Navy photos of Submarine USS San Francisco in Dry Dock (you won't believe the extent of damage!)

U.S. Navy ^

[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

[Robert A Cook PE]

But no "mountain" (no land or "seamount" or shallow water or island or anything else) was on the chart.

How is the CO supposed to miss something that's not there?

The undersea plain was marked at regular intervals with 5000-6000 feet soundings in the nearby 30 mile area. One dashed circle (near, but not across the sub's path) was marked "reported discolored water" - but no soundings changed, no date, no report what (or who) reported the "discolored water."

It is now suspected that this "discolored water" was a space (satellite) report that was caused by the seamount.

Still no actual soundings or undersea survey of the area is reported in the unclassified reports at least.

Guam isn't an "old" sub repair or staging area - there's not been enough budget or time yet to fully survey that area -> There was no Russian sub activity, and the Chinese didn't go that far. So our boats didn't either.

[Boot Hill]

8	“The undersea plain was marked at regular intervals with 5000-6000 feet soundings in the nearby 30 mile area. One dashed circle (near, but not across the sub's path) was marked 'reported discolored water' - but no soundings changed, no date, no report what (or who) reported the 'discolored water'.”

This may be the chart you were thinking of. I thought posting it again might help clarify the matter.

Note:   This is a portion of the 1989 DMA chart number 81133, that has been annotated by the New York Times. It was originally posted by "neverdem" here: "Submarine Crash Shows Navy Had Gaps in Mapping System".

I can't tell for sure just how much the NYT altered the chart. Did they add the dashed circle? Did they add the course line? Did they add the notation about "Discolored Water Rep"? Nevertheless, the depth markings (fathoms?) clearly show the area to be very deep water and free from any designated shoaling.

Since this issue is not going away for awhile, it might be in our (FR's) interest to contact the NGA (nee, DMA) and procure a copy of this chart.

--Boot Hill

[WildTurkey]

Didn't we call it service air. I remember we always had a little "rule" about test depth pressure.

[WildTurkey]

As noted in another thread, that map looks suspicious. Doesn't look like one they would navigate by, the legend says "MILES" and the NYT annotation says depth in "METERS".

[Boot Hill]

I agree, but the NYT times admits up-front that it annotated the chart, and that clearly would apply to the phrase "water depth in meters" at the top right, the scale added at the bottom right, and (imo) to the dashed circle. I say we contact NGA and get ourselves a copy of that chart.

--Boot Hill

[deaconjim]

You are absolutely right. My bad.

1 Thessalonians 5:17-18:

"Pray without ceasing. In every thing give thanks: for this is the will of God in Christ Jesus concerning you."

[Al B.]

Way to go EB!!!!!

EB didn't build the San Francisco...didn't design it either.

Newport News did.

[SSN VET]

This is not the fist time a sub buried it's nose in a mountain. In the mid to late 80's a 637 class, I don't remember the name, ran into an underwater mountain off the coast of San Diego. I was stationed there when it happened. It was put up in dry dock next to our sub. The damage was very similar. It was decomed because the torpedo tubes were knocked out of alignment. When a sub is built the torpedo tubes have to be in perfect alignment so the fire control equipment has an accurate point of reference when a weapon is fired. If the alignment is slightly off, it would would greatly reduce the accuracy of the solution that was fed to the weapon at time of firing. The shipyards use lasers to align the tubes when it was built. The 637 was actually stuck for several hours. It took two emergency blows and back emergency to free itself. Between the emergency blows they had to recharge the 4500 psi tanks which took several hours.

[Racky]

I served on a fast attack sub, just like this one, for 4 years. Only time the helmsman and plainsmen ("drivers") are strapped in is during major maneuvering events and fast speeds. Don't know how fast this sub was going. Can tell you that people did go flying around on impact.

[justshutupandtakeit]

That is one argument I never accepted from him or anyone else. He is no more intelligent than his old man and since I got through school without relying on that one I told him he damn well better too.

It is not as though I put up an unattainable goal for him. I told him "all I ask is NOT to hear from your teachers." That barely made it past third grade.

Nuke school is busting his butt but good though. He says "Dad some of those guys are CRAZY smart." LoL.

[justshutupandtakeit]

My boys are a credit to any parent can't say I did that much. Except to show my appreciation for patriots and clear thinkers.

[Lakeside]

Hahaha. "...some of those guys are CRAZY smart." My oldest son was going through nuke school two years ago and that was HIS thought, too!

[justshutupandtakeit]

Arlen calls me often and tells me the latest lingo amongst the guys. That's some funny stuff. Hope your boy is doing well thanks to him for his devotion.

[Lakeside]

Yep, he's doing just great. There's something special about bubbleheads esp. when that bubblehead's your son. Give Arlen our best.

[txsublax]

My son is on a Fast-Attack Submarine and is stationed in Guam. He word for what had happen... "DAMN!!!"

Since you are a Navy parent, there is a forum that is NMOL... navymomonline.net ... Check out to see if it is your cup of tea...

[justshutupandtakeit]

Thanks fellow Bubblehead parent.

[lertie32]

------
""See if I got this straight ... these guys totaled a gaziilion dollar sub by running it into a mountain, and they're heroes?"

While on a mission ordered by the Navy, and traveling a route directed by the Navy, you take a 160 men in a 7,000 ton sub traveling at 35 knots and collide head on with an uncharted underwater seamount at a depth of 525 feet and you still manage to surface the vessel and return to home port with the loss of only one life, then you bet your sweet ass, these guys are heroes.

You should be ashamed for having asked.

--Boot Hill"
------

HOO-YA!


PING...
Wow.

My brother is an LT on one of these, and it definitely is a proud moment for bubblehead families that the SanFran made it home. Regardless of blame or innocence on the CO, one sailor was lost and everyone made it home... Bittersweet and something to remember. All members of all service branches give part or all of themselves in service and deserve commendation for a job well done.

As a side note, is there any relevance to the major earthquakes/tsunami events 2 weeks prior, and could that have affected underwater land masses and locations in the area of the SanFran collision?

[Boot Hill]

(WildTurkey: See link at bottom for some wild speculation.)

8	“As a side note, is there any relevance to the major earthquakes/tsunami events 2 weeks prior, and could that have affected underwater land masses and locations in the area of the SanFran collision?”

I'm not a geologist, but I did sleep at a Holiday Express last night!

According to the DMA chart in post #522, above, the reported soundings in the vicinity of the grounding area were 6,000 feet (give or take). To my knowledge, a terrestrial based geologic upward change in topography of over a mile in height occurring within only a two week period, either on land or under the sea, is simply unheard of anywhere in the geologic history of the earth.

Furthermore, it begs credibility that such a change could occur today, unnoticed by the thousands of seismic sensors around the globe, which would have pinpointed such an event. Keep in mind that these seismic sensors are sensitive enough to detect and pinpoint a magnitude 1 quarry blast.

I don't give it ANY credibility, but in the interests of fair disclosure, there are some who are speculating that such shifts occurred (at least near the quake epicenter, 3,557 statute miles away from where the submarine grounded) and according to the link below, the U.S. Navy is involved in answering the question as to just how much under sea vertical and horizontal shift in topography actually occurred as the result of the earthquake (not the tsunami).

See "U.S. Navy surveying waters near tsunami epicenter", for example.

--Boot Hill

[Boot Hill]

An after thought...

The collision occurred in the Caroline Islands and that area hasn't been geologically active since 100-300 million years ago.

BTW, welcome aboard, newbie!

--Boot Hill

[TexasCajun]

This is hardly surprising, given that they literally ran into a mountain.

A Russian submarine mountain perhaps?