Then I apologize. My point in the sentence you quote was to highlight the fact that Beer's said he was on the surface in the daylight a couple miles from shore, which is obviously not very covert. I believe the assumption that the exercises were classified is clear in the article as a whole and Irvine states that in his original article concerning Beers. If you believe Beers, then Irvine's theory is wrong.
"Not a significant difference...."
Perhaps SubMareener could clarify this point. Do Sturgeon class subs "crash dive" and would they do so in 20 fathoms of water. And would they do so while making significant headway?
"There are some tracks about 4 or 5 miles from the crash."
The closest track moving at a speed realistic for a surfaced sub (other than the 30knot track) is roughly 8 miles away. That is about the same distance as TWA 800 was from the shore of Long Island. Since none of the witnesses on shore (there were several within 8-10 miles) felt the urge to dive for cover, why would the OOD if the sub was that far away? Assuming TWA 800 was at 13000ft when it exploded, it would be very clear to someone 8 miles away, that they were not threatened by falling debris.
Wrong. The very tracks that Irvine refers to are about 2 miles from the crash and travel 14-17 knots. This is from the NTSB's report, and the text on the chart is in the NTSB's report. The tracks are marked by the arrows toward the top, center of the graphic. The crash/debris zone is in the circled area, upper right corner.
So in fact Beers first story passes your truth test.