[Moogs]

I don't know if this has been reported earlier or if the story is just now coming out, but the article in the Times is pretty scary. I did not realize just how low a percentage of the ocean's topography had been mapped (10% roughly!). I would've thought in the age of satellite imaging and all the scientific missions on the seas, that we'd have much of the Oceans' terrain mapped by now.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/05/18/na...rtner=homepage


From the graphic it looks like the San Francisco is an attack sub, not a boomer, which would've been really fucking scary had that gone down. Although [one of the pictures] looks a lot like an Ohio-class sub as it sits in dry dock.

[Brad]

Please quote the content of the article when linking to sites like NY Times. That particular site has actually decided to start charging for people who want to access old archives; so, it would benefit everyone to copy it here.

Thanks.

[Moogs]

I would've, except that it is 5 pages long, along with graphics. I'll go get some of the first few paragraphs. Didn't realize they are going to start charging people. What do they consider "an archive"? 30 days?

[Moogs]

First page of the story:

Blood was everywhere. Sailors lay sprawled across the floor, several of them unconscious, others simply dazed. Even the captain was asking, "What just happened?" All anyone knew for sure was that the nuclear-powered attack submarine had slammed head-on into something solid and very large, and that it had to get to the surface fast. In the control room, a senior enlisted man shoved the "chicken switches," blowing high-pressure air through the ballast tanks to force the vessel upward. Usually, the submarine would respond at once. But as the captain, Cmdr. Kevin G. Mooney, and top officers stared at the depth gauge, the needle refused to budge. Moments before, they had been slipping quiet and fast through the Pacific. Now, they were stuck, more than 500 feet down. Ten seconds passed. Then 20, 30. "I thought I was going to die," Commander Mooney recalled. It would be close to a minute, but an excruciatingly long minute, before the submarine's mangled nose began to rise, before the entire control room exhaled in relief, before the diving officer, Chief Petty Officer Danny R. Hager, began to read out a succession of shallower depths. "I don't know how long it was," Chief Hager said, "but it seemed like forever." Last week, Navy investigators reported that a series of mistakes at sea and onshore caused the 6,900-ton submarine, the San Francisco, to run into an undersea mountain not on its navigational charts. One crewman was killed, 98 others were injured, and the captain and three other officers were relieved of their duties as a result of the Jan. 8 crash, one of the worst on an American submarine since the 1960's. But what is becoming clear only now, from the first interviews with Commander Mooney and 15 other officers and enlisted men, as well as a review of Navy reports, is how much worse it nearly was, and how close the San Francisco came to being lost. The submarine crashed at top speed - 33 knots, or roughly 38 miles an hour - about 360 miles southeast of Guam. The impact punched huge holes in the forward ballast tanks, so the air being blown into them was no match for the ocean pouring in. The throttles shut, and the vessel briefly lost propulsion. As the emergency blow caught hold, mainly in the rear tanks, the sub was just drifting in the deep, its bow pointing down. Luckily, the thick inner hull protecting the nuclear reactor and the crew's quarters held. But within was pandemonium - bodies pinballing, heads striking steel in the warren of lethally sharp surfaces in impossibly tight spaces. There was so much blood on the instruments and on the control-room floor that the place, Chief Hager said, "looked like a slaughterhouse." Then chaos gave way to improvised heroism and a perilous, and finally futile, effort to rescue the most grievously injured sailor. The merely battered ministered to the badly hurt, turning the mess hall and the officers' wardroom into instant clinics, ripping off shirts to use as tourniquets and creating splints from cleaning brushes. When they realized that the only hope for the dying man, a young machinist's mate named Joseph A. Ashley, was to get to a hospital, sailors cut off railings and fixtures to thread his stretcher through narrow areas. They then rigged pulleys in an effort to hoist him through the sail, at the top of the submarine, and onto a helicopter hovering just above. To avoid detection, submarines travel silent and largely blind, relying heavily on charts, and their interpreters, to navigate the undersea landscape. The meeting of this submarine and that mountain beneath the Pacific was in many ways a stroke of hauntingly rare bad luck: everyone relied on the one chart, from a panoply of them, that lacked even a hint of the looming danger. But the submarine's fate was also the result of a confluence of simple shipboard errors. The Navy has placed the blame on the captain and the crew, and Commander Mooney says, "I accept full responsibility." He acknowledges several critical mistakes, including going too fast, taking insufficient depth soundings and failing to cross-check the route with other charts.

[The Return of the 'nut]

Originally Posted by Brad Please quote the content of the article when linking to sites like NY Times. That particular site has actually decided to start charging for people who want to access old archives; so, it would benefit everyone to copy it here. Thanks.

they have always charged to read their archives

[sunrain]

Damn, that's a lot of bad luck.

[thuh Freak]

Originally Posted by Brad Please quote the content of the article when linking to sites like NY Times. That particular site has actually decided to start charging for people who want to access old archives; so, it would benefit everyone to copy it here. Thanks.

Are you encouraging copyright infringement?

[julesstoop]

Don't they use sonar on routine missions?

[Enki]

Originally Posted by sunrain Damn, that's a lot of bad luck.

No, it's called betting on the cum that you won't screw up by using a 30 year old chart and then not updating it manually from the chart update manual listing or other newer charts.

The crew may have made some mistakes, but the idiots that refuse to reprint critical navigation charts because it costs too much should shoulder even more of the blame. You should NEVER have to go to the chart update manual, it's been proven to be a REALLY BAD system. Aviano Italy and an EA-6B into a skycar cable not on the main chart, SF into a charted but unprinted seamount. Those 2 incidents have probably cost several times more than the chart reprinting would have cost over the last 30 years! Not to mention the ones that happen that don't make the 6 o'clock news.

[murbot]

Betting on the cum?

[Bryson]

My Flatmate reckons these problems wouldn't occur if they fitted windscreens to those subs.

[LudwigVan]

Originally Posted by The Return of the 'nut they have always charged to read their archives

Yes, they have, as have many other online papers. Perhaps Brad mixed this up with the recently announced TimeSelect membership project.

[CobaltFire]

Having been stationed on an attack sub (SSN 766, USS Charlotte), it is beyond scary to think of that situation. Interesting to note the top speed they quoted, as in times past they have only said "in excess of 25 knots" or "in excess of 30 knots", not a specific number. I wonder where they got that information? Also, the USS San Francisco was a Los Angeles class fast attack submarine stationed in Guam, FYI. Another scary thing to realize is that it is actually MORE difficult to surface while not under propulsion from a shallow depth than from a deep depth, i.e. it is harder to surface from 500ft than from 750ft. After seeing some of the pictures from that sub, I am thankful they survived at all.

Also, boomers almost never travel that fast. They are made to be quiet, and that means going slow. Anytime they are going fast they are either in trouble, testing, or on the surface.

[kretara]

I feel sorry for the Officers. Many of their career's are now ruined because of something that was not their fault. I've known enough people who were in the Navy who all told me the same thing: Its never the Navy's fault.

[CobaltFire]

I don't really feel sorry for the officers. I know it wasn't their fault, and sucks for them, but that is what they get paid for. That may sound harsh, but that's really how it is. The enlisted guys run the sub, the chiefs hold it all together, and the officers are basically like the college kid on the production floor. Now, the CO and XO are a different story, and yes, it does suck for them. However, they knew that this could happen when they took the job. In summary, I don't think it was their fault, but if they were the higher-ups, they would have done the same thing to the captain that was in their place.

[sunrain]

Originally Posted by murbot Betting on the cum?

Well, it is the Navy.

[alcimedes]

Maybe thats like a soggy biscuit bet.

[kretara]

Or getting a jelly baby

[Naderfan]

I remember seeing a documentary on the USS Indainapolis (the ship that was attacked and sank during WWII and most of the men who survived the sinking were eaten by sharks...it's mentioned in the movie Jaws as well) that the captain of the ship (who did survive) was court-martialed because he didn't sound the Abandon Ship...however, the Japanese had a hell of a first hit and knocked out the communication system with the first blast. The captain started calling out the abandon ship order and tried to pass it by word of mouth, but there really wasn't anything he could do in the circumstances. They also charged him with putting the ship in danger by not sailing in a zig-zag course in waters with enemy submarines. Again, however, he was operating on recent intelligence stating that there was no enemy movement in that area. To top it all off, they even brought in the Japanese commander who had fired and sank the ship to testify. The captain was found guilty and later committed suicide.

I understand that people often want someone to pin the blame on after a tragedy, and I agree that everyone should be held accountable for their actions, but sometimes accidents happen and there's really no one who should have to bear all the responsibility. But I guess things are different in the Navy.

[curiousuburb]

I'd hate to see what happens to the deductible on the Captain's Insurance after this.

If it comes out that they were talking on the cell phone rather than driving with both hands on the wheel...

[CobaltFire]

I agree that it is messed up, but it IS the Navy (as other people have said) and the captain is always the one who takes it when the brown stuff and the air mover coincide in space-time. It is very unfortunate, but the public would have been pissed if someone wasn't lynched, and that falls on the captain. Hence why I turned down the offer to become an officer.

[Moogs]

Good info you've posted here Cobalt... thanks. I didn't realize boomers normally travelled well under 30kts. I thought they were designed for both speed and stealth (despite their huge size). Do Los Angeles and Ohio class subs have basically the same shape and features, with only the scale being different (on the outside I mean)?

[CobaltFire]

No, they do not. An Ohio is HUGE. I have had to tie those things up before, and they make a Los Angeles look tiny. Also, they use pretty different reactor systems (please don't ask, I can't say). The Ohio's are basically set up for 1/3-1/2 speed silent cruising. They can go faster than that and still be VERY quiet (quieter than most LA's), but then again, the whole point of an Ohio is to be a hole in the water. If you really want to see a big boat, look up a Typhoon. Those things are as big as some old battleships. The hull design on most modern submarines is pretty standard, so yes the hulls look similar. One way to tell relative size is the sail (thing that sticks up). It is about the same size on both boats (a little bigger on an Ohio), so check that out.

Oh yeah, as a side note, the Charlotte (my old boat) was the sistership of the Greeneville... Also, I work with a guy who was onboard for ALL of the collisions. Some luck, huh?

[Moogs]

Damn. Don't let that guy drive you home after a night at the watering hole.

Regarding the sail / sail planes... so basically you're saying the way to tell the two classes apart is that the Ohio is so huge it makes the sail structure look tiny relative to the rest of the boat, while the LA class it looks more proportional?

I kind of figured the shape of the hull / plane structure / screws might look very similar because at some point the Navy found the "optimum shape" and just changed the scale based on what's inside / what the purpose of the vessel is.

I've seen some footage of the Typhoon class. Scary shit. Scarier still to think of how poorly maintained they might be, yet still going to sea. Hopefully no more Kursk-like episodes.

[CobaltFire]

Yes, the shape is basically figured out. However, the Virginia's look a little different (I WILL NEVER GO ON A VIRGINIA, THEY ARE DEATHTRAPS!) due to some newer design philosiphy (no idea what). LMAO, I just thought of a good analogy for a Virginia...

PowerMac Dual 2.5 - Seawolf Class (top of the line, EXPENSIVE, best there is)
PowerMac Digital Audio - Los Angeles Class (still works great, can be upgraded to ALMOST new standards)
Homebuilt Wintel - Virginia Class (umm, need I say more? parts made by random people, none fit right, many integration problems)

For the Virginia Class, the government went 1 worse than it's usual "lowest bidder' strategy. The took each section of the sub, and contracted it to the lowest bidder... Never before has a sub been designed by about 4 different companies... See the issues here?

[elvia]

Its always a tragedy when something like this happens. But this is old news, it happened on Jan 8 or 9. I think we have better charts than they did.

[CobaltFire]

Don't fool yourself. Charts probably haven't been updated with anything more than that seamount. Updating charts is not as easy as it sounds, and is likely to take a while. That is, if the government even does it.

[Enki]

Originally Posted by CobaltFire Don't fool yourself. Charts probably haven't been updated with anything more than that seamount. Updating charts is not as easy as it sounds, and is likely to take a while. That is, if the government even does it.

That's the 'effin problem. The charts are shit. By the time they are reprinted, they are still 5-10 years out of date minimum. Even the "Gucci" ones only available to certain entities. And the Mapping Agencies have been spending so much on new letterhead every 2 years for the last ten due to name changes they can't afford to do actual usable digital charts. The digital charts are only the same crappy out of data paper ones! Scanned! 3 new digital CD's a quarter, always the same damn out of date crap. Someone needs to be fired, but it's impossible to clean out GS lame workers, and decision-makers responsible for the screwed up system are long gone.

All that said:

The Navigator should be strung up by his balls, CO/XO slammed for not making sure he did his job, and a cast of several others, both E and O thrown in for good measure because they knew what was the right thing to do, but either didn't or let their buddies knowingly slack off. Every other person on that boat trusted them with their lives and that trust was cavalierly broken.

[_Ω_]

Originally Posted by CobaltFire Homebuilt Wintel - Virginia Class (umm, need I say more? parts made by random people, none fit right, many integration problems)

You missed the "has a tendency to crash" observation.

[curiousuburb]

With regard to the undersea landscape/quality of maps, I wonder about a few things.

Tom Clancy's "Hunt for Red October" caused many a raised eyebrow among the dolphin-wearing set for blurring the line between fiction and fact in its disclosures about Soviet and American submarine ops. Committees were called to find out if there were leaks feeding him classified material. Reagan loved it.

One section is dedicated to the high-speed run through undersea canyons in the G.I.UK. gap used by the Soviets in hopes of transiting past US subs. US subs couldn't keep pace through the canyons because the Soviets had made accurate maps of "Red Route One" and the Americans hadn't. While we may assume some dramatic license in the novel for the sake of plot, the underlying framework of research is generally cited as sound and has been confirmed since by experts on both sides.

If (grain of salt) the USSR could make functional high-speed navigable canyon maps in the 80s, you'd figure the technological advantages the Americans bring might compare by now. Half the underwater teevee you see has sidescan sonar spotting archeological relics in crisp resolution, so you'd think correctly flagging mountains shouldn't be so hard by now.

The subs can stay quiet. Run a fleet of sleds as a mapping expedition that conveniently avoids exposing any holes in the water, but happens to calibrate vague charts by noticing tonnes of rock. Near bases.
Get Howard Hughes to make a public noise as misdirection if you want. Or Jacques Cousteau's kid.

The Shuttle's SRTM mission provided radar mapping data that has helped approach navigation at dozens of otherwise hazardous mountain airports. Fascinating data sets, if you're into X and K band music. Some of the most interesting results were from ground-penetrating effects, helping rediscover parts of the Silk Road through the high Asian deserts from beneath the sand. Technology isn't the limiting factor anymore.

That said...
Not long after the Dec 26th Tsunami, I seem to recall the USGS or some similar body suggesting subsea terrain shifts of more than 100 meters in some coastal shelves near Indonesia. The planet isn't static. Subduction zones and volcanic vents can add or subtract hazards at varying paces, so at some level it isn't possible to be current and accurate. Without getting into Heisenberg or Korzybski, there will always be a fog between assumption and reality. Knowing this, one starts to question the wisdom of driving blind with the hammer (mostly) down.

Care to comment, CobaltFire? I've lost touch with the only ex-boomer crewman I knew.