediate vicinity but stand by to give aid."
from http://tpub.com/content/administration/14067/css/14067_148.htm

and http://www.mcga.gov.uk/c4mca/v2wc6s8.doc says:
"8.2.5	Submarine Preparing to Surface

A submarine preparing to surface will release two white or yellow smoke candles released single about 3 minutes apart. This indicates that vessels should keep clear, do not stop propellers, and clear the area immediately.

8.2.6	Reports of Submarine Flares (Grenades)

Any vessel sighting such signals may report this to HM Coastguard. If there are no escort vessels in the vicinity, the report should be passed onto CINCFLEET.

If a red flare (grenade) is sighted and the submarine does not surface within 5 minutes, it should be assumed that the submarine is in distress and has sunk. A vessel making such a report should attempt to fix the position in which the signal was sighted and remain on scene.

November 2005	6 - 8 - 4	Amendment 6
They should be advised to follow instructions in accordance with the Annual Summary of Admiralty Notices to Mariners, Section 8 Part 3 and await further instructions.

CINCFLEET must be informed without delay to confirm the possible presence of a submarine in the area and to give instructions."

I can't find the US reference that used to be in the annual Local Notice to Mariners in some areas, but thought the US used green, black, and orange (emergency) smoke as indicators.


----------



## sailaway21 (Sep 4, 2006)

Radar does not transmit sound. It transmits in the RF range.

Merchant ships are never unmanned and rarely cheaply manned. Poor watch-keeping is mostly the provenance of recreational sailors. You own a $150,000 sail-boat, and you get to drive it. Mr Merchant Ship-owner has a 150 million dollar ship, and millions of dollars of cargo in it, and you don't get to drive it. In fact you will have to have two years on deck of such vessels before you get to touch the wheel. Substantially more training and experience is required if you are going to navigate the vessel and stand a watch.

The Navy, and US military in general, has a higher than expected accident rate due to the types of things they do; it is inherently more risky than sailing from point A to point B. Merchant vessels and certainly not recreational sailors do not engage in the daily risks a naval vessel traffics in. Attempting to compare the two activities is an apples and oranges argument, on the par with having a driver's license and figuring you are qualified to drive a Formula One car.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

Sailaway-
"Merchant ships are never unmanned and rarely cheaply manned. Poor watch-keeping is mostly the provenance of recreational sailors. "
It only takes one to ruin your day.

I was on a small cruise ship and after we'd be given the bridge tour and the 'navigator' decided not to use his sextant because it was cloudy (the sun kept peeping out, he didn't want to wait and peep) I stood on the bridge wing, outside a locked and empty bridge, for 15 minutes while the ship was on autopilot and the bridge UNMANNED. This, in a sea lane, with commercial and private traffic. So I can say that I have witnessed one unmanned commercial vessel first hand.

Then there's a gentlemen retired from the USN who I know and trust, who was discussing this topic with me. He confessed that one night, while in command of a large gray vessel, as part of a group of large gray vessels under orders to maintain radio silence, he actually called down to one of his deck guns and placed a starshell across the bridge of the next ship behind him. Which had been closing on a collision course while ignoring blinkers and all other attempts to get attention form whoever was on watch.

So yes, I have good reason to believe the same problem of insufficient watch--for whatever reason--applies to big gray vessels as well as commercial vessels.

It ain't just submarines that have a problem with "Where did that come from?!"


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Hello,

I would like to thank you for making me feel so much more at ease everytime I see a ship bearing down on me. 

- CD


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

CD-
Don't worry about it, barge drivers feel the same way about sailboats.<G>

So, you want I should send you a one-day guest pass to shop at Missiles-R-Us? Or you just wanna come along next time I'm shopping that way? <VBG>


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Shopping spree? Nah. I will just avoid flying a Japanese flag. Plus, I have painted WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) on the side so I am sure to never be seen but never be hit either.


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

*THE PORTUGUESE BLACK BALLS CHICKEN PLAY

HOW TO HANDLE TANKERS

FIRST I CHOSE A "TARGET"









THEN I "AIM"










THEN I JUST WAIT FOR THEM TO CHICKEN OUT!!!!!!!!!!!










THEY KNOW ME BY NOW.....AND STAY OUT OF MY WAY    *

That was in 2003 with a boat I owned then


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Which boat was yours?


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

Cruisingdad said:


> Which boat was yours?


Hey....behave...want me to go to the Catalina post again??????


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

No, no... just kidding. However, I do owe you about three or four hundred before we are even and before you can say anything!!


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

Cruisingdad said:


> No, no... just kidding. However, I do owe you about three or four hundred before we are even and before you can say anything!!


I publically said I like the catalinas....where have you been??? That should have clean my slate.....destroyed my reputation though..... (just kidding, I like them)


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Oh... the tears... they won't stop!! Giu is being NICE to me and my boat. Just for that, I will name my next Catalina Giulietta.


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

Cruisingdad said:


> Oh... the tears... they won't stop!! Giu is being NICE to me and my boat. Just for that, I will name my next Catalina Giulietta.


Now you're pushing it.......but since we are so far appart, ok then....


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

PS - 

Hope you don't mind, but I have been doing a little doctoring of that document you sent me. Cut and paste. Little additions here and there. So let me ask you a question:

You said there were NO Catalinas in Portugal, but I have proof now. They even did this big article on them and big write up. One of the boats is named Giulietta. Now, my Portugese friend, how do you explain that? 

- CD

PS I will say one thing... beautiful boat. And it looks suspociously similar to mine!


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

What are friends for?


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

CD-
"I will just avoid flying a Japanese flag."
Sometimes I'm certain that some former Axis powers still carry a grudge. You don't suppose...A trawler and now a tanker...Some of the USN are still PO'd as well? (After all, if Truman hadn't been such a wuss, Sony and Mercedes would be US domestic products.)


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

Ahhhhhh Mercedes now is from Japan???

I thought the one in Europe was another General!!


----------



## T34C (Sep 14, 2006)

G- I think the tanker captian figures with your navigation even they are safe!!  

CD- Giulietta is not some damned left coast (or even FL) Catlina. You know he had that thing built in France!


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

G-
"Ahhhhhh Mercedes now is from Japan???" No, but they most certainly were an Axis war power. Mercedes was a part of the Nazi war machine. The Axis powers included Italy, Germany, and Japan. 
That ex-Nazi corporations now own Rolls Royce motorcars (and some other classic British marques) and the US Chrysler motors, and that Toyota is about to take over the #1 sales position in the US, while televisions and other electronic goods simply are no longer made in the US, leads one to ask, who really won that war in the long term?


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

hellosailor said:


> G-
> "Ahhhhhh Mercedes now is from Japan???" No, but they most certainly were an Axis war power. Mercedes was a part of the Nazi war machine. The Axis powers included Italy, Germany, and Japan.
> That ex-Nazi corporations now own Rolls Royce motorcars (and some other classic British marques) and the US Chrysler motors, and that Toyota is about to take over the #1 sales position in the US, while televisions and other electronic goods simply are no longer made in the US, leads one to ask, who really won that war in the long term?


OK good for the point of view, you're right there.. now an opinion from an outsider....

As far as what is happening...ITS ALL YOUR FAULT....don't cry...its your consumist sellfish way of thinking that got you there....the almighty $$$$$.

Can't beat the "half Dollar a day" wages.....and the "leaders" don't care, it exercises economy, they say...yeah right...

That is why....but don't worry we're heading that way, too. That's why I reduced the buying of "asian" merchandise....

and that is why my boat is 100% Portuguese. I'll exercise the economy of those I want....not who they want


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

G-
"and that is why my boat is 100% Portuguese." 
Hmmm... built with Portuguese resin and Portuguese FRP, refined from oil wells in Portugal? Or can you do that from olive oil?<VBG>


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

hellosailor said:


> G-
> "and that is why my boat is 100% Portuguese."
> Hmmm... built with Portuguese resin and Portuguese FRP, refined from oil wells in Portugal? Or can you do that from olive oil?<VBG>


   NO COMMENT


----------



## sailingdog (Mar 19, 2006)

That's why his boat smells so nice...the resin is made from olive oil...


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Ok, ok! Hello is on MY TEAM!!!


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

Cruisingdad said:


> Ok, ok! Hello is on MY TEAM!!!


yes he is, and for a few bucks...he'll say good things about Catalinas, too..   Like most people


----------



## Cruisingdad (Jul 21, 2006)

Fine, you asked for it. I am pushing Button #1. The tube is flooded. Launch:

HELLO GO GET HIM!!


----------



## Giulietta (Nov 14, 2006)

Ahhhhh, pffffff

The bravery of being out of range...typical....


----------



## Waltthesalt (Sep 22, 2009)

If you really want to know....
Submarines operate at depths well below surface vessles. Thier risk is when coming up shallow to periscope depth say to recieve a radio message and when surfacing. A sub would first come up to periscope depth the check the area clear before surfacing or would have a surface vessle to check the area clear if not and communicate on an underwater accoustic phone. 

Submarines tell what's going on about them by sonar normally passivev sonar. This gets only the bearing, direction, frequency of the ship's sound. It does not get range. An estimated course and speed can be calculated by tracking the ship's noise through a few submarine maneuvers and using computers. But that's always an inexact calculation as several course speed solutions will fit the same bearing/bearing rate data streams. Complicating this is when doing it in crowded waters you may be hearing 20-30 vessles. You can hear ships a long way off and the loudness is not necessarily an indication of range. On the other hand a loud signal can mask a weaker closer in signal and often ships have a quiet spot dead ahead especially big ships. Then there's an issue if the water temperature as it changes with depth called thermocline. If the surface of the water is warm relative to the deeper water then you have a layer of water that traps sound waves by refraction. So a deeper vessle cannot hear them. 

Submarines when not being stealty can also use active sonar commonly refered to as pinging. This can help to locate close in vessles by hearing and measuring thier echos to get a range. If there's an adverse thermocline however you may not get a return echo. 

So that's the situation. When thinking of this however consider also that large majority of surface ship collisions with other surface ships happen in clear weather with unlimited visibility.


----------



## hellosailor (Apr 11, 2006)

"SPECIAL SUBMARINE SIGNALS The following signals, though not part of the Rules of the Road, are prescribed for submerged submarines in emergency situations involving rising  to periscope depth or surfacing. 

1. A yellow smoke flare fired into the air from a submarine indicates that the submarine is coming to periscope depth to carry out surfacing procedures. Ships should clear the immediate vicinity, but should not stop propellers. 

2. A red smoke flare fired into the air from a submarine is a signal that the submarine is in serious trouble and will surface immediately if possible. Smoke flares of any color, fired into the air at short intervals, mean that the submarine requires assistance. All ships in the vicinity should stand by to give aid."

"A yellow signal floating in the air from a small parachute, about 300 feet above the water, would indicate that a submarine is about to rise to periscope depth"

"During a training exercise a submarine indicating that a torpedo has been fired will send up smoke from a float. The smoke's color will be black"

"A green signal, floating in the air from a parachute, about 300 feet above the water, indicates that a submarine has fired a torpedo during a drill "

All this is supposed to be covered in the Coast Pilots and used to be covered annually in the printed Special Notice To Mariners in districts where there were submarine bases or activity.

A sub operating under non-combat conditions has damn little excuse to pop up and hit something on the surface. And if it does so without making the proper smoke/flare signal warnings, I'd suspect the court of inquiry to be rather short.

Personally? If I see smoke or flares or bouys coming up from the water anywhere around me, I plan to levitate and GTF out of the area with maximum speed AND noise. I'll figure out the color codes once I'm outside the area.


----------



## Superpickle (Oct 17, 2009)

camaraderie said:


> That's it Bill...it's all about Bush...he must have caused that collision at sea. Too bad Pelosi wasn't in charge...with all the subs in dry dock that collision would never have happened! ...and Hillary doesn't like anything cigar shaped either!


So  does Polosi have them useing only One sheet of TP at a time on the Subs yet ??


----------

