Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Nuclear Submarine Runs Aground South of Guam
The Associated Press ^ | Jan 8, 2005 | The Associated Press

Posted on 01/08/2005 3:19:47 AM PST by Jet Jaguar

HONOLULU (AP) - A nuclear submarine ran aground about 350 miles south of Guam, injuring several sailors, one of them critically, the Navy said.

There were no reports of damage to the USS San Francisco's reactor plant, which was operating normally, the Navy said.

Jon Yoshishige, a spokesman for the U.S. Pacific Fleet based at Pearl Harbor, said the Friday afternoon incident is under investigation and the 360-foot submarine was headed back to its home port in Guam.

Details on the sailors' injuries were not immediately available. The sub has a crew of 137, officials said.

Military and Coast Guard aircraft from Guam were en route to monitor the submarine and assist if needed, the Navy said.

Guam is a U.S. territory about 3,700 miles southwest of Hawaii.

---

On the Net:

U.S. Pacific Fleet: http://www.cpf.navy.mil

AP-ES-01-08-05 0343EST


TOPICS: Breaking News; Government; US: Hawaii
KEYWORDS: guam; shipwreck; silentservice; ssn711; submarine; usn; usssanfrancisco
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460461-480481-500 ... 1,101-1,102 next last
To: FrPR; fastattacksailor

http://www.npt.nuwc.navy.mil/Seneca/hlc/graphics/heavy.jpg

You pinging something? 8<)

Funny, to see a picture of a USN sonar sphere submerged off of Guam, you can look at an image of a crane advertisement!


461 posted on 01/08/2005 10:56:12 AM PST by Robert A Cook PE (I can only donate monthly, but Kerry's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 452 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE
You really don't want the "pleasure" of playing with SUBROC's.

Roger that. I get the feeling that the removal of tactical nukes by Bush 41 was a relief to many fast boat sailors. They would prefer to let the "boomer fags" deal with that headache.

462 posted on 01/08/2005 10:56:44 AM PST by CenturionM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 415 | View Replies]

To: woofer
So....you're gonna defend the Captain?

He's an American, one who's spent years in service of this country. You gonna tear him up?

463 posted on 01/08/2005 10:59:22 AM PST by HairOfTheDog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar
When a sub runs aground with a water-cooled nuclear reactor, doesn't the reactor's cooling system start sucking mud into the reactor instead of sea water? I'm pretty sure mud doesn't have the same heat transfer and flow characteristics as sea water. I suspect there is a downplay of the threat to the reactor in this article.
464 posted on 01/08/2005 11:00:36 AM PST by Rockitz (After all these years, it's still rocket science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robert A. Cook, PE

Go figure, right?

Weird seeing it like that.....


465 posted on 01/08/2005 11:03:15 AM PST by fastattacksailor (The US without the UN is like not having your mother-in-law with you on your honeymoon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 461 | View Replies]

To: battlegearboat

I'm not trying to give you a hard time. I just thought you were making a joke and I was appreciating your subtle humor.


466 posted on 01/08/2005 11:03:37 AM PST by Dan Cooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 451 | View Replies]

To: ErnBatavia

A submerged sub would hardly notice it aside from a slight change in pressure. In the open ocean the amplitude of the wave is miniscule and the frequency is huge.


467 posted on 01/08/2005 11:04:13 AM PST by Axenolith (This space for rent...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: fastattacksailor

You bet I will.


468 posted on 01/08/2005 11:04:54 AM PST by Nimitz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 439 | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar

Bump to read replies later


469 posted on 01/08/2005 11:06:32 AM PST by hattend (Liberals! Beware the Perfect Rovian Storm (All Hail, Chimpus Khan!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dan Cooper
Glad you made that clarification.

And prayers up bump.

470 posted on 01/08/2005 11:07:31 AM PST by Miss Behave (Beloved daughter of Miss Creant, super sister of danged Miss Ology, and proud mother of Miss Hap.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 466 | View Replies]

To: Caipirabob; All
The sub's sonar didn't change any. Wouldn't want to be him.

People, people, people: subs in general don't use active sonar while underway. In peace time we don't want to give out free info to 'the other guys' on what frequencies and sound profiles our acttive sonar uses, lest they find counter-measures. In war time, the only time one would go active is to acquire final targetting info for torpedoes or missles. If you go active, 'they' can get a fix on where you are.

Subs DO use a fathometer while underway, but in the deep ocean it doesn't tell you a lot. It's mainly used for shallow water (less than a few thousand feet) operation. However! No one knows where every single sea-mount or underwater pinnacle is. Many are uncharted. At high speed, the suckers can sneak up on you.

One of my boats (USS Scamp) hit an uncharted seamount at speed in the late 60s - not that far from this region! - causeing severe damage (screw trashed, lower rudder gone, big gash in bottom of ballast tank, etc.) and had to be towed into Guam for repairs. I don't think the skipper was canned; what can he do if the hazard is unknown and he has orders to get from point A to point B at all possible speed?

As many true sub vets have noted, it's way too early to cast any judgement yet. As an aside, the skipper of the San Francisco is LCDR Kevin Mooney, a terrific officer that I've communicated with accasionally on submarine BBS's, prior to his assuming command. Sometimes bad juju happens to good people.

- Just another sub vet; SSN 588, SSBN 629B, SSN 669

471 posted on 01/08/2005 11:07:54 AM PST by IonImplantGuru (PhD, School of Hard Knocks)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz
When a sub runs aground with a water-cooled nuclear reactor, doesn't the reactor's cooling system start sucking mud into the reactor instead of sea water?

No. In a pressurized water reactor the seawater does not come in contact with the reactor. No China Syndrome here. If they are steaming back to Guam the reactor is okay. Godspeed them on their way.

472 posted on 01/08/2005 11:09:25 AM PST by CenturionM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 464 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz

When a sub runs aground with a water-cooled nuclear reactor, doesn't the reactor's cooling system start sucking mud into the reactor instead of sea water? I'm pretty sure mud doesn't have the same heat transfer and flow characteristics as sea water. I suspect there is a downplay of the threat to the reactor in this article.



Not the way the system works at all. Seawater and reactor plant completely isolated from each other. Can't go into details, but I will say have been nuc submariner the last 28 years.


473 posted on 01/08/2005 11:10:18 AM PST by Borntowade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 464 | View Replies]

Prayers to all aboard and families ashore


474 posted on 01/08/2005 11:11:09 AM PST by CivilWolf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 471 | View Replies]

To: Dan Cooper
fair enuf

Driving a bathtub is no easy task, either on the high seas empty or a curvy enemy infested river.

That picture, I have many like it.

First thing out the ramp was the bbq pits and beer.

Sorry to blow my stack.

475 posted on 01/08/2005 11:11:51 AM PST by battlegearboat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 466 | View Replies]

To: IonImplantGuru

CDR Kevin Mooney is a really good submarine officer. They dont make them much better.

I've seen his posts on Submarine BBS's as well.

Submarines are basically a dangerous business. Things can happen that will hurt you. These guys deserve every bit of support that we can give them.


476 posted on 01/08/2005 11:16:27 AM PST by judicial meanz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 471 | View Replies]

To: BIGLOOK

Certainly! I'm spent enough time on SPECOP with an augmented 'Q-4 to get to be friends with quite a few spooks.


477 posted on 01/08/2005 11:16:37 AM PST by Doohickey ("This is a hard and dirty war, but when it's over, nothing will ever be too difficult again.”)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 391 | View Replies]

To: Rockitz; fastattacksailor
When a sub runs aground with a water-cooled nuclear reactor, doesn't the reactor's cooling system start sucking mud into the reactor instead of sea water? I'm pretty sure mud doesn't have the same heat transfer and flow characteristics as sea water. I suspect there is a downplay of the threat to the reactor in this article.

Yes. And no.

See - If you run aground .. And you hit a flat, muddy bottom. And you stay there. For more than a few seconds. You probably will suck muddy water up into the SEAWATER system. Then that water "might" stay in the seawater side of the seawater-engineroom fresh water heat exchanger and a few other secondary coolers in the auxiliary seawater system - which, if left there for a long time, might reduce (not eliminate!) "some" of the engineroom fresh water heat exchange capability. (And those smaller heat exchangers can be flushed out to get rid of the mud, or even isolated, opened up, and cleaned out by hand if it's really, really badly clogged up.)

Now, IF you stayed on this muddy bottom for long, long time, you probably would suck muddy water into the main engine heat exchanger - but THAT won't affect the reactor since the main engine condenser is used only to cool stream going to the propeller turbine: But if you're stuck on the bottom, you're NOT running the propeller, so you don't have lots of water flowing at high speed though the ME condensor anyway.

(It's kind of a self-eliminating problem. If you're running the main engine, you not stuck on the bottom and aren't in danger of getting muddy water in the seawater system. If you stuck on the bottom, you're not running the main engine for long periods of time at high speed.)

BUT ...

The reactor itself ISN'T cooled by any of these systems (Directly, at least.) So, no matter what happened to the outside of the submarine, and to the seawater heat exchangers inside the submarine, the reactor can keep running without incidents. (Without drawing classified drawings of the reactor support systems - that's about as far as I want to explain things.)

478 posted on 01/08/2005 11:17:57 AM PST by Robert A Cook PE (I can only donate monthly, but Kerry's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 464 | View Replies]

To: Red Sea Swimmer
down into the Marianas Trench. The trench is deeper than the height of Mt.Everest.

Yes but not nearly as snowy.......
479 posted on 01/08/2005 11:18:21 AM PST by festus (The constitution may be flawed but its a whole lot better than what we have now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Doohickey

Please add me to your ping list. 28 years of riding boats and still not tired of them!


480 posted on 01/08/2005 11:19:12 AM PST by Borntowade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 477 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 441-460461-480481-500 ... 1,101-1,102 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson