Jump to content

Seawolf attack Sub Connecticut "hit something" under the South China Sea

AUS-97HORN

By AUS-97HORN
in Daily Texan

 Share

Recommended Posts

FartingMonk

FartingMonk 3606

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Bobby_Batronic said:

I wasn’t so much thinking buoyancy as having the same motor push an additional 2000+ tons through the water. But you bring up an interesting point. I imagine speed and acceleration isn’t everything in a world where outrunning a torpedo is unlikely, but I’m sure it still provides options in all kinds of tactical situations. 
 

Kinda the opposite supposition for the all cruise missile Ohios. Did they weigh significantly less than the traditional boomers, and if so did they perform better in the fat Seawolf role?

There were challenges in the ISR role when it came to shallow water ops.  But a lot of that was overcome just due to training and figuring out actual limitations.  Spec ops you were capable of putting up with a whole SEAL battalion and not even notice they were there.  I think Florida had buoyancy issues when they shot their entire payload at Libya.  105 or so tomahawks but it wasn't an issue because Libya didn't have a navy.  

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Macanudo

Macanudo 12917

Posted
Posted
On 10/28/2021 at 10:15 PM, FartingMonk said:

 Spec ops you were capable of putting up with a whole SEAL battalion and not even notice they were there.  

Do you means an entire Seal Team (around 95 people) or a platoon (16)?   I don't think a sub has near enough room to stick 95 more bodies on it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 27250

Posted
Posted

USNI: Investigation Concludes USS Connecticut Grounded on Uncharted Seamount in South China Sea

Investigators have determined USS Connecticut (SSN-22) hit an uncharted seamount that grounded the nuclear attack submarine on the underwater feature in the South China Sea Navy, USNI News has learned.

The results of the command investigation into the Oct. 2 incident, completed last week, have now been passed up to U.S. 7th Fleet commander Vice Adm. Karl Thomas for review and to determine if there will be any additional accountability actions over the incident, a legislative source and two defense officials that are familiar with the findings told USNI News on Monday.

“The investigation determined USS Connecticut grounded on an uncharted seamount while operating in international waters in the Indo-Pacific region,” 7th Fleet spokesperson Cmdr. Hayley Sims told USNI News in a Monday afternoon statement following an earlier version of this post. “Commander, U.S. 7th Fleet will determine whether follow-on actions, including accountability, are appropriate.”

The damage to the forward section of the submarine damaged its ballast tanks and prompted Connecticut to make a week-long voyage on the surface from the South China Sea to Guam, USNI News understands. The Navy has said repeatedly that the submarine’s nuclear reactor and propulsion system are undamaged.

The boat is in currently in Guam undergoing initial repairs overseen by Naval Sea Systems Command, personnel from the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and submarine tender USS Emory S. Land (AS-39).

Link to comment
Share on other sites
AUS-97HORN

AUS-97HORN 11644

Posted
  • Author
Posted

I really hope The Navy eventually comes out with a more specific story. 

 

Because as a normal citizen (who understands that in the military the buck stops with the commander/captain), hearing that for a 2nd time in 20 years that a US sub ran into another UNDOCUMENTED seamount and The Navy's instant response is to sack the Captain, his XO and Chief of Boat  

The article says "Navy officials say the crew members "could have prevented" the collision."

OK, I honestly want to hear what they mean by that.

if the seamount is undocumented and the sub is following the maps and contours of the maps PROVIDED BY THE NAVY,  and a fucking 300 Foot tall underwater mountain isnt fucking listed on the charts, how in the holy fuck are the commanders supposed to prevent that?

[the 300 foot number is me just throwing that out there no idea how tall it was or how deep they were]

Now, if it turns out there are warnings on the charts that say the entire area has only been mapped to the 150 meter mark  -meaning the chart guarantees there not being any ocean floor ABOVE that example 150 meter mark, and they smashed into something BELOW that level  at the 300 foot mark, then yes, I fully understand how the Captain would be responsible in that situation.

But if his charts told him the ocean floor was 450 meters deep and they hit the undocumented mount at the 100-150 meter depth, I want a much better explanation how the commanders of the sub could have fucking done anything to prevent that. 

 

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Captainant

Captainant 27250

Posted
Posted
39 minutes ago, AUS-97HORN said:

But if his charts told him the ocean floor was 450 meters deep and they hit the undocumented mount at the 100-150 meter depth, I want a much better explanation how the commanders of the sub could have fucking done anything to prevent that. 

I'd bet there was an alternative course available that had fewer unknowns/whathaveyous/macguffins to deal with, and that's what the Navy is hanging on the boat's command officers

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Schulz2.0

Schulz2.0 28710

Posted
Posted
54 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I'd bet there was an alternative course available that had fewer unknowns/whathaveyous/macguffins to deal with, and that's what the Navy is hanging on the boat's command officers

Removing the CO, XO, COB is just the standard procedure. Were they actually at fault? Maybe, but it's just as likely they're the scapegoats for this fuckup.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Popular Post
BillyGoatHill

BillyGoatHill 4276

Posted
  • Popular Post
Posted (edited)
On 10/12/2021 at 1:28 PM, MidTexHorn said:

During my time in the Air Force in the late 80s-early 90s I got a chance to fly on a Navy P-3 while they were looking for Soviet subs transiting to the Pacific under the polar ice cap. Flew up to the edge of the ice cap from Eielson AFB outside of Fairbanks. Probably the most fun I had in the AF. We saw an Oscar class cruise missile sub and a Delta IV class ballistic missile sub on the surface - flew right by the Delta IV and two guys up top waived at us. Dropping the sonobouys out of the hole in the floor of the plane was pretty damn cool as was listening to the sonar readings on the subs - props sounded like a washing machine. Navy guys were a lot more chill than the AF and they cooked up some great food on the way back. Top 5 day all time for me.

CSB....😀

Here's some pics from my cool (COLD as F*ck 😬) story.

I was also AF and went to the icecap in '85 and '86 in support of a joint civilian/USNavy "Research" team (drilling holes in the ice and dropping sonar bouys to track Ivan's subs). '85 was small support/supply drop and was only on the ice for 3 days. Went well, and they had us back the following year and I spent 3 weeks up there. Many drops and airlands on the ice with the camp being built up to around around 50 people (USN and civilians)when we left late March/early April. I wish we could have stayed until May to see the subs break through.

command-tent.jpg

southexposure.jpeg

astrid-sub.jpg

north-pole.jpg

IMG_0596.jpg

Edited by BillyGoatHill
  • Hook 'Em 18
  • Like 2
  • Drool 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
MidTexHorn

MidTexHorn 822

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, BillyGoatHill said:

CSB....😀

Here's some pics from my cool (COLD ass) story.

I was also AF and went to the icecap in '85 and '86 in support of a joint civilian/USNavy "Research" team (drilling holes in the ice and dropping sonar bouys to track Ivan's subs). '85 was small support/supply drop and was only on the ice for 3 days. Went well, and they had us back the following year and I spent 3 weeks up there. Many drops and airlands on the ice with the camp being built up to around around 50 people (USN and civilians)when we left late March/early April. I wish we could have stayed until May to see the subs break through.

command-tent.jpg

southexposure.jpeg

astrid-sub.jpg

north-pole.jpg

IMG_0596.jpg

That’s a unique experience for sure. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
BillyGoatHill

BillyGoatHill 4276

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, MidTexHorn said:

That’s a unique experience for sure. 

Without a doubt.🤘

I mostly forget about it until it comes back up in some silly conversation or reading about others Military experience or cool stories like yours.

The funniest story being when my daughter was about 5 or 6 years old.

She didn't live with me full time (divorced when she was 2.5/3) and I got her like every other Christmas as she and the ex had moved out of state (whole 'nother story). Anyway she was going through some picture albums and saw one of me basically encrusted with ice around my face being on the ice cap. She asked where the picture was from and my wife (now) stated, "That's from when your dad went to the North Pole....!"

My daughter's eyes lit up (and due to the time of year and her age) she blurted out "The North Pole? DID YOU SEE SANTA????!!!!" I gave my wife a, uh....."Thanks for that answer look" and quickly said "Yes, I saw him and I met him". Of course that was followed by "So please be good or I'll have to let him know and he won't bring you any presents if you were bad.....🤷‍♂️ 😀! The ruse worked great for a few more years ( for her anyway) but of course she told ALL of her younger cousins the story and of course I had to REPEAT the tale to them too throughout the years.....

Of course, in time, the truth was learned by ALL of them.

But I still use the line on them (they are all in their upper teens, mid twenties now).....Those that DO NOT BELIEVE, DO NOT RECEIVE. They know I am the sucker Uncle and say YES!, they do BELIEVE and I give those that show up to our annual Christmas Party (If you show, You get the Dough) a $100 bill.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
FartingMonk

FartingMonk 3606

Posted
Posted
On 11/1/2021 at 10:03 AM, Macanudo said:

Do you means an entire Seal Team (around 95 people) or a platoon (16)?   I don't think a sub has near enough room to stick 95 more bodies on it.  

https://www.navy.mil/Resources/Fact-Files/Display-FactFiles/Article/2169613/guided-missile-submarines-ssgn/

 

We called it SOF berthing.  Also the reason. We never hot racked on an SSGN.  (Mostly)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
El Diablo

El Diablo 4232

Posted
Posted

Somewhere in the future...

"Honey, get your shoes on, we're going to visit Gramps at the VA home"
"Aw mom, he's old and smells, and he talks crazy"
"That's no way to talk about your Grampaw! He's had a hard life. When he was younger he was a great Captain in the Navy you know, he even has a mountain named in his honor."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...