ARA San Juan

RetiredUSNChief

RetiredUSNChief

Get over it, snowflake.
Charter Life Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Joined
Dec 17, 2016
Messages
29,260
Location
SC to VA
Rating - 0%
0   0   0
A few days ago, I posted something in another thread, about the camaraderie between service members, the common bond we share which others may acknowledge, but not fully understand. It's particularly true for those in the same service, with the same professional experiences.

For me, this means submariners.

Argentina has lost a submarine, the AKA San Juan. It's big in the news and I'm sure most all of us here have read or heard about it. Communications were lost with the sub on November 15th, 6 days ago. She was on a routine patrol.

"Routine patrol". Spokespersons and the media may use this phrase, but in the realm of submarine life the use of the word "routine" is anathema. There is NOTHING "routine" about submarine life.

Why? Because the moment things become "routine", bad, bad things happen. If the sea is unforgiving on the surface, it's absolutely unforgiving in the cold depths.

Those Sailors on the AKA San Juan? They're part of the Brotherhood of the 'Phin. Regardless of nationality, regardless of political stands, they're my brothers (and sister), as surely as any shipmate I ever had.

Six days missing. In a steel tube, possibly on the ocean floor somewhere. Maybe above crush depth, maybe below. Maybe alive, maybe dead. Every submariner knows the risk...every submariner knows they live only at the mercy of the ocean, and that the ocean is absolutely unforgiving of mistakes and those who don't respect her.

Six days missing. If they're alive, they know exactly how much of their 7 to 10 days of oxygen they've used.

Six days missing. Oxygen may not be the limitation. You know the water temperature at crush depths of submarines can be below 40 degrees Fahrenheit? Cold kills, just as surely as suffocation.

Six days missing. Literally trapped in a steel tube with less and less hope of survival. Just imagine what this would do to the average mind.

Death can take many forms aboard a submarine. This particular scenario is probably the most terrifying. Alive but trapped, lost to the outside world, little if any hope of survival beyond a handful of days.

Finding a missing submarine is not easy. And every minute that passes by means survival grows less likely.



Hold these people in your prayers. If you don't hold religious beliefs, take a moment to consider what it means to be a submariner and extend to them your respect and hope for survival.
 
saw this on CNN10 yesterday, says they have food and water for 2 weeks. That really isnt that long when searching a large part of an ocean.
thoughts are with them and their loved ones.
 
I was going to come post something along the same line this morning, Chief. Though it's been 13 years since I heard my last diving klaxon and slipped beneath the waves on the boat, these kinds of situations haven't lost the sharpness with which they cut through our community.

Lord God, our power evermore,
Whose arm doth reach the ocean floor,
Dive with our men beneath the sea;
Traverse the depths protectively.
O hear us when we pray, and keep
Them safe from peril in the deep.
 
11B CIB said:
I hope they’re rationing and not rioting.

It could get real ugly under there.
Click to expand...

Honestly, if they're still alive, many are probably telling some morbid as F#@k jokes, swapping stories in lurid detail of port visits, maybe writing a final letter to loved ones while working feverishly to devise a way to survive and return to the surface.
 
Last edited:
Back again.

Another day gone, another day closer to certainty that the crew has not/will not survive.

This posting will consider some practical realities.

If a submarine goes down, it will do so in essentially two places: somewhere in which the ocean bottom is above crush depth, or somewhere in which the ocean bottom is below crush depth.

If the submarine goes down below crush depth, there is no hope of survival. The hull will collapse catastrophically, causing the immediate deaths of all aboard with no hope of holdouts in any compartment. Let's consider this option and what it means.

For the sake of argument, let's used 2,000 feet as crush depth. It's a number I chose at random, not meant to imply any amount of detail or accuracy either in general or specifically to any given class of submarine. Pressure increases about 1 atmosphere for every 33 feet of depth. Let's call that 45 pounds per square inch every 100 feet, for round numbers. At 2,000 feet, this means there is about 900 pounds per square inch acting on the hull of the submarine. Nearly 1/2 ton per square inch. Per foot, that works out to about 65 TONS per square foot.

Assuming DirtyScrew's new F-150 weighs 5,000 pounds, that would mean you'd have to stack 26 F-150s on top of every square foot of surface area on the submarine, just to get an idea the amount of force being applied to the ship's hull. Every. Square. Foot.

I said there is no hope of any survival when the hull collapses...and that's PERIOD. There is no compartment aboard a submarine which can withstand anywhere near that kind of pressure. Every watertight bulkhead WILL fail. There will be NO Hollywood survival of some lone Sailor who manages to shut a watertight door behind him somewhere.


But what about sinking to the bottom in shallower water?

Well, if the submarine is in about 300 feet of water or shallower, the crew MAY be able to evacuate through the hatches in small groups to the surface IF they have the equipment to do so. It doesn't take much...we used to have what they called "Steinke Hoods" in the Navy (which have since been replaced by something else, much better.) Basically, it was really nothing more than a plastic hood you put on over your head which trapped a small amount of air in it with you. You'd open the lower escape trunk hatch, a handful of Sailors would climb into it, shut the lower hatch, then flood down the escape trunk. When pressure equalized with sea pressure, open the upper hatch and swim/float to the surface, breathing out the entire time (because going up would cause air in the lungs to expand). The problem with this is that chances of survival on the surface may be no better than on the sub, depending on sea conditions, water temperature, and survival equipment.

If the sub is sitting on the bottom intact, there are other options available to the crew. What they need to survive is oxygen, some kind of atmosphere control equipment to take care of CO2, and electricity. So the limitations here are as follows:

1. Oxygen: limited to the atmosphere and whatever is in their O2 banks. Since power is necessarily limited due to being solely on battery power, they will not be able to generate more O2. There is some limited capability of generating O2 chemically, based on how many O2 "candles" they have aboard to burn.

2. CO2 removal. CO2 will kill just as surely as lack of O2. CO2 is normally scrubbed from the air by atmosphere control equipment, which requires air circulation. So long as they have battery power, they can circulate air and run their CO2 scrubbers. They can also chemically scrub CO2 from the air, limited to how much supplies they have aboard, plus the ability to circulate air. Again...power to run the fans is essential.

3. Power. Submerged without the ability to snorkel (run the diesel), their sole source of power is the battery. It's a sure bet that if they survived, they would have rigged for reduced electrical..."ultra reduced electrical", in fact. They would have shut off absolutely ALL non-essential electrical loads. They would be down to quite literally minimal fans to circulate air and a very, very few lights in order to maximize their time with atmosphere control equipment. BUT...there is a complication here. The ship reported a problem with its battery system, including a short. While this doesn't necessarily mean it was a catastrophic problem, it does indicate a problem which could at least affect the amount of useful power they would have in an emergency.


But the problem isn't just bare-bones survival. It's how to get the outside world to find you. And THIS is what worries me.

The ocean is HUGE. Mindbogglingly so, in fact. Just looking at a globe doesn't do it for most people...you have to really be out in the middle of absolutely NOWHERE to get an inkling of how huge the ocean is. It's somewhat smaller in this case, because we already know things like the range of the submarine and approximate last known location. But still...that's a HUGE area. And the submarine compounds this because it's...well, it's UNDER the frickin' ocean. And for several days initially, the weather was NOT cooperating with search efforts, making things even worse.

If the crew were alive (and this is what gets me here), there are a variety of options available to them to attract attention. Depending on the design of the ship and safety equipment, there may be an automatic signal buoy which would release, travel to the surface, and signal for help. If this class has something like this, the fact that nothing has been heard from them does not bode well for their survival.

If the crew were alive and they had power available, they could use alternative methods to signal. Using active sonar, for example, would be an excellent way to send a powerful signal under water that could be heard for hundreds, if not thousands, of miles. However...this requires power and operational equipment. Not to mention a living crew.

Even simple banging on the hull with tools would send sound signatures into the water which could be detectable for a long, long distance. As yet, no such signals have been heard.

If the ship's posture on the bottom, and equipment status, supported it, a torpedo could be launched, wire guided and detonated. Again...this requires a living crew, plus functional equipment, to perform.

Getting ANYTHING out a hatch or torpedo tube which could float to the surface as debris or oil slick could help signal a location. As yet...nothing of the sort has been found.

There are SOSUS (underwater sound surveillance systems) in strategic places around the world, designed and developed specifically to detect and track submarines. You can bet the sound signatures are being analyzed from the applicable networks in an effort to locate the San Juan. However, there are operational issues with respect to SOSUS since the end of the Cold War which may have reduced its effectiveness. Deployable systems are apparently being used.


BACK TO THE BATTERY:

It bothers me that they reported a problem with the battery in their last communication. The ship's battery contains a HUGE amount of stored energy and there are some pretty bleak potential casualties that could happen with the battery. Lemme go over some:

Seawater in the battery well is bad. Why? Because if it gets into the batteries, mixture with the acid would cause Chlorine gas to be released. In addition to toxic gas, the salt water would cause electrical grounds and shorts, creating an uncontrolled discharged of the batteries, which not only generates heat, could cause an explosion and flash into fire. A fire in the battery well is a truly catastrophic event.

How catastrophic?

The USS Bonefish, a diesel submarine, was lost due to exactly this. Seawater got into the battery well, caused an explosion and a fire. The temperature in the battery well reached 1,200 degrees F in minutes. I toured the Bonefish while I was stationed in Charleston, SC. The berthing compartment above the battery well had been completely burned out. And by completely burned out, I mean the ship, though it had been somewhat cleaned after the fire, had not had any equipment removed...the berthing compartment was, materially, exactly like it had been after the fire. There was NOTHING there. All the racks the Sailors slept in? Vaporized in the heat. The fire spread up to the berthing area, heated a brazed 700 pound air pipe until the joint failed. This dumped 700 pound air into the fire in the spot. This, in turn, heated the much larger 3,000 pound air pipe above until it ruptured. The berthing area was converted into a blast furnace.

Fortunately, this happened during a naval exercise and the Bonefish was able to surface and abandon ship.

Each battery cell is pretty much like the battery in your car or truck. Except it's maybe 6 feet tall or more, and maybe 16 to 18 inches square. And there are well over a hundred. I don't know how many on a diesel submarine...maybe over 200. That's a LOT of stored energy to be released in a casualty.
 
Retired, that was a VERY good post. Very thorough and gave me more understanding of submarines, thank you.
Sadly, everything you said was negative, my heart sinks for these men and women and their loved ones. May they rest in peace
 
Thought I posted an update a few minutes ago, but apparently I didn't tap the post button.

A Daily Mail article out of the UK, as well as another article in Australia, claim that our Navy may have located the missing sub in about 70 meters of water. That's about 230 feet of water, entirely survivable.

I haven't yet seen this on our MSM.

If this isn't another false alert, this is extremely good news.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...bmarine-located-Navy.html?ito=social-facebook

Missing Argentine submarine 'is located by US Navy and a new sonar signal heard' as rescuers race to the spot with oxygen due to run out imminently

  • US Navy aircraft reportedly detected a 'heat stain from a metallic object' at a depth of about 230ft
  • Separately, a rescue vessel allegedly reported hearing an infrasound sonar signal late Tuesday night


http://www.news.com.au/world/south-...e/news-story/2cd05b2655dbc6eb7f53b89db966fec3

Last day of air for missing Argentinian submarine
BREAKING: An “area of heat” has been found on the ocean floor in the frantic search for a submarine that’s been lost for almost a week.
 
RetiredUSNChief said:
... better than on the sub, depending on sea conditions, water temperature, and survival equipment.

If the sub is sitting on the bottom intact, there are other options available to the crew. What they need to survive is oxygen, some kind of atmosphere control equipment to take care of CO2, and electricity. So the limitations here are as follows:

1. Oxygen: limited to the atmosphere and whatever is in their O2 banks. Since power is necessarily limited due to being solely on battery power, they will not be able to generate more O2. There is some limited capability of generating O2 chemically, based on how many O2 "candles" they have aboard to burn.

2. CO2 removal. CO2 will kill just as surely as lack of O2. CO2 is normally scrubbed from the air by atmosphere control equipment, which requires air circulation. So long as they have battery power, they can circulate air and run their CO2 scrubbers. They can also chemically scrub CO2 from the air, limited to how much supplies they have aboard, plus the ability to circulate air. Again...power to run the fans is essential.

3. Power. Submerged without the ability to snorkel (run the diesel), their sole source of power is the battery. It's a sure bet that if they survived, they would have rigged for reduced electrical..."ultra reduced electrical", in fact. They would have shut off absolutely ALL non-essential electrical loads. They would be down to quite literally minimal fans to circulate air and a very, very few lights in order to maximize their time with atmosphere control equipment. BUT...there is a complication here. The ship reported a problem with its battery system, including a short. While this doesn't necessarily mean it was a catastrophic problem, it does indicate a problem which could at least affect the amount of useful power they would have in an emergency.


But the problem isn't just bare-bones survival. It's how to get the outside world to find you. And THIS is what worries me.

The ocean is HUGE. Mindbogglingly so, in fact. Just looking at a globe doesn't do it for most people...you have to really be out in the middle of absolutely NOWHERE to get an inkling of how huge the ocean is. It's somewhat smaller in this case, because we already know things like the range of the submarine and approximate last known location. But still...that's a HUGE area. And the submarine compounds this because it's...well, it's UNDER the frickin' ocean. And for several days initially, the weather was NOT cooperating with search efforts, making things even worse.

If the crew were alive (and this is what gets me here), there are a variety of options available to them to attract attention. Depending on the design of the ship and safety equipment, there may be an automatic signal buoy which would release, travel to the surface, and signal for help. If this class has something like this, the fact that nothing has been heard from them does not bode well for their survival.

If the crew were alive and they had power available, they could use alternative methods to signal. Using active sonar, for example, would be an excellent way to send a powerful signal under water that could be heard for hundreds, if not thousands, of miles. However...this requires power and operational equipment. Not to mention a living crew.

Even simple banging on the hull with tools would send sound signatures into the water which could be detectable for a long, long distance. As yet, no such signals have been heard.

If the ship's posture on the bottom, and equipment status, supported it, a torpedo could be launched, wire guided and detonated. Again...this requires a living crew, plus functional equipment, to perform.

Getting ANYTHING out a hatch or torpedo tube which could float to the surface as debris or oil slick could help signal a location. As yet...nothing of the sort has been found.

There are SOSUS (underwater sound surveillance systems) in strategic places around the world, designed and developed specifically to detect and track submarines. You can bet the sound signatures are being analyzed from the applicable networks in an effort to locate the San Juan. However, there are operational issues with respect to SOSUS since the end of the Cold War which may have reduced its effectiveness. Deployable systems are apparently being used.


BACK TO THE BATTERY:

It bothers me that they reported a problem with the battery in their last communication. The ship's battery contains a HUGE amount of stored energy and there are some pretty bleak potential casualties that could happen with the battery. Lemme go over some:

Seawater in the battery well is bad. Why? Because if it gets into the batteries, mixture with the acid would cause Chlorine gas to be released. In addition to toxic gas, the salt water would cause electrical grounds and shorts, creating an uncontrolled discharged of the batteries, which not only generates heat, could cause an explosion and flash into fire. A fire in the battery well is a truly catastrophic event.

How catastrophic?

The USS Bonefish, a diesel submarine, was lost due to exactly this. Seawater got into the battery well, caused an explosion and a fire. The temperature in the battery well reached 1,200 degrees F in minutes. I toured the Bonefish while I was stationed in Charleston, SC. The berthing compartment above the battery well had been completely burned out. And by completely burned out, I mean the ship, though it had been somewhat cleaned after the fire, had not had any equipment removed...the berthing compartment was, materially, exactly like it had been after the fire. There was NOTHING there. All the racks the Sailors slept in? Vaporized in the heat. The fire spread up to the berthing area, heated a brazed 700 pound air pipe until the joint failed. This dumped 700 pound air into the fire in the spot. This, in turn, heated the much larger 3,000 pound air pipe above until it ruptured. The berthing area was converted into a blast furnace.

Fortunately, this happened during a naval exercise and the Bonefish was able to surface and abandon ship.

Each battery cell is pretty much like the battery in your car or truck. Except it's maybe 6 feet tall or more, and maybe 16 to 18 inches square. And there are well over a hundred. I don't know how many on a diesel submarine...maybe over 200. That's a LOT of stored energy to be released in a casualty.
Click to expand...

I was a nuclear electrician on the USS Key West, so I am intimately aware of all the horror stories that can take place with the battery.

A battery casualty is bad - especially on a diesel electric boat. Besides the Chlorine gas produced by seawater, there's also a lot of Hydrogen gas produced when discharging the battery. Add a short, and that's another avenue for a catastrophic loss of ship event.

If it weren't catastrophic, and say power was lost while submerged and the crew was still alive, I don't understand why they wouldn't have hit the chicken switches and emergency surfaced. So long as the ballast tanks weren't ruptured and the air Banks were intact, the submarine should have been able to make it to the surface.

It's this piece that, to me at least, suggests the crew didn't survive the initial casualty. Although I suppose if the moisture content of the compressed air was too high, they could have frozen up the emergency blow valves.

The other side of catastrophic hull failures is the supposed diesel effect that would take place - the sudden in rush of tons of seawater compressing the air in the compartment, rapidly heating and igniting all combustibles (including people) before the wall of seawater quenched them and the hull crushed around it. We used to talk about that shit on watch - taking solace in the fact that it would likely be a really quick death.

If it happened suddenly before they had a chance to react, no big thing. If there was a failure and the boat slowly sank through crush depth, though - the psychological and emotional piece of knowing what was coming it less than pleasant to think about.
 
Last edited:
Hopefully they get to them in time. I couldn't be in the Navy because I'm not going out in the ocean, on top or under the surface. If I die in the ocean it will be from a plane falling out of the sky, not a ship that is sinking.
 
On another note, two Argentina politicians have manage to get themselves on the sh*tlist of a lot of their people.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/f-you-pirates-youre-responsible-11561416

Ships and aircraft from seven countries - including the British Royal Navy 's polar exploration vessel HMS Protector - are involved in the desperate hunt.

But despite the British help, two Argentine politicians sparked fury today when they attacked the Royal Navy’s involvement in the search.

As the search for the lost crew continued Argentina's Workers' Party leader Gabriel Solano tweeted tweeting the Brits: 'F*** you! pirates'.

He then added: “You are responsible for war crimes, like the sinking of the General Belgrano,” in reference to the loss of the light cruiser which was sunk by the Royal Navy during the Falklands War in 1982.


Here are a couple responses in the article:

He was attacked by ordinary Argentinians who branded him an “a**hole”.

Silvia Del Palacaio wrote: "This must be a fake, this can't be real, surely no-one can be much an A*HOLE!!!"

Noelia Lorenzo wrote, using an emoji of the British flag: “You have no idea of human greatness. Nothing at all. You will never understand that those you love to hate, are giving everything to help Argentina. UK, such a gesture will never be forgotten.”

This Gabriel Solano is a mighty angry man over something that happened when he was 8 years old.
 
RetiredUSNChief said:
Thought I posted an update a few minutes ago, but apparently I didn't tap the post button.

A Daily Mail article out of the UK, as well as another article in Australia, claim that our Navy may have located the missing sub in about 70 meters of water. That's about 230 feet of water, entirely survivable.

I haven't yet seen this on our MSM.

If this isn't another false alert, this is extremely good news.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...bmarine-located-Navy.html?ito=social-facebook

Missing Argentine submarine 'is located by US Navy and a new sonar signal heard' as rescuers race to the spot with oxygen due to run out imminently

  • US Navy aircraft reportedly detected a 'heat stain from a metallic object' at a depth of about 230ft
  • Separately, a rescue vessel allegedly reported hearing an infrasound sonar signal late Tuesday night

http://www.news.com.au/world/south-...e/news-story/2cd05b2655dbc6eb7f53b89db966fec3

Last day of air for missing Argentinian submarine
BREAKING: An “area of heat” has been found on the ocean floor in the frantic search for a submarine that’s been lost for almost a week.
Click to expand...

Here's another scenario, if the battery failed, they could have been either at PD or on the surface snorkelling - took a wave over the snorkel mast, head valve failed to shut and took on seawater, choked out the diesel and flooded that way.

Hopefully the new information leads to survivors.
 
Yeah, thank God it's reachable. 230 feet isn't anything. That is a long swim tho. Just need to get assets on target.
 
Well...it's nearly the 24th, and no other news agencies had anything to say which would have backed up those other two links, so I'm going to have to say they were false alerts.

This grows increasingly dire, and not just because of what people keep saying about how much oxygen they have. Speaking as a submariner, if a submarine has a casualty which puts the boat on the bottom, you'd be EXTREMELY fortunate if your survival really turned out to be based on how much oxygen you have on board. If the crew is dead, odds are they died earlier, and not from lack of oxygen.

An article I read said the depths in the area the sub was last known to be in varies from 200 to 2,000 meters. 200 meters is about 650 feet. Test depth of this class of submarine (A German TR-1700) is listed as 300 meters (980 feet) on Wikipedia. Odds of sinking in a shallow enough area to survive are slim...possible, but very slim.

Yesterday, news came out that a "hydro-acoustic anomaly" was detected by listening posts around the time the submarine was lost. A "abnormal, singular, short, violent, non-nuclear event". While one could conceive that this could have been an explosion, it could very well be a submarine hull imploding at crush depth. Neither gives me much hope. Nothing I've found describes the sound with any more detail.

I fear when we finally locate the ship that they crew will have already perished in the sinking.
 
Indeed.....reports now are that the Argentine Navy had indications of an explosion in the last known area of the boat for a while now, and hadn't said anything to the families. It's certainly consistent with reports of shorting and battery failure.

Maybe they detonated a torpedo to fake the loss of the ship and stole the submarine to run drugs for Colombian drug cartels. We talked about doing that lots of times on station making turns for nowhere.

Fair winds and following seas, San Juan - on eternal patrol.
 
well, I hate to hear that. I had been following this pretty regularly.
 
I heard this song many times during my time aboard ship, but never like these guys sing it.

 
Today marks the eleventh day.

I wish I could find a good youtube of "Red, Right, Returning" by the Jolly Rogers on youtube to post. The only one there is so faint of the audio that it's pretty much useless.

In tribute to them, here's Tommy Cox singing "Take Her Deep":

 
What was that show I used to watch as a kid?? I loved it.

The Silent Service

The Silent Service is an American syndicated anthology television series based on actual events in the submarine section of the United States Navy. The Silent Service was narrated by Rear Admiral Thomas M. Dykers, who retired from the Navy in 1949 after twenty-two years of service.[2] He began each episode with this refrain: "Tonight, we bring you another thrilling episode of Silent Service stories, of warfare under the sea."

Actors appearing on The Silent Service included Russell Johnson, cast three times in the role of the character "Beach". DeForest Kelley appeared in three episodes as Lieutenant Commander James Dempsey and Leonard Nimoy appeared in two episodes as Sonarman. Jerry Paris and Liam Sullivan each guest starred twice. Wright King played "Bony" in the 1957 episode "The Squallfish". Eric Morris appeared in nineteen episodes, identified only as "Soldier".[2]

Other guest stars included Joe Conley, Jack Lord, Chuck Connors, Lawrence Dobkin, Ron Hagerthy, Adam Kennedy, Robert Knapp, Paul Richards, Edward Platt, Bing Russell, Craig Stevens, Dennis Weaver, Bob Denver, Dick Van Patten, L. Q. Jones, and Stuart Whitman.[3]

Many of these episodes have been uploaded to YouTube.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silent_Service_(TV_series)
 
Last edited:
When I was young I took the ASVAB. I had only spoken with the Marine recruiter.

Apparently, all the services get the test results. A Navy recruiter contacted me and asked me to take the Nuke Test, so I did. After I tested, their interest level kicked up a notch or three.

Life intervened. I found out I was to be a father and decided it was important to be here and present for that, so I never enlisted.

Hearing all the ways things can go horribly wrong and how those scenarios play out is sobering.

My thanks for those who did the deal.

"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

- unknown -
 
Someone say Sub?

a893548da45144f82c154e2f1ce33c79.jpg



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
RetiredUSNChief said:
A few days ago, I posted something in another thread, about the camaraderie between service members, the common bond we share which others may acknowledge, but not fully understand. It's particularly true for those in the same service, with the same professional experiences.

For me, this means submariners.

Argentina has lost a submarine, the AKA San Juan. It's big in the news and I'm sure most all of us here have read or heard about it. Communications were lost with the sub on November 15th, 6 days ago. She was on a routine patrol.

"Routine patrol". Spokespersons and the media may use this phrase, but in the realm of submarine life the use of the word "routine" is anathema. There is NOTHING "routine" about submarine life.

Why? Because the moment things become "routine", bad, bad things happen. If the sea is unforgiving on the surface, it's absolutely unforgiving in the cold depths.

Those Sailors on the AKA San Juan? They're part of the Brotherhood of the 'Phin. Regardless of nationality, regardless of political stands, they're my brothers (and sister), as surely as any shipmate I ever had.

Six days missing. In a steel tube, possibly on the ocean floor somewhere. Maybe above crush depth, maybe below. Maybe alive, maybe dead. Every submariner knows the risk...every submariner knows they live only at the mercy of the ocean, and that the ocean is absolutely unforgiving of mistakes and those who don't respect her.

Six days missing. If they're alive, they know exactly how much of their 7 to 10 days of oxygen they've used.

Six days missing. Oxygen may not be the limitation. You know the water temperature at crush depths of submarines can be below 40 degrees Fahrenheit? Cold kills, just as surely as suffocation.

Six days missing. Literally trapped in a steel tube with less and less hope of survival. Just imagine what this would do to the average mind.

Death can take many forms aboard a submarine. This particular scenario is probably the most terrifying. Alive but trapped, lost to the outside world, little if any hope of survival beyond a handful of days.

Finding a missing submarine is not easy. And every minute that passes by means survival grows less likely.



Hold these people in your prayers. If you don't hold religious beliefs, take a moment to consider what it means to be a submariner and extend to them your respect and hope for survival.
Click to expand...

Amen, Chief.


Brothers, please don’t take my post above as making light of the situation.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Bailey Boat said:
Why are we not hearing anything else about this??? It seems to have just dropped off the news....
Click to expand...

Can't speak for the veracity of the site or the story - it was shared by a WWII Warship group I follow.

https://frontlinevideos.com/blogs/v...tm_term=original-ww2-mr&utm_content=submarine

Continuing submerged with the problem mentioned in that article makes absolutely no sense if you're trying to save the crew and prevent a loss of ship event.

No sense whatsoever.
 
SPM said:
Yep....you guys were always the sub - asking us to dominate you by banging deckplates, getting all masts and antennas up, pumping so fast and so hard that we cause cavitation.

You even got the cute pouty face going...

[emoji1]
Click to expand...

Meh. Nothing a few DICASS buoys couldn’t solve. [emoji16]

Oh, I’m sorry, were you sleeping?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:
sr30 said:
Amen, Chief.


Brothers, please don’t take my post above as making light of the situation.
Click to expand...

No offense taken. Those of us who have served understand that humor, however twisted it may seem to outsiders, is simply another way of dealing with the realities we all face under the pressures of the job. We know the difference between the intended humor and disrespect.

;)
 
SPM said:
Can't speak for the veracity of the site or the story - it was shared by a WWII Warship group I follow.

https://frontlinevideos.com/blogs/v...tm_term=original-ww2-mr&utm_content=submarine

Continuing submerged with the problem mentioned in that article makes absolutely no sense if you're trying to save the crew and prevent a loss of ship event.

No sense whatsoever.
Click to expand...

Remember...the weather played a factor in this, as well, with the ARA San Juan. A submarine submerged in bad weather is much preferable than a submarine on the surface in bad weather unless there is an overriding reason for it to be otherwise.

The decision on how to proceed with ship's operations is a decision that lies with the Captain and is based on a thorough evaluation of the issues at hand with respect to ship's operational requirements and safety. We cannot gainsay the decisions which were made without knowing both WHAT those decisions actually were as well as the precise circumstances leading up to those decisions.

The concept of ship's operations during normal conditions at sea is alien to people who have not had the experience. Their understanding tends to be simplistic, with a lack of understanding about the day-to-day realities involved with these evolutions. Trying to understand how to evaluate operations under casualty conditions is even more alien. This is natural, and no fault of their own.

When I get a chance to read those links, I will. Thanks!
 
Last edited:
RetiredUSNChief said:
Remember...the weather played a factor in this, as well, with the ARA San Juan. A submarine submerged in bad weather is much preferable than a submarine on the surface in bad weather unless there is an overriding reason for it to be otherwise.

The decision on how to proceed with ship's operations is a decision that lies with the Captain and is based on a thorough evaluation of the issues at hand with respect to ship's operational requirements and safety. We cannot gainsay the decisions which were made without knowing both WHAT those decisions actually were as well as the precise circumstances leading up to those decisions.

The concept of ship's operations during normal conditions at sea is alien to people who have not had the experience. Their understanding tends to be simplistic, with a lack of understanding about the day-to-day realities involved with these evolutions. Trying to understand how to evaluate operations under casualty conditions is even more alien. This is natural, and no fault of their own.

When I get a chance to read those links, I will. Thanks!
Click to expand...

I understand that - and in almost every other circumstance I’d agree that being on the surface during rough seas sucks giant donkey balls.

But given the reports - shorted batteries and/or an electrical distribution system, fire onboard, and taking on water - it doesn’t make any sense for them not to have hit the chicken switches and gone to the surface if they lost depth control. If there were chlorine gas (every submariner knows if they smell almonds in the People tank it’s a bad day) or smoke from a fire, you’re talking about an IDLH environment where almost everyone’s sucking rubber to not die until they can ventilate.

If there was a battery casualty, the likelihood of remaining on the electric motors submerged is less. I suppose they could have been at PD snorkeling and running the diesels for propulsion. In rough seas, they may have taken a wave over the snorkel mast and if the head valve failed to close, that could be the source of the water in the ventilation system (been there, done that due to A Gang gaffing logs on a failing pressure regulator and the cook plugging the sump watch into the wrong phone circuit. I was in the control room trying to tagout the ship’s dryer for the PM when the COW couldn’t maintain ships trim - that was a lot of water in the fan room, but even then.....if depth control is lost, emergency blow and drive to the surface.

I still think it was catastrophic failure that either killed the crew outright or destroyed the ability of the crew to maintain depth control.
 
The latest via some of my Navy buddies who are still in:

A sad Update

The ARA San Juan had been called back to port after the commander informed of a complication with one of the batteries. "Entry of seawater by ventilation system to battery tank No. 3 caused a short circuit and the beginning of a fire in the balcony of battery bars, bow batteries out of service, at the time of immersion, propelling with a split circuit. I will keep staff informed," Pedro Martín Fernández informed in a message via radio frequency.

ANALYSIS OF ACOUSTIC DETECTION OF THE
LOSS OF THE ARGENTINE SUBMARINE SAN JUAN

By Bruce Rule

An analytical review of all information released by the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization on the acoustic signal associated with the loss of the Argentina Submarine ARA SAN JUAN confirms the following:

That acoustic signal originated near 46-10S, 59-42W at 1358Z (GMT) on 15 November 2017. It was produced by the collapse (implosion) of the ARA SAN JUAN pressure-hull at a depth of 1275-feet. Sea pressure at the collapse depth was 570 PSI. The frequency of the collapse event signal (bubble-pulse) was about 4.4 Hz.
The energy released by the collapse was equal to the explosion of 12,500 pounds of TNT at the depth of 1275-feet. That energy was produced by the nearly instantaneous conversion of potential energy (sea-pressure) to kinetic energy, the motion of the intruding water-ram which entered the SAN JUAN pressure-hull at a speed of about 1800 mph.

The entire pressure-hull was completely destroyed (fragmented/compacted) in about 40 milliseconds (0.040s or 1/25th of a second), the duration of the compression phase of the collapse event which is half the minimum time required for cognitive recognition of an event.
Although the crew may have known collapse was imminent, they never knew it was occurring. They did not drown or experience pain. Death was instantaneous.

The SAN JUAN wreckage sank vertically at an estimated speed between 10 and 13 knots. Bottom impact would not have produced an acoustic event detectable at long range.

The open question is: why was no corrective action - such as blowing ballast - taken by the SAN JUAN crew before the submarine sank to collapse depth?

According to Argentine Navy spokesman Gabriel Galeazzi, the Commanding Officer of the SAN JUAN reported a "failure" in the submarine's "battery system," The time of that report was 0730 on 15 November, assumed to have been GMT. Subsequently, the problem was reported to have been "fixed." The SAN JUAN intended to submerged and continued its transit north. The SAN JUAN pressure-hull collapsed at 1358 GMT on 15 November.
In the case of the loss of the US nuclear submarine SCORPION (SSN 589), hydrogen out-gassed by the main battery exploded at 18:20:44 GMT on 22 May 1968 incapacitating/killing the crew with an atmospheric over-pressure in the battery well estimated to have been 7-10 times the fatal value. The pressure-hull was not breached. This assessment was based on analysis of acoustic detections of the event and damage observed in pieces of the fragmented battery recovered from the wreckage at a depth of 11,100 feet by the US submersible TRIESTE, e.g., microscopic, spectrographic and x-ray diffraction analyses. (There was no flooding of the pressure-hull before the battery exploded.)

SCORPION lost power and sank slowly over nearly 22 minutes to collapse at a depth of 1530-feet at 18:42:34 GMT on 22 May 1968.

There is the possibility that a similar sequence of events occurred aboard the SAN JUAN. If the wreck is located and efforts are made to recover components, emphasis should be placed on the battery system.

The author of this assessment was the lead acoustic analyst at the US Office of Naval Intelligence for 42 years, analyzed acoustic detectors of the loss of the USS THRESHER (SSN 593) on 10 April 1963 and testified before that Court of Inquiry. The author expresses his appreciation to those who supported this assessment with research and calculations.

23926419_1690820954271600_3936365020931501131_o.jpg
 
SPM said:
The latest via some of my Navy buddies who are still in:

A sad Update

The ARA San Juan had been called back to port after the commander informed of a complication with one of the batteries. "Entry of seawater by ventilation system to battery tank No. 3 caused a short circuit and the beginning of a fire in the balcony of battery bars, bow batteries out of service, at the time of immersion, propelling with a split circuit. I will keep staff informed," Pedro Martín Fernández informed in a message via radio frequency.

ANALYSIS OF ACOUSTIC DETECTION OF THE
LOSS OF THE ARGENTINE SUBMARINE SAN JUAN

By Bruce Rule

An analytical review of all information released by the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization on the acoustic signal associated with the loss of the Argentina Submarine ARA SAN JUAN confirms the following:

That acoustic signal originated near 46-10S, 59-42W at 1358Z (GMT) on 15 November 2017. It was produced by the collapse (implosion) of the ARA SAN JUAN pressure-hull at a depth of 1275-feet. Sea pressure at the collapse depth was 570 PSI. The frequency of the collapse event signal (bubble-pulse) was about 4.4 Hz.
The energy released by the collapse was equal to the explosion of 12,500 pounds of TNT at the depth of 1275-feet. That energy was produced by the nearly instantaneous conversion of potential energy (sea-pressure) to kinetic energy, the motion of the intruding water-ram which entered the SAN JUAN pressure-hull at a speed of about 1800 mph.

The entire pressure-hull was completely destroyed (fragmented/compacted) in about 40 milliseconds (0.040s or 1/25th of a second), the duration of the compression phase of the collapse event which is half the minimum time required for cognitive recognition of an event.
Although the crew may have known collapse was imminent, they never knew it was occurring. They did not drown or experience pain. Death was instantaneous.

The SAN JUAN wreckage sank vertically at an estimated speed between 10 and 13 knots. Bottom impact would not have produced an acoustic event detectable at long range.

The open question is: why was no corrective action - such as blowing ballast - taken by the SAN JUAN crew before the submarine sank to collapse depth?

According to Argentine Navy spokesman Gabriel Galeazzi, the Commanding Officer of the SAN JUAN reported a "failure" in the submarine's "battery system," The time of that report was 0730 on 15 November, assumed to have been GMT. Subsequently, the problem was reported to have been "fixed." The SAN JUAN intended to submerged and continued its transit north. The SAN JUAN pressure-hull collapsed at 1358 GMT on 15 November.
In the case of the loss of the US nuclear submarine SCORPION (SSN 589), hydrogen out-gassed by the main battery exploded at 18:20:44 GMT on 22 May 1968 incapacitating/killing the crew with an atmospheric over-pressure in the battery well estimated to have been 7-10 times the fatal value. The pressure-hull was not breached. This assessment was based on analysis of acoustic detections of the event and damage observed in pieces of the fragmented battery recovered from the wreckage at a depth of 11,100 feet by the US submersible TRIESTE, e.g., microscopic, spectrographic and x-ray diffraction analyses. (There was no flooding of the pressure-hull before the battery exploded.)

SCORPION lost power and sank slowly over nearly 22 minutes to collapse at a depth of 1530-feet at 18:42:34 GMT on 22 May 1968.

There is the possibility that a similar sequence of events occurred aboard the SAN JUAN. If the wreck is located and efforts are made to recover components, emphasis should be placed on the battery system.

The author of this assessment was the lead acoustic analyst at the US Office of Naval Intelligence for 42 years, analyzed acoustic detectors of the loss of the USS THRESHER (SSN 593) on 10 April 1963 and testified before that Court of Inquiry. The author expresses his appreciation to those who supported this assessment with research and calculations.

23926419_1690820954271600_3936365020931501131_o.jpg
Click to expand...

May God Rest Their Souls! At least the end was so fast that they did not know what happened until they mustered at the Pearly Gates and were told by St. Peter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom