No crew members were hurt and the submarine remains watertight, according to a Ministry of Defence spokesman. Posted on 05/27/2008 2:24:56 PM PDT by SmithL
A British nuclear-powered submarine has been damaged after it hit rocks in the Red Sea, defence officials say.
HMS Superb hit an underwater rock on 26 May and damage to its sonar equipment forced it to surface.
No crew members were hurt and the submarine remains watertight, according to a Ministry of Defence spokesman.
He said the submarine's nuclear reactor was "completely unaffected", but a full investigation was under way to determine the cause of the collision.
The 272ft attack vessel had passed through the Suez Canal and was in the northern Red Sea, 80 miles south of Suez itself, when she hit an underwater rock pinnacle.
'No casualties'
There were 112 crew on board, but no other vessel was involved.
The MoD said: "There were no casualties and the submarine remains watertight, is safe on the surface and able to operate under her own power."
There was also "no environmental impact" from the collision, he added.
The Navy is now trying to work out how to return the vessel to port.
It is currently in international waters, but is unable to dive because of the damage to its sonar equipment.
HMS Superb was first launched in 1976. Most recently she has been deployed to Afghanistan to provide support for troops there.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.bbc.co.uk ...
Mate, we like you fine. It just bothers us to see the culture from which we have sprung lapsing into wobbliness.
Britannia once ruled the waves. Now your navy is scarcely more than a coastal defence force.
We know that you have it in you to be more than you are because we remember when you were more. And we'd like you to be that again.
Only those in the Democrat Party.
In any case, whenever someone gets in a jam, were the first ones people call on to get them out. Including You Brits.
Got a lot of respect for individual Brits, not much respect for the people that run your country. You folks need to find another Churchill or Thatcher, and soon.
Here's my tribute to the former:
Churchill - The Last Lion Roars.
A land convoy in Iraq. So, is it indicative of all US soldiers???? Are you all cowards?????
Just as this is used as an example of how bad we Brits are right?????
“Britannia once ruled the waves. Now your navy is scarcely more than a coastal defence force.”
Coastal Defence??!!!! Thats nonsense mate, you certainly have done very little in the way of research on this matter. We are building new 65,000 tonne carriers. The new Type 45 ADD’s are getting close to commission. Astute Class attack subs are rolling off the docks. A helicopter attack ship, HMS Ocean, isn’t even 10 years old. We have 2 new amphibious assault ships, HMS’ Albion and Bulwark. New Landing ships, the ‘Bay Class’ allow much greater performance and supplies. We have a brand new Hydrographic Squadron with HMS Scott and HMS Endurance. Our patrol forces have also been improved with the introduction of the superb ‘River Class’, to patrol the littoral areas of the British Isles, an adapted version of one, HMS Clyde, is now the Falkland Islands Patrol Ship. These islands are thousands of miles away from the UK, and yet our navy patrols their shores as though they were the White Cliffs of Dover. That is a hallmark of a bluewater navy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_of_the_Royal_Navy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astute_class_submarines
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-35_Lightning_II
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_Elizabeth_class_aircraft_carrier
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_45_destroyer
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albion_class_landing_platform_dock
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay_class_landing_ship_dock_%28auxiliary%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Endurance_%28A171%29
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/River_class_patrol_vessel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_water_navy
Examples of operating blue-water navies:
These are navies that have successfully used the capabilities of their blue-water navies to exercise control at high seas and from these have projected power into other nations’ littoral waters.
* The United States Navy maintains continuous readiness to deploy six Carrier Strike Groups simultaneously as well as deploy an additional two within 30 days under the Fleet Response Plan (FRP) while maintaining a posture of Continuous At Sea Deterrence through the Trident submarine-launched ballistic missiles on Ohio-class submarines. The U.S. Navy also maintains a continuous deployment of Expeditionary Strike Groups that embark a Marine Expeditionary Unit with an Aviation Combat Element of Landing Helicopter Docks and Landing Helicopter Assault.
* The United Kingdom’s Royal Navy maintains two task forces concurrently (one based around an aircraft carrier and one based around an Amphibious Command Ship) and maintains a Continuous At Sea Deterrence policy. At least one task group is deployed at any one time. There are currently two Invincible-class aircraft carrier in operation, with a further one in reserve. The Royal Navy also uses the Ocean-class Landing Platform, Helicopter (LPH) as well as the two Albion-class amphibious transport docks as the centre of a task group. The UK also supports a number of standing commitments worldwide on a continuous basis.
* The French Navy (Marine Nationale) has the ability to deploy an aircraft-carrier-based task group and maintains a Continuous At Sea Deterrence included in the Force Océanique Stratégique (Strategic Oceanic Force). France also has a wide range of naval deployments throughout the world.
If I haven’t managed to educate you about the UK’s naval power, then you clearly aren’t prepared to listen to an argument counter to your own, even in the face of obvious facts. We are spending nearly $30bn upgrading our navy to turn it from an anti-sub Atlantic force, to second only to the US Navy, both in terms of tonnage and capacity.
Royal Marines for you I guess!
Sharp suits!
If I were to make a gross generalization, I might think that most conservatives, including Freepers and conservative Brits, recognize that human nature is the pretty much the same worldwide. It is human institutions that vary enormously.
We conservatives prefer institutions that convey freedom and prosperity, on us and our posterity and to the extent practical, our neighbors worldwide.
No country outshines England (or Britain as a whole) in fostering, creating and promulgating institutions that do that. American traditions and liberties are indisputably our legacy from the mother country.
But as students of human nature, conservatives understand that gratitude is that rarest of human qualities. Speaking only for myself, may I at least offer thanks?
Today it's 82. Three "carriers" which are what the US calls amphibious assault ships. About the same as India.
Don't rant at me about it. I'm just reporting the facts.
I understand if you think that sucks. So do we.
Which is why we complain about you. You used to be a great power. You gave it up.
Stop whining and tell your government that they should do something about it.
“But as students of human nature, conservatives understand that gratitude is that rarest of human qualities. Speaking only for myself, may I at least offer thanks?”
I find myself a little sheepish that I took such a militant stance here, but I felt my nation was slighted. Speaking only for myself of course, I offer my thanks for your warm and welcoming comments.
Just go through all the links on post 25, and you’ll see our Navy will be strong once more. Unless you think the earth is flat of course.
Entirely up to you mate.
More succintly: there are a certain number of jerks everywhere.
We ain’t got much room to talk either. Under Reagan our Navy was just a few short of 600 now it’s down to 279 thanks to Poppy, Clinton, Junior, and the DEMs in congress 1989-1994, & in 1995 the GOP majority in congress who sat on it’s hands who could and should have acted to stop it.
If they can drag the boat all the way up those mountains to Afghanistan, a few rocks on the sea bottom are not going to hurt it much!
The problem is not with the Royal Navy. The problem was the civilian leadership in government that "would not allow" the military to take the appropriate action. Maggie Thatcher (I wish she were our president) would have taken them out for an eternal dirt nap.
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.