[colorado tanker]

Actually, it isn't "known" that Scorpion exploded. A competing theory is that it went below crush depth for some reason and imploded.

Scorpion was located with the help of acoustical data. It would be pretty obvious if there was another sub present and firing on Scorpion. I'm skeptical of this conspiracy theory.

[Tallguy]

I've gotta go grab my copy of "Blind Man's Bluff". IIRC, the searchers went to the acoustical recordings after the sub failed to reach port. They were able to get a bearing on the wreckage which ultimately located the wreck (the initial search area was along the subs anticipated track & the sub was not found there).

The torpedo theory was based on 2 things:

1. there was a known problem with the torpedoes carried by the Scorpion, and
2. the sub was pointed toward the Med, indicating a reversal in course.

THEORY: the sub executed a maneuver to rapidly reverse course in the hopes of preventing a warhead cookoff. Torpedoes that suddenly reverse course are a hazard to the attacking submarine so the warhead is designed to disable as a safety measure.

I don't think this was ever proved, but it's the strongest theory they have that fits the available evidence.

[outofstyle]

I saw something on maybe The History Channel. I thought that they were pretty sure that it was hit by a torpedo. They were able to say that because of the wreckage, but mostly by reports of sonar data that were later obtained. I thought that the commonly accepted theory was that it was hit by one of its own torpedoes.

The explanation was that the torpedo was armed and its propulsion system malfunctioned. The prop was spinning in the torpedo tube and it had to fired in order to avoid an on board explosion. There were several high ranking naval officers, in uniform, offering this explanation. I thought that it sounded pretty far fetched. I'm not a conspiracy guy. However, if there was evidence that it was hit by a torpedo and the intent was to cover up an act of war. What other story could you tell?