Question about the Navy sub that demolished that Japanese boat...did the sub sustain ANY damage???

NFS4

No Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
72,647
27
91
I'm looking at pics of the sub and the thing didn't have much damage to it. Are our subs built THAT good that it could crack a big ass boat and not take on any damage?
 

JBAR

Diamond Member
Dec 21, 1999
3,469
0
0
The initial pics of it coming into port showed some major scrapes on the conning tower.
 

vi edit

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Oct 28, 1999
62,403
8,199
126
Did anyone else hear rumors that a civilian was at the helm at the time of the impact? I heard that on the radio on my way home from work the other day?

If that was true, I think somebody has some serious explaining to do.
 

thebestMAX

Diamond Member
Sep 14, 2000
7,487
121
106
They showed a little on the "sail" but called it the "rear fin" on one broadcast I saw.
 

thebestMAX

Diamond Member
Sep 14, 2000
7,487
121
106
Yeah, they said a civilian was at the controls but wasnt responsible???? WTF does that mean? Of course the Captain is ultimately responsible for everything as he signed for the boat.
 

Napalm381

Platinum Member
Oct 10, 1999
2,724
0
0
NFS4- consider that these subs are designed to withstand the water pressure hundreds of feet below the sea (just to remind everybody, 33 feet of water = 1 atmosphere of pressure). I doubt that the pressure caused by this sort of impact came anywhere close to the pressure that the hull is designed to withstand.
 

Viper GTS

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
38,107
433
136
They are also designed to withstand torpedo hits. If anything it probably just messed up their high-tech paint job.

As for the civilian at the helm, I really don't see what the big deal is. If it's as routine as everyone says it is, & proper procedures were followed, it wouldn't have mattered who was there. Once the initial error was made (not seeing the ship on the surface), it didn't matter WHO was at the controls. There was no way expert maneuvering would have averted disaster, there's no freakin' windows in a sub.

Viper GTS
 

thebestMAX

Diamond Member
Sep 14, 2000
7,487
121
106
No windows, just a screen door. old joke

Guess if they missed it on sonar, you are right. Didnt matter who was driving.
 

shifrbv

Senior member
Feb 21, 2000
981
1
0
How the heck could these guys not see this ship on the surface? I thought that's one of the things these high-tech subs are supposed to be able to do. Locate anything on their radar/whatever equipment they use, while their lurking below? Isn't that how they are able to detect larger ships? Doesn't this sound strange to anybody else?
 

Viper GTS

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
38,107
433
136
How the heck could these guys not see this ship on the surface?

If the ship was hidden from the periscope by a swell, & active sonar was not used (which is apparently left at the discretion of the sub commander), it's very possible they could have missed it.

Viper GTS
 

KevinH

Diamond Member
Nov 19, 2000
3,110
7
81
Strange? Not really. Unlikely? Definitely! Some dude just f'ed up. It happens.
 

toph99

Diamond Member
Aug 25, 2000
5,505
0
0
don't forget, passive sonar only works if there is something making noise. if the ship's engines were off, there was no way they'd know it was there(in theory at least)
 

SmiZ

Senior member
Oct 6, 2000
869
0
0
Think about the unlikelyhood of this. Those guys in the fishing boat are some poor bastards. Such a huge ocean and they had to be in the wrong place at the worst time.
 

rahvin

Elite Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,475
1
0
In the photo's on CNN there were a couple big scratches in the side side of the sub (guestimating they were 18' long and a foot or so wide). They also said there was a sizable dent, and some other pictures of the conning tower showed a bunch of paint (either removed or scraped onto it).
 

Aquaman

Lifer
Dec 17, 1999
25,054
13
0
I remember seeing a documentary on Subs and some can crack through 3 metres (10 ft) of arctic ice.

Cheers,
Aquaman
 

Cheapster

Senior member
Dec 31, 2000
238
0
0
It says after the hit that they were taking on water, so there had to be some type of damage.
 

AndrewR

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,157
0
0
Like Aquaman said, nuclear subs (well, probably all of them, but I'm not sure if there are any diesel boats in the Navy anymore) are designed to penetrate the Arctic ice cap so the conning towers are quite strong. Plus, as is also mentioned, these boats are designed for combat, ie., they are not only armored to withstand extreme pressures from just travelling at extreme depths, they are also armored to resist explosive detonations from enemy munitions.

Fishing boats are designed with waves in mind. BIG difference.

The thing that floors me about this whole incident is how unlikely it was. Think about how big the ocean is and how relatively small these two vessels are. I suspect that the statistical chances for this occurring are nil. The civilian at the helm was NOT the cause of the accident since it isn't like they leave them at the controls without supervision. Also, it's likely, though I haven't any experience on a sub, that the helm is rather useless during an emergency rise to the surface, which they were practicing (they blew their tanks to rise quickly). It's not like they were gradually coming to the surface on a slow glide.

As I see it, the captain made two mistakes. He strayed beyond the designated sub training area (which is common, but probably should be avoided) and then when he did decide to do a practice run of a rapid resurfacing, he didn't make DAMN sure there were no ships around since he was outside of that training area. He was negligent in that regard, and the civilians had nothing to do with that. The media just likes to drum up stuff to make the military look bad.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |