I've found my carkeys, now where's that sub?

[Fazor]

Billion-dollar US Submarine Dissapears Overnight (http://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=2950740&page=1&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312&US=true)

How long until people start claiming that it showed up breifly in some port in NY, only to return to florida in a green haze with sailors melded into the metal and wandering the halls dazed and mortally ill? :)

[mike alexander]

Billion-dollar US submarine disappears overnight for several hours.


First thought: make up your mind. Was it several hours, or overnight?

Second thought: Is the adjectival cost always necessary (e.g., the $800 million Cassini spacecraft)? Does anybody think the US Navy gets their submarines from one of those cable TV ads for $29.95? Second one free if you act RIGHT NOW!

[Doodler]

Billion-dollar US submarine disappears overnight for several hours.


First thought: make up your mind. Was it several hours, or overnight?

Second thought: Is the adjectival cost always necessary (e.g., the $800 million Cassini spacecraft)? Does anybody think the US Navy gets their submarines from one of those cable TV ads for $29.95? Second one free if you act RIGHT NOW!

"Billion Dollar Submarine" means it was an attack sub. If it were WWIII in a Can, they'd have called it a "Nuclear Armed Submarine".

They just picked their superlatives for appropriate sensationalist rankling.

[Fazor]

:) Sensationalism, not relavance or accuracy, is the lifeblood of news media. Average Joe Schmo hears "Navy loses communication with submarine for a few hours" (which is what happened) he thinks "So what?"

But say "Billion dollar sub lost overnight!" and he thinks "They spent a BILLION dollars of MY tax money (yeah like he's paid a billion dollars in taxes) and then can't even keep track of it?!" and suddenly it's water-cooler fodder. The trick is in the penmenship. :)

[korjik]

Aren't they supposed to dissappear?

...

Ah, I see. Now that I read the article, it is mostly just poor reporting. At least it shows that even our own navy, looking in the right spot, cant see one of our own subs :)

[SeanF]

First thought: make up your mind. Was it several hours, or overnight?
Overnight isn't several hours?

[mike alexander]

GILLIAN! Would you please get in here and esplain to seanf?

[Swift]

Billion-dollar US submarine disappears overnight for several hours.


First thought: make up your mind. Was it several hours, or overnight?

Second thought: Is the adjectival cost always necessary (e.g., the $800 million Cassini spacecraft)? Does anybody think the US Navy gets their submarines from one of those cable TV ads for $29.95? Second one free if you act RIGHT NOW!
Shows how much we value the sailors. If it was some "cheap" Navy cargo ship with a couple hundred sailors, who would care. :neutral:

[Doodler]

There's a label on the uniform of every soldier, regardless of national origin.

It reads "Expendable". You weren't under the impression that "die for your country" was hyperbole, were you?

[Whirlpool]

Overnight isn't several hours?

Communications with the submarine were first lost at 7 p.m. Tuesday and were finally re-established by 5 a.m. today

That's 10 hours for missing sub.

[mike alexander]

Arrrgh! I concede! Even though either one would have been adequate.

Oh, well. 'Mistakes were made'.

[Swift]

There's a label on the uniform of every soldier, regardless of national origin.

It reads "Expendable". You weren't under the impression that "die for your country" was hyperbole, were you?
Not at all. I would just hope the news media would have more concern for the potential 100+ people that were missing, not the cost of the sub.

[swansont]

"Billion Dollar Submarine" means it was an attack sub. If it were WWIII in a Can, they'd have called it a "Nuclear Armed Submarine".

They just picked their superlatives for appropriate sensationalist rankling.

Well, the San Juan is an SSN, so it is an attack sub and not a boomer, but that doesn't mean it's not nuclear armed. Though you probably will not get anyone to officially confirm or deny that.

[Doodler]

Well, the San Juan is an SSN, so it is an attack sub and not a boomer, but that doesn't mean it's not nuclear armed. Though you probably will not get anyone to officially confirm or deny that.

My little brother's a submariner on an LA class boat, he's technically not allowed to confirm the existance of a nuclear reactor on board.

[Fazor]

Friend's uncle is a nuclear engineer (dunno actual title) onboard a sub. (He's also a heck of a nice guy). Same deal tho. Altho, a nuclear engineer *probably* indicates that there's a reactor ;)

[Doodler]

I'm surprised he's allowed to confirm he exists. ;)

[Bearded One]

Has there been any word on why/how it managed to be missing? I'm assuming it wasn't suppossed to be running silent, or else there wouldn't have been a fuss in the first place.

One could envision armed rebellion on board -- makes for good hollywood flicks (sometimes) :lol:

[Fazor]

Has there been any word on why/how it managed to be missing? I'm assuming it wasn't suppossed to be running silent, or else there wouldn't have been a fuss in the first place.

One could envision armed rebellion on board -- makes for good hollywood flicks (sometimes) :lol:

Apparently it's standard for them to not have radio contact, and so they schedule predetermined times to make contact with "HQ". They simply missed one of these predetermined times. Although I'm sure you'll start to see plenty of bizaar reasons theorized by those silly CT'ers. :)

[Bogie]

I’m reading “Nimitz Class” by Patrick Robinson and when I first heard the “missing” report the theme of the book brought up the worst fears. In “Nimitz” an air craft carrier disappears from the middle of a Carrier Battle Group, a suspected nuclear accident.

Conspiracy theories forum might take this one up. They missed reporting in, the sub was taken over by hostile forces who finally forced the crew to report in with the lame excuse that they forget to call. I say we make the sub surface for boarding and investigation :).

[swansont]

I’m reading “Nimitz Class” by Patrick Robinson and when I first heard the “missing” report the theme of the book brought up the worst fears. In “Nimitz” an air craft carrier disappears from the middle of a Carrier Battle Group, a suspected nuclear accident.

Conspiracy theories forum might take this one up. They missed reporting in, the sub was taken over by hostile forces who finally forced the crew to report in with the lame excuse that they forget to call. I say we make the sub surface for boarding and investigation :).

A missing carrier and missing sub are very different scenarios. Subs are supposed to be "missing" most of the time.

But, addressing the latter point: since the communications are undoubtedly encrypted and follow certain protocols, it shouldn't be that difficult to send the equivalent of "we've been hijacked" in a way that the protagonists wouldn't know. (Unless it's a mutiny, and Gary Busey has taken over. Then Steven Seagal has to save the day)

[Larry Jacks]

Back in the 1960s, two American nuclear submarines failed to check in on time. They were the USS Thresher and USS Scorpion. Both were lost with all hands. That thought probably passed someone's mind when this sub failed to check in on time.

[Fazor]

Both were lost with all hands. That thought probably passed someone's mind when this sub failed to check in on time.

Thank heavens the rest of the body parts made it out! :) Sorry, jokes in bad taste are my forté. That, and certian phrases just bring the darndest mental images.

[Larry Jacks]

The Navy has a lot of sayings like that. For example, "Officers and men" as in "An Ohio class submarine is manned by 20 officers and 110 men" (or some such numbers). Does that mean officers can't be men? When they call out "all hands on deck", are they saying they can leave their heads behind?

But then, what do you expect from a service (unofficial motto: "200 years of tradition unhindered by progress") that calls latrines "heads", walls "bulkheads", floors "decks", and ceilings "overheads"? That and their enlisted rank structure makes them nearly incomprehensible to people from other services. What's a Bosun's Mate, much less a 2nd class one?

[Fazor]

That and their enlisted rank structure makes them nearly incomprehensible to people from other services. What's a Bosun's Mate, much less a 2nd class one?

Hmm...sounds like a fellow who walks funny, and not because of scurvy... ;)

[Doodler]

What's a Bosun's Mate, much less a 2nd class one?

Enlisted equivalent of the Officer of the Deck. A senior enlisted man who heads a deck crew assigned to a particular task. In the old days, they were the rigging masters. 2nd class means his official enlisted rate is probably Petty Officer, 2nd Class.

[swansont]

Enlisted equivalent of the Officer of the Deck. A senior enlisted man who heads a deck crew assigned to a particular task. In the old days, they were the rigging masters. 2nd class means his official enlisted rate is probably Petty Officer, 2nd Class.

Petty Officer is the generic term for any enlisted person E-4 to E-6, with a 2nd class petty officer being E-5. Bosun's mate, or more correctly Boatswain's mate, is one rate. Others are Electrician's mate, Machinists mate, and dozens more.

http://www.bluejacket.com/usn_ratings.html

[swansont]

Back in the 1960s, two American nuclear submarines failed to check in on time. They were the USS Thresher and USS Scorpion. Both were lost with all hands. That thought probably passed someone's mind when this sub failed to check in on time.

The Thresher was in contact. She was doing testing following an overhaul, so there were vessels accompanying her when her engine room flooded. Back then, that meant scramming the reactor and isolating the steam plant as standard procedure, so you had no means for propulsion. Any attempt to do an emergency blow of the ballast tanks (obviously) didn't work, and simply wouldn't, after some level of engine room flooding had occurred.

[swansont]

The Navy has a lot of sayings like that. For example, "Officers and men" as in "An Ohio class submarine is manned by 20 officers and 110 men" (or some such numbers). Does that mean officers can't be men? When they call out "all hands on deck", are they saying they can leave their heads behind?

But then, what do you expect from a service (unofficial motto: "200 years of tradition unhindered by progress") that calls latrines "heads", walls "bulkheads", floors "decks", and ceilings "overheads"? That and their enlisted rank structure makes them nearly incomprehensible to people from other services. What's a Bosun's Mate, much less a 2nd class one?

Oh, secure that whining. An O-3 from other services can be treated pretty well on a Navy base, for a while anyway. Just keep out of sight, calling yourself captain on the phone and enjoy it until they figure out you're an army/air force/marine captain and not a navy one (three steps higher in rank)

Make a hole so I can go down the ladder and rack out.

[Gillianren]

Petty Officer is the generic term for any enlisted person E-4 to E-6, with a 2nd class petty officer being E-5. Bosun's mate, or more correctly Boatswain's mate, is one rate. Others are Electrician's mate, Machinists mate, and dozens more.

http://www.bluejacket.com/usn_ratings.html

Wow. That officially means nothing to me!

Then again, the only way anyone was able to explain what my boyfriend actually does in the Army was by pointing out that he's essentially Radar O'Reilly.

[Jens]

Altho, a nuclear engineer *probably* indicates that there's a reactor ;)

Not necessarily. I think nuclear engineers need some quiet place to do research, where they can't be disturbed by phone calls, etc. A submarine is a great place to do it. They all have these little offices in the sub, and spend their time reading up and drawing up plans. :)

[swansont]

Wow. That officially means nothing to me!


Then my work here is done. And without using any acronyms or abbreviations, even!

[Gillianren]

Then my work here is done. And without using any acronyms or abbreviations, even!

Which is pretty much all my boyfriend would respond with when I asked him what he does in the Army. It took his mom to explain it to me so it made sense.

[Bob]

You can simulate life on a submarine in your own home.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/docs/simlife.htm

[mugaliens]

There's a label on the uniform of every soldier, regardless of national origin.

It reads "Expendable". You weren't under the impression that "die for your country" was hyperbole, were you?

Is that why submarine rescue crews exist on both coasts, with C-5s on alert to take them wherever they're needed?

[Doodler]

Is that why submarine rescue crews exist on both coasts, with C-5s on alert to take them wherever they're needed?

They expect to take losses, but that doesn't preclude preventing them where possible. Infantry units expect to take losses too, they also wear body armor. This is not contradictory.

[Fazor]

They expect to take losses, but that doesn't preclude preventing them where possible. Infantry units expect to take losses too, they also wear body armor. This is not contradictory.

Well, I think you're both just looking at the word "Expendable" differently (if it helps doodler, i've heard that saying before too).

Obviously the millitary, in any branch, is not going to send soldiers into a situation knowing they are going to be killed. It's not "lets throw bodies in there and hope some survive". And obviously they DO care about thier soldiers, it's not like they say "eh, 15 people died in that roadside ambush? send 15 more and see if there's any more bombs".

But you're point is valid doolde: it's war, they know there will be casualties. they don't know who and how many, and they never purposely throw thier soldies away, but it's understood that there is a chance lives will be lost. they take any steps they can to prevent it, but lives are still lost.

[Doodler]

I think anyone who climbs inside of a steel tube that sits hundreds of feet below the surface who doesn't consider the very real possibility that the odds of a non-fatal accident involving the operation of said vehicle are astronomically slim probably doesn't have too solid a grasp on reality.

Slamming into a mountain, being hulled by a torpedo, surfacing under a fishing boat or having any kind of non-passive equipment failure involving explosives... On the surface, these are a dangerous problem. Add to that being deep underwater with nowhere to go overboard that won't kill you quicker raises the stakes dramatically. They keep those rescue crews on next-to-zero notice because anything that does happen on those boats, you've got about that much time to mobilize if you expect to get anyone out alive. Just having something go wrong down there means someone's already dead, or will be by the time you arrive. That's not callousness, that's just the realities of working in a bloody hostile environment.

[Swift]

You can simulate life on a submarine in your own home.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/docs/simlife.htm
:lol:
Reminds me of a Steven Wright line: "I like to fill my tub up with water, then turn the shower on and act like I'm in a submarine that's been hit."

(I used to actually do that when I was a kid :shifty: )

[Fazor]

That still doesn't mean they're throwing their lives away. And it's not necessarily true. My grandfather was stationed on a sub during WWII. They struck sand and were grounded for about 5 days IIRC, although might have only been two or three. Anyway they made it out alive. So not every accident means instant death.

You ride in cars right? I'm sure you go up to 60-70mph on the highway. You hit something stationary, or worse yet, something moving toward you, at those speeds and you are (barring a miracle) not going to live. So do you consider yourself expendable because you choose to ride in cars?

My point is yes, there are tons of things that can kill a submariner. But there's also tons and tons of things designed to try to keep that from happening.