Skip to comments.
Navy photos of Submarine USS San Francisco in Dry Dock (you won't believe the extent of damage!)
U.S. Navy ^
Posted on 01/27/2005 12:42:24 PM PST by Boot Hill
The amount of damage is simply staggering!
That this boat ever made it back to port is a tribute to its designers, builders, and especially to the crew and captain. How does America keep finding men like these?
High resolution version here
High resolution version here
TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: grounding; guam; navy; ssn711; submarine; usssanfrancisco
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 461-480, 481-500, 501-520 ... 541-554 next last
To: Eaker
You post states that on the boat's chart there were no obstacles within three miles. That supports my position and defeats yours that the captain was not prudent.
481
posted on
01/28/2005 6:58:04 PM PST
by
WildTurkey
(When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
To: Popman
I don't know jack about submarine construction, but I seriously doubt these subs are built with a modular design concept. The bulk head is probably modular for safety reasons, but the guts are probably integrated assembly. Of course I could be 100% wrong.How does 50% sound? The LA class boats were built 'the old-fashioned' way; the pressure hull itself was a series of cylinders welded together with bulkheads installed as approriate, and equipment installed as one went along.
The newer Virginia class boats are built modularly with, say, compartment 'A' built at EB in Groton and shipped down to Norfolk to be joined up to compartment 'B' at Newport-News.
482
posted on
01/28/2005 6:58:36 PM PST
by
IonImplantGuru
(PhD, School of Hard Knocks)
To: Eaker
The officials said the main chart on the submarine, prepared in 1989 and never revised, did not show any potential obstacles within three miles of the crash. Thank you for providing a link to that thread which you said I had not bothered to read. If you notice, I posted about 15 posts and was posted to about the same number. Strike TWO!
483
posted on
01/28/2005 6:59:33 PM PST
by
WildTurkey
(When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
To: amigatec
The below image is the closest I could find to "angles and dangles." Imagine the image below with the bow going up and down while it tilts side to side.....but of course, not nearly as fast as the image.
484
posted on
01/28/2005 7:01:08 PM PST
by
El Gran Salseron
( The replies by this poster are meant for self-amusement only. Read at your own risk. :-))
To: Eaker
"The new information about the charting flaws "
Found AFTER the incident. I don't think the CO can be called negligent if it was not known to the Navy until AFTER the incident.
STRIKE THREE!
485
posted on
01/28/2005 7:01:22 PM PST
by
WildTurkey
(When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
To: SS Guy
Without getting too technical, the outer doors are intimately linked through pivots, pins, hydraulic actuators, frames, interlocks, and hull structure to the outer door (22" dia pressure tight hatches, latched shut) and the shutter doors (rectangular non-watertight plates = those plates people are calling outer doors, as you pointed out) and the TT themselves.
All are actuated at the same time by these links and pivots and slides in the watertight HP impulse tanks, the rams, and the fill slides: But what's worse than these getting destroyed and moved into the pressure hull, is the physical movement (even of "only" a few inches) of the two port side torpedo tubes themselves getting "jammed" aft into the pressure hull. Two stiff 22" tubes getting rammed aft with all that impact pressure on the small welds around the tubes would put incredible stress on the hull in localized areas that would very likely bend the pressure hull.
Yield strength (when the hull will bend and permanently distort) on these metals is 1/4 - 1/5 the ultimate breaking strength. So bending, but not penetration of cracks, is very likely. Invisible where these photo's are taken.
Granted, they did NOT dislodge- else the boat would have sunk. Nor (apparently) did the steel and welds attaching the TT and impulse tanks necessarily break in wide cracks, but even if the welds cracked "only a little" you'd be months grinding and rewelding.
486
posted on
01/28/2005 7:03:25 PM PST
by
Robert A Cook PE
(I can only donate monthly, but Kerry's ABBCNNBCBS continue to lie every day!)
To: El Gran Salseron
The below image is the closest I could find to "angles and dangles." Imagine the image below with the bow going up and down while it tilts side to side.....but of course, not nearly as fast as the image.Except when you have a Russian sub headed straight for you at 30+ knots ...
487
posted on
01/28/2005 7:04:46 PM PST
by
WildTurkey
(When will CBS Retract and Apologize?)
To: Poohbah
Im currently attached to the boat. We went through an ERO before coming out to Guam, so fuel is the reason decomm isnt the "only" answer.
The boat does have 3 buckles in the superstructure running forward from about the capstan. Itll be a few weeks before we know the fate.
To: iconoclast
See if I got this straight ... these guys totaled a gaziilion dollar sub by running it into a mountain, and they're heroes?Educate yourself, Bozo, before you spout a comment like that. Read this entire thread or scan through the several other threads about the San Francisco incident.
My opinion, as an 11 year submarine vet? You're f***ing aye ditty bag, these guys are heros. Naah, I'll modify that slightly: these guys are superb submariners that got a nasty surprise, could have lost their boat and all hands, but dealt with the casualty and got their boat back to home port.
God bless 'em all.
489
posted on
01/28/2005 8:11:58 PM PST
by
IonImplantGuru
(PhD, School of Hard Knocks)
To: WildTurkey
"Except when you have a Russian sub headed straight for you at 30+ knots ..."True enough. :-)
490
posted on
01/28/2005 8:26:44 PM PST
by
El Gran Salseron
( The replies by this poster are meant for self-amusement only. Read at your own risk. :-))
To: IMRight
You know what? Now that I look at it... the Long Beach is prettier like this. That was one ugly silhouette.Maybe. But let me relate a true tale: 1966, I'm on a carrier Kitty Hawk) in the Gulf of Tonkin. Long Beach manuvers along side for an unrep. (For non Navy folks, that's UNderway REPlenishment.) We highline them provisions, mail, some new movies, and ammo. Getting ready to separate, a bagpiper steps out on the port bridge wing of the cruiser and, when the connections are severed, begins playing Amazing Grace as she peels away.
All you hear (remember the Long beach is nuclear powered, so there's no combustion or stack noise) as the distance increases between us is the slowly fading sounds of the pipes and her wake noise. Makes me shiver just to remember it.
She wasn't ugly then. I cried... so sue me.
491
posted on
01/28/2005 8:28:37 PM PST
by
IonImplantGuru
(PhD, School of Hard Knocks)
To: WildTurkey
Rigging for angles and dangles in Maneuvering meant for the EO to put the RO's cig into the ashtray, the RO's coffee cup off of his panel and wake him up so that he wouldn't hit his head.BTDT! ROFLMAO.
- Ex-RO
492
posted on
01/28/2005 8:33:02 PM PST
by
IonImplantGuru
(PhD, School of Hard Knocks)
To: IonImplantGuru
There was a couple of time out on patrol that the Schullers would pop out of nowhere and the soundings would be significantly off. Charts are pretty accurate but they are not accurately accurate.
I always hated shooting the transit box. the game was to always be on the front end of the box because 1 trip to PD would easily cause the boat to suddenly find itself at the back end of the box, especially if a new opord was coming in.
Heroes the crew is. I can't imagine the fright and the what the f*#$ was that.
I am shocked the pressure hull held up. I can't imagine wha would have happended if it was a VLS hull....
Good read brings back a lot of memories..
Scott
Nav ET (before the rate consolidation)
To: El Gran Salseron
Thanks for the info!
I was a Tank Mechanic and worked on a version of the M60 called a M728 CEV (Combat Engineer Vehicle), the same thing used on the Branch Davidian's in Waco.
I just have a thing for Sub's.
494
posted on
01/29/2005 5:38:17 AM PST
by
amigatec
(There are no significant bugs in our software... Maybe you're not using it properly.- Bill Gates)
To: Robert A. Cook, PE
I'd use use her for a new reactor training boat. Keep it pierside.When I was in Charleston there was talk of adding a retiring 688 to the two S5W Moored Training Ships. Since all of the S5W boats were going away it seemed to make more sense to train the nukes on a more modern powerplant. I think you have just made the case to do this.
To: Robert A. Cook, PE
DR. Cook -- I agree with your post. Wasn't trying to minimize the damage at all. Just wanted the other FReepers to realize the outer portion of the boat is not the pressure hull.
Your point about the torp tubes is right on.
Bottom line, I wouldn't want to test-dive that boat after "repairs". ;-)
496
posted on
01/29/2005 7:59:16 AM PST
by
Blueflag
(Res ipsa loquitor)
To: xrp
I wonder if the sub would be considered a total loss.If they have the same car insurance company that I have...it is. Of course, a wrecked bumper, a fender, and a grill is considered "totaled" these days...
FWIW-
497
posted on
01/29/2005 8:04:30 AM PST
by
Osage Orange
("We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." - Hillary Rodham Clinton)
To: amigatec
"I was a Tank Mechanic"In the early 80s my nephew was 1 college credit away from a degree. He decided to join the Army. Of course, being one credit away I would have thought that the Army would have sent him to OCS.
El wrongo!
They had him driving some kind of personnel transport vehicle that kinda looked like a tank.
He's now an attorney in the Denver area.
498
posted on
01/29/2005 8:16:31 AM PST
by
El Gran Salseron
( The replies by this poster are meant for self-amusement only. Read at your own risk. :-))
To: WildTurkey
I posted from memory because you were too lazy to go back and look at the threads.
I stand by my very first post on this subject as you have certainly proven it accurate.
499
posted on
01/29/2005 8:39:09 AM PST
by
Eaker
("I am a Scientist ..................... and that was fast for me.")
To: SS Guy
I still think Wadle got a raw deal.Cdr. Scott Waddle admits that he screwed up. He wrote a book about it. And before this starts a flame war, I have a lot of respect for him. But consider this:
1. He allowed an unqualified Sonar Tech to man one of the watchstations.
2. No proper baffle clear.
3. No proper TMA legs to obtain solutions on the contacts.
4. Contact Coordinator station not manned and the sonar repeater in the Control Room was inop with no compensatory action specified
5. Periscope sweep was too short to ensure clear ahead for the Emergency Blow.
6. The ST was too intimidated to question the CO's "no close contacts" call and moved his solution on the Ehime Maru from 1800 yds to 10,000 yds without notifying anyone.
7. The Greenville was EAST of the Submarine Op Area by a large margin.
Bottom line: Cdr. Waddle cut too many corners and the Big Ocean Theory of contact avoidance didn't work that time.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 461-480, 481-500, 501-520 ... 541-554 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson