I didn’t expect my comment to provoke such strong reactions. Allow me to expand on my comments, and if I am wrong, please let me know specifically what is wrong. Don’t just call me inaccurate or idiotic or ridiculous and leave it at that. Educate me on my errors.
First, I am not saying I agree with women being on subs, I was just commenting on what would happen if they were and one turned up pregnant.
My first hand experience is limited to a three day Tiger Cruise along the Atlantic Seaboard in the Boise. My son is a submariner, though, and I have a limited understanding of what goes on during a deployment based on what he has told me through the years. My knowledge is further limited to attack subs; boomers operate differently.
Maybe a little knowledge is dangerous. But I do know that attack submarines make scheduled stops during a six month deployment. They can carry only enough food to last about six weeks. I have been told by my son that if there is an immediate need for a sailor to get off the boat, they will meet up with the nearest surface ship. He also told me there is only one person on the sub with limited medical experience. I believe that person is called an Independent Duty Corpsman (IDC).
My speculation about what would happen is based on the premise that a woman who turns up pregnant would be in the very early stages of pregnancy. This would allow sufficient time to make arrangements to get her off the sub at the next scheduled port call. But if something happened that required immediate attention while the boat was in the middle of the ocean, they would have to meet up with the nearest surface ship.
Saganite asked “I wonder if the Subs will have to surface or put in to offload their preggies?” If those of you calling me wildly and dangerously inaccurate, ridiculous, or an idiot still don’t agree with my answer, please let me know what I have wrong.
Here is where you run off the rails. The US Navy should never be in a position where it has to worry about a pregnant sailor, ever. No need to read on. Get it? Women have no place on a warship of any kind. The whole premise is silly. To go beyond that is to give the whole idea "legs". Bad thing.....
I also said it’s not an issue for the Navy anymore. They have learned to deal with the disruption.
Pregnancies afloat affect the readiness of a warship and pregnancies afloat are a real problem because you lose a significant percentage of the women aboard any ship during any cruise. Those women occupy important positions and have critical war fighting skills. Replacing them is a burden. But like I said, we’ve adapted to the PC necessities of keeping the feminist wing of the political parties placated, even at the expense of weakening our readiness.
Quite frequently there is no nearby surface ship. The mission of a ballistic missile submarine is strategic deterence. They bore hole in the water a 4 knots in the middle of the ocean. When there hear a surface vessel on sonar, they turn the other way. If a US Navy surface vessle is close by, it is likely just in transit to somewhere elese.
Fast attack subs can support surface vessels and may be in close proximity to US Navy vessels. They also perform loe wolf type operations such as special operations (spying) and are not even close to US Navy surface vessels (maybe the surface vessels of other countries).