U.S. Nuclear Submarine Runs Aground
Moderator: S2k Moderators
-
Ivanova
U.S. Nuclear Submarine Runs Aground
U.S. Nuclear Submarine Runs Aground
Sat Jan 8, 3:45 AM ET
HONOLULU - A nuclear submarine ran aground about 350 miles south of Guam, injuring several sailors, one of them critically, the Navy said.
There were no reports of damage to the USS San Francisco's reactor plant, which was operating normally, the Navy said.
Jon Yoshishige, a spokesman for the U.S. Pacific Fleet based at Pearl Harbor, said the Friday afternoon incident is under investigation and the 360-foot submarine was headed back to its home port in Guam.
Details on the sailors' injuries were not immediately available. The sub has a crew of 137, officials said.
Military and Coast Guard aircraft from Guam were en route to monitor the submarine and assist if needed, the Navy said.
Guam is a U.S. territory about 3,700 miles southwest of Hawaii.
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u ... _aground_5
***
Quake has redrawn the world map
December 30, 2004 18:23 IST
The massive earthquake which unleashed deadly tsunamis in many Asian countries on Sunday has literally redrawn the map, moving some islands several meters, scientists say.
***
"The Indian plate's jarring slide released the Burma microplate from its tension, causing it to spring violently upwards, the report said.
This bulge could have altered the elevations, as well as the positions, of the nearby islands, McGuire says. The Andaman and Nicobar islands may have been raised by the quake; meanwhile, slightly further from the fault line itself, water levels indicate that the Indonesian city of Banda Aceh has been left lower than before.
Californian seismologists, Nature said, are already planning an expedition to see exactly how the area's geography has changed. They will use the Global Positioning System to work out how the region's maps will need to be redrawn. "
http://us.rediff.com/news/2004/dec/30map.htm
*
0 likes
-
Ivanova
I assume US submarines usually run via a computer program
that has in its program the ocean's normal topography.
But what if the massive earthquake changed some of the ocean's
floor topography ?? How else could a submarine running aground
350 miles south of its Guam's home base be explained ??
?
0 likes
-
Guest
Ivanova wrote::idea:
I assume US submarines usually run via a computer program
that has in its program the ocean's normal topography.
But what if the massive earthquake changed some of the ocean's
floor topography ?? How else could a submarine running aground
350 miles south of its Guam's home base be explained ??
?
I went to submarine school in 1989-1991, and it is very tough to run aground, especially near your home base. Either the helmsman was not paying attention or the COB gave nonsensical orders and did not realize the depths of teh ocean floor.
0 likes
-
Ivanova
wxcrazy wrote:
I went to submarine school in 1989-1991, and it is very tough to run aground, especially near your home base. Either the helmsman was not paying attention or the COB gave nonsensical orders and did not realize the depths of teh ocean floor
.
I doubt a US submarine is solely dependent on humans to operate...
it was probably on some kind of computer driven "automatic pilot"...
in which case, it was not human error that caused the crash... but
maybe a programming error, ie, the ocean floor topography had
changed since the recent earthquake.
*
Last edited by Ivanova on Sat Jan 08, 2005 6:22 pm, edited 2 times in total.
0 likes
-
Ivanova
Nuclear sub runs aground
From correspondents in Los Angeles
09jan05
US military planes and ships are rushing to help the US nuclear submarine San Francisco after it ran aground in the Pacific injuring about 20 crew, one seriously.
The vessel's nuclear plant was not damaged in the accident, which happened while the San Francisco was conducting underwater operations 560km south of its base at Guam, the Navy said.
The submarine was heading back to base under its own steam, but on the surface on today.
The Los Angeles class submarine, which has a crew of 137, was heading for a port visit in Brisbane when the accident happened yesterday.
A Pacific fleet spokeswoman said about 20 crew were injured, and one was reported in critical condition.
The injured were being treated on board by medics with special emergency training, the spokeswoman said.
But the submarine was still too far out of helicopter range for the evacuation of the most seriously injured sailor, Pacific Fleet spokesman Master Chief John Barnett said.
"We are sending air and sea units out to meet the ship to bring in extra medical help," he said.
"We are still working trying to get the right assets out there to help those guys."
A Navy statement said: "There were no reports of damage to the reactor plant, which is operating normally."
Officials said the hull of the vessel was intact.
A full investigation into the accident has already started.
Los Angeles class submarines are 110 meters long and have one nuclear reactor and one shaft, according to US Navy data.
Submarines of that class are able to get on station quickly, stay for an extended period of time and carry out a variety of missions including deployment of special forces, minelaying, and precision land attacks.
The USS San Francisco is one of three submarines of its class to be based in Guam. It has been there since 2002. It can carry out intelligence gathering and take special forces on missions. Its strike arms usually include Tomahawk missiles.
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common ... 02,00.html
*
From correspondents in Los Angeles
09jan05
US military planes and ships are rushing to help the US nuclear submarine San Francisco after it ran aground in the Pacific injuring about 20 crew, one seriously.
The vessel's nuclear plant was not damaged in the accident, which happened while the San Francisco was conducting underwater operations 560km south of its base at Guam, the Navy said.
The submarine was heading back to base under its own steam, but on the surface on today.
The Los Angeles class submarine, which has a crew of 137, was heading for a port visit in Brisbane when the accident happened yesterday.
A Pacific fleet spokeswoman said about 20 crew were injured, and one was reported in critical condition.
The injured were being treated on board by medics with special emergency training, the spokeswoman said.
But the submarine was still too far out of helicopter range for the evacuation of the most seriously injured sailor, Pacific Fleet spokesman Master Chief John Barnett said.
"We are sending air and sea units out to meet the ship to bring in extra medical help," he said.
"We are still working trying to get the right assets out there to help those guys."
A Navy statement said: "There were no reports of damage to the reactor plant, which is operating normally."
Officials said the hull of the vessel was intact.
A full investigation into the accident has already started.
Los Angeles class submarines are 110 meters long and have one nuclear reactor and one shaft, according to US Navy data.
Submarines of that class are able to get on station quickly, stay for an extended period of time and carry out a variety of missions including deployment of special forces, minelaying, and precision land attacks.
The USS San Francisco is one of three submarines of its class to be based in Guam. It has been there since 2002. It can carry out intelligence gathering and take special forces on missions. Its strike arms usually include Tomahawk missiles.
http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/common ... 02,00.html
*
0 likes
-
Ivanova
*
Volcano Erupting in Pacific
Diverts International Flights
see this topic:
http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=55481
Guam is a US territory... this erupting volcano is part of
the Northern Mariana Islands = US Commonwealth.
Which reminds me... CNN has yet to report from Diego Garcia
*
Volcano Erupting in Pacific
Diverts International Flights
see this topic:
http://www.storm2k.org/phpbb2/viewtopic.php?t=55481
Guam is a US territory... this erupting volcano is part of
the Northern Mariana Islands = US Commonwealth.
Which reminds me... CNN has yet to report from Diego Garcia
*
0 likes
-
Guest
Ivanova wrote:wxcrazy wrote:
I went to submarine school in 1989-1991, and it is very tough to run aground, especially near your home base. Either the helmsman was not paying attention or the COB gave nonsensical orders and did not realize the depths of teh ocean floor
.
I doubt a US submarine is solely dependent on humans to operate...
it was probably on some kind of computer driven "automatic pilot"...
in which case, it was not human error that caused the crash... but
maybe a programming error, ie, the ocean floor topography had
changed since the recent earthquake.
*
You must remember though, it takes humans to input the information, so it must be human error.
0 likes
-
kevin
Its not a computer program. They aren't pinging the ocean floor I'm assuming because everyone would know where a nuclear submarine is. Which would remove the undefeatable nuclear deterent. So these things are not actively probing the oceans floor. Do they have an idea of what the surface is like on the bottom? I would assume so.
To program a computer to go on autopilot would mean a detailed plan of where the submarine is and where it is going. it is my assumption that while computers no doubt process the orders given by people, it is a hands on navigation, using degrees of up and down and left to right.
No windows to look out neither.
To program a computer to go on autopilot would mean a detailed plan of where the submarine is and where it is going. it is my assumption that while computers no doubt process the orders given by people, it is a hands on navigation, using degrees of up and down and left to right.
No windows to look out neither.
0 likes
-
Guest
kevin wrote:Its not a computer program. They aren't pinging the ocean floor I'm assuming because everyone would know where a nuclear submarine is. Which would remove the undefeatable nuclear deterent. So these things are not actively probing the oceans floor. Do they have an idea of what the surface is like on the bottom? I would assume so.
To program a computer to go on autopilot would mean a detailed plan of where the submarine is and where it is going. it is my assumption that while computers no doubt process the orders given by people, it is a hands on navigation, using degrees of up and down and left to right.
No windows to look out neither.
They do ping the floor, and they do use autopilot. The helmsman is always by the handle to make sure nothing goes wrong. Trust me I still have my sub notes on it. The programs they have are sophisticated and I think the ocean topography changed on them and they did not know it.
0 likes
-
Ivanova
US submarine ran into apparently uncharted undersea mountain: official
WASHINGTON (AFP) Jan 11, 2005
The nuclear-powered US submarine that ran aground in the Pacific last week, causing the death of a sailor and injuring 23 others, ran head-on into an undersea mountain that apparently was not on the navy's charts, a US defense official said Tuesday.
The USS San Francisco, a Los Angeles-class attack submarine, arrived at its home port in Guam under its own steam Monday as the navy investigated the mishap.
A senior defense official, who asked not to be identified, told AFP initial reports were that the submarine was cruising at high speed at a depth of about 120 meters (400 feet) Sunday when it ran into an uncharted sea mountain.
Typically, a vessel's commander is held responsible for such mishaps, but the official said that might not be the result here if an investigation concludes that it was an uncharted sea mountain and the skipper's judgments were sound.
"Our hearts and prayers and sympathies are with the family of the sailor lost in that accident, his shipmates and all others injured and affected," Admiral Thomas Fargo, commander of the US Pacific Command, said in Hawaii.
"As we are still gathering facts, it would be inappropriate to speculate on the cause," he said. "But I assure you that the Pacific fleet will conduct a rapid and a thorough investigation and we'll let you know what happened once that investigation is complete."
The navy said the submarine's nuclear plant was not damaged and its hull was still intact.
But the sonar dome in the bow of the vessel was partly flooded during the collision, the official said.
The sailor who died Sunday of injuries sustained in the accident was identified as Machinist Mate 2nd Class John Allen Ashley, 24, of Akron, Ohio.
Twenty-three other crew members on the USS San Francisco were being treated "for a range of injuries, including broken bones, lacerations, bruises and a back injury," Petty Officer Alyssa Batarla told AFP.
The accident occurred on Friday, some 560 kilometers (350 miles) south of Guam, when the vessel was conducting underwater operations on its way to Brisbane, Australia with its crew of 137, the navy said.
http://www.spacewar.com/2005/050111170915.7kuasutx.html
*
0 likes
-
Ivanova
January 10, 2005
Continuing Earth Changes Cripple American Submarine
and Pose New Dangers for the American Continents
By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Russian Subscribers
Continued energy surges, and as yet still unexplained by Western scientists, continue to bombard the earth’s Southern Hemispheric Regions this morning causing many widespread and anomalous events throughout the world and affecting all of its peoples.
Western media sources are presently reporting the dire circumstances surrounding the United States Los Angeles Class Nuclear Submarine San Francisco and the latest reports are saying that one crewman has died and ‘23 other crew members are being treated aboard for injuries including broken bones, bruises and lacerations’.
The BBC also reports in this article that, “The US Navy said it did not know what the vessel had struck and was investigating severe damage to the outside of the submarine.”
Not being reported by the Western media though is that the USS San Francisco (SSN 711) is part of the United States Navy’s Pacific Fleet, and a part of what is known as Submarine Squadron Fifteen based out of the US Territory of Guam, located in the Mariana Islands Region of the Pacific Ocean.
The significance of this lies in the eruption on Anatahan Island, a part of the Mariana Islands and in the ‘patrol zone’ of the USS San Francisco.
As related to us by one Russian Naval Official, “Imagine you walking around your house at night with the lights off and someone had re-arranged the furniture, make no mistake about it, the American submariners ‘know’ their courses too well and are too highly trained for this to happen suddenly. Some extreme geologic ‘change’ had to have happened for this accident to occur.”
Could this ‘extreme geologic change’ have been this eruption?
As reported in the Western media regarding this event we hear, “The volcano's activity intensified beginning Tuesday and Wednesday last week after months of extremely low seismic activities, which followed the second batch of eruptions from April to June last year. The volcano on Anatahan first erupted after centuries of dormancy on May 10, 2003, with ash plume rising to more than 30,000 feet.”
We are also continuing to receive reports of meteor fireballs entering the earth’s atmosphere. Yesterday another such sighting was reported as occurring in the United States region of Alaska, and where it is said, “It streaked quickly from the west to the east in a steep downward arc, and soon wasn't visible behind the mountains.”
More information also continues to be received by us also relating to my December 28, 2004 report, Evidence for Sumatra 9.0 Quake Leans towards Meteorite Strike.
In one research report by the United States National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) it clearly states, and in apparent contradiction to the known facts about The Great Tsunami of 2004, that, “In the Indian Ocean, however, the Indo-Australian plate is being subducted beneath the Eurasian plate at its east margin. Therefore, most tsunamis generated in this area are propagated toward the southwest shores of Java and Sumatra, rather than into the Indian Ocean.”
As recent events have occurred however we know this not to be the case due to the fact that the waves propagated out from a ‘center’ to all areas of the Indian Ocean, to even the African Coast and beyond.
Numerous, yet conflicting, Western media reports also continue to be generated about this cataclysmic event with no regard to science fact but rather relying on speculation alone.
Reports are varying to many extremes of sea floor horizontal and/or vertical movement, such as one report that states, “slippage occurred along about 1,200 km of the interface between the tectonic plates”, and another that states that it was, “…a 600-mile-long (965km) rupture that generated a 35ft vertical displacement in the sea floor.”
But the differences in how many kilometers of vertical displacement did or did not occur, or how high or low various parts of the sea floor rose or fell are not as important as to how fast these assertions of fact were being spread by the Western media sources.
They in fact began within hours of the cataclysm occurring, with no scientific research being conducted and in contradiction to what the United States National Geophysical Data Center had reported and Prof Ravinder Kumar of the Centre of Advance Studies in Geology, Punjab University who has said, “There is no historic record of a tsunami in the Indian Ocean.”
This information alone does not constitute proof of a meteorite strike being the cause of this cataclysmic, but neither do the pronouncements by the Western media stating the cause as being an earthquake event. The behavior of the waves in the Indian Ocean though do suggest a meteorite due to their concentric nature of flowing throughout the oceans basin, where if these were caused by an earthquake would have been omni or bi directed only as scientists have previously predicted, and particularly in a region where no historical reports of a tsunami had ever been recorded.
Not being connected in the Western Media about this event either was its precursor which occurred in the Macquarie Island region of Antarctica and was measured as an 8.2 event on the Richter scale. (An 8.2 Richter event is equal to 3 billion tons of TNT and the 9.0 event in the Indian Ocean was equal to 32 billion tons.) But released almost simultaneously with the Antarctica 8.2 event was a report from the United States space organization NASA's Near Earth Object Program in an ‘Asteroid Alert’ which in part said, “For comparison, the Barringer Meteor Crater in northern Arizona is thought to have been created by an iron meteorite between 30 and 100 meters in diameter. Its impact would have released energy equivalent to about 3.5 million tons of TNT.”
More interesting in the light of these recent events are that these two events have more in common than their historically rare power in that both the Antarctica event and the Indian Ocean event are connected by their sameness in both geological and magnetic anomalous features, and as previously mapped by scientists.
One such other area on the earth is known as the Cayman Trough and is located in the Northwest Caribbean Sea.
A number of the world’s top scientists in their fields have reported on this region in a report that in part says, “We review the plate tectonic evolution of the Caribbean area based on a revised model for the opening of the central North Atlantic and the South Atlantic, as well based on an updated model of the motion of the Americas relative to the Atlantic-Indian hotspot reference frame. We focus on post-83 Ma reconstructions, for which we have combined a set of new magnetic anomaly data in the central North Atlantic between the Kane and Atlantis fracture zones with existing magnetic anomaly data in the central North and South Atlantic oceans and fracture zone identifications from a dense gravity grid from satellite altimetry to compute North America-South America plate motions and their uncertainties.”
As we are all aware, the largest magnetic anomalous area in the world is located in Russia and is named the Kursk Satellite Magnetic Anomaly (KMA), and in the memory of our fallen heroes from the great Russian Submarine Kursk of the same naming.
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index658.htm
Continuing Earth Changes Cripple American Submarine
and Pose New Dangers for the American Continents
By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Russian Subscribers
Continued energy surges, and as yet still unexplained by Western scientists, continue to bombard the earth’s Southern Hemispheric Regions this morning causing many widespread and anomalous events throughout the world and affecting all of its peoples.
Western media sources are presently reporting the dire circumstances surrounding the United States Los Angeles Class Nuclear Submarine San Francisco and the latest reports are saying that one crewman has died and ‘23 other crew members are being treated aboard for injuries including broken bones, bruises and lacerations’.
The BBC also reports in this article that, “The US Navy said it did not know what the vessel had struck and was investigating severe damage to the outside of the submarine.”
Not being reported by the Western media though is that the USS San Francisco (SSN 711) is part of the United States Navy’s Pacific Fleet, and a part of what is known as Submarine Squadron Fifteen based out of the US Territory of Guam, located in the Mariana Islands Region of the Pacific Ocean.
The significance of this lies in the eruption on Anatahan Island, a part of the Mariana Islands and in the ‘patrol zone’ of the USS San Francisco.
As related to us by one Russian Naval Official, “Imagine you walking around your house at night with the lights off and someone had re-arranged the furniture, make no mistake about it, the American submariners ‘know’ their courses too well and are too highly trained for this to happen suddenly. Some extreme geologic ‘change’ had to have happened for this accident to occur.”
Could this ‘extreme geologic change’ have been this eruption?
As reported in the Western media regarding this event we hear, “The volcano's activity intensified beginning Tuesday and Wednesday last week after months of extremely low seismic activities, which followed the second batch of eruptions from April to June last year. The volcano on Anatahan first erupted after centuries of dormancy on May 10, 2003, with ash plume rising to more than 30,000 feet.”
We are also continuing to receive reports of meteor fireballs entering the earth’s atmosphere. Yesterday another such sighting was reported as occurring in the United States region of Alaska, and where it is said, “It streaked quickly from the west to the east in a steep downward arc, and soon wasn't visible behind the mountains.”
More information also continues to be received by us also relating to my December 28, 2004 report, Evidence for Sumatra 9.0 Quake Leans towards Meteorite Strike.
In one research report by the United States National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) it clearly states, and in apparent contradiction to the known facts about The Great Tsunami of 2004, that, “In the Indian Ocean, however, the Indo-Australian plate is being subducted beneath the Eurasian plate at its east margin. Therefore, most tsunamis generated in this area are propagated toward the southwest shores of Java and Sumatra, rather than into the Indian Ocean.”
As recent events have occurred however we know this not to be the case due to the fact that the waves propagated out from a ‘center’ to all areas of the Indian Ocean, to even the African Coast and beyond.
Numerous, yet conflicting, Western media reports also continue to be generated about this cataclysmic event with no regard to science fact but rather relying on speculation alone.
Reports are varying to many extremes of sea floor horizontal and/or vertical movement, such as one report that states, “slippage occurred along about 1,200 km of the interface between the tectonic plates”, and another that states that it was, “…a 600-mile-long (965km) rupture that generated a 35ft vertical displacement in the sea floor.”
But the differences in how many kilometers of vertical displacement did or did not occur, or how high or low various parts of the sea floor rose or fell are not as important as to how fast these assertions of fact were being spread by the Western media sources.
They in fact began within hours of the cataclysm occurring, with no scientific research being conducted and in contradiction to what the United States National Geophysical Data Center had reported and Prof Ravinder Kumar of the Centre of Advance Studies in Geology, Punjab University who has said, “There is no historic record of a tsunami in the Indian Ocean.”
This information alone does not constitute proof of a meteorite strike being the cause of this cataclysmic, but neither do the pronouncements by the Western media stating the cause as being an earthquake event. The behavior of the waves in the Indian Ocean though do suggest a meteorite due to their concentric nature of flowing throughout the oceans basin, where if these were caused by an earthquake would have been omni or bi directed only as scientists have previously predicted, and particularly in a region where no historical reports of a tsunami had ever been recorded.
Not being connected in the Western Media about this event either was its precursor which occurred in the Macquarie Island region of Antarctica and was measured as an 8.2 event on the Richter scale. (An 8.2 Richter event is equal to 3 billion tons of TNT and the 9.0 event in the Indian Ocean was equal to 32 billion tons.) But released almost simultaneously with the Antarctica 8.2 event was a report from the United States space organization NASA's Near Earth Object Program in an ‘Asteroid Alert’ which in part said, “For comparison, the Barringer Meteor Crater in northern Arizona is thought to have been created by an iron meteorite between 30 and 100 meters in diameter. Its impact would have released energy equivalent to about 3.5 million tons of TNT.”
More interesting in the light of these recent events are that these two events have more in common than their historically rare power in that both the Antarctica event and the Indian Ocean event are connected by their sameness in both geological and magnetic anomalous features, and as previously mapped by scientists.
One such other area on the earth is known as the Cayman Trough and is located in the Northwest Caribbean Sea.
A number of the world’s top scientists in their fields have reported on this region in a report that in part says, “We review the plate tectonic evolution of the Caribbean area based on a revised model for the opening of the central North Atlantic and the South Atlantic, as well based on an updated model of the motion of the Americas relative to the Atlantic-Indian hotspot reference frame. We focus on post-83 Ma reconstructions, for which we have combined a set of new magnetic anomaly data in the central North Atlantic between the Kane and Atlantis fracture zones with existing magnetic anomaly data in the central North and South Atlantic oceans and fracture zone identifications from a dense gravity grid from satellite altimetry to compute North America-South America plate motions and their uncertainties.”
As we are all aware, the largest magnetic anomalous area in the world is located in Russia and is named the Kursk Satellite Magnetic Anomaly (KMA), and in the memory of our fallen heroes from the great Russian Submarine Kursk of the same naming.
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index658.htm
0 likes
-
Ivanova
*
New York Times
Navy Says Sub Hit Mountain That Was Not on Its Charts
By CHRISTOPHER DREW
Published: January 11, 2005
A nuclear attack submarine that ran aground Saturday in the South Pacific, killing one sailor and injuring 23 others, appears to have smashed into an undersea mountain that was not on its charts, Navy officials said yesterday.
Go to URL for entire article
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/11/natio ... oref=login
January 12, 2005
E-Mail Shows Higher Toll From Crash of Submarine
By CHRISTOPHER DREW
The nuclear submarine that ran aground Saturday in the South Pacific hit so "incredibly hard" that about 60 of its 137 crew members were injured and the sailor who died was thrown 20 feet by the impact, according to internal Navy e-mail messages sent by a top admiral.
The messages said the submarine's hull was severely damaged after the head-on crash into what Navy officials believe was an undersea mountain that was not on the navigation charts. One message said the submarine, the San Francisco, was traveling at high speed, and the impact practically stopped it in its tracks and caused flooding in parts of the bow.
The messages were written by Rear Adm. Paul F. Sullivan, the commander of submarines in the Pacific. They paint a more dire picture of the accident, which occurred 360 miles southeast of Guam, than had previously been disclosed. They also hint at the extensive efforts to steady the vessel and save the sailor who died.
The e-mail indicated that the Navy had tried to evacuate the fatally injured man, Machinist Mate 2nd Class Joseph A. Ashley, within hours after he had been thrown forward and hit his head on a metal pump, which knocked him unconscious.
Petty Officer Ashley's father, Daniel L. Ashley, said in an interview he had been told that as a helicopter hovered over the choppy seas, crew members could not maneuver a stretcher carrying his son through the submarine's hatches before he died.
"They tried numerous times to maneuver him through various hatches," Mr. Ashley said. "But it just didn't happen."
Admiral Sullivan, who is based in Hawaii, sent the e-mail messages to other Navy officials. As the messages circulated within the submarine community, two people provided copies to The New York Times, and Navy officials confirmed their authenticity.
The e-mail also indicated that about 60 crew members had been injured. All the Navy had said publicly was that 23 crew members were treated for broken bones, cuts and bruises.
The messages said those 23 were hurt seriously enough that they were unable to stand their watch duties as the submarine limped back to Guam. Mr. Ashley said the submarine's captain, Cmdr. Kevin Mooney, told him by phone on Monday that among the injured crew members, "there were a lot of broken fingers, broken arms and legs and one fractured back."
Navy officials said yesterday that the rest of the injuries were minor.
The admiral's e-mail also said an outer hull ripped open at the submarine's nose, causing flooding in a dome with sonar sensors and in four of the ballast tanks used to submerge the vessel or take it to the surface.
The flooding caused the submarine to sit deeper in the water and made it hard to maneuver on the trip back to Guam. Sailors had to keep pumping pressurized air into the tanks to prevent the water from rising and to maintain buoyancy.
An inner hull, which surrounds the crew's living and work spaces, held firm, the e-mail said. The nuclear reactor and critical propulsion systems were not damaged.
In the e-mail, Admiral Sullivan did not discuss why the vessel ran aground. The Navy is investigating, and the admiral, who ultimately will have to decide whether to reprimand any of the submarine's crew members, did not respond to requests for comment.
Navy officials have said that the submarine, which was headed for Australia, appeared to have smashed into an undersea mountain that was not on its charts. Mr. Ashley, who lives in Akron, Ohio, said Commander Mooney told him the same thing on Monday.
"He said, 'On the charts we have, this is a clear area all the way through to Australia,' " Mr. Ashley said.
Navy officials said the San Francisco was traveling at 30 knots when it careened off some part of the undersea mountain range. In one of the e-mail messages, Admiral Sullivan wrote that on impact, the vessel made a "nearly instantaneous deacceleration" to about 4 knots.
Mr. Ashley said Commander Mooney told him that his son had just gotten off watch duty in the engine area and was chatting with other sailors when the accident occurred.
Mr. Ashley said his son, who was 24, "loved the Navy and that submarine" and had just re-enlisted.
Mr. Ashley said Commander Mooney, who could not be reached for comment, also told him that his son's condition seemed to worsen as sailors labored to tilt the stretcher through the evacuation hatch.
Mr. Ashley said that at the end of the conversation, Commander Mooney told him that he took full responsibility for the sailor's death. Mr. Ashley said he replied that he had heard all he needed "to know that you and your crew did everything you could do to save my son's life."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/12/national/12sub.html
*
New York Times
Navy Says Sub Hit Mountain That Was Not on Its Charts
By CHRISTOPHER DREW
Published: January 11, 2005
A nuclear attack submarine that ran aground Saturday in the South Pacific, killing one sailor and injuring 23 others, appears to have smashed into an undersea mountain that was not on its charts, Navy officials said yesterday.
Go to URL for entire article
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/11/natio ... oref=login
January 12, 2005
E-Mail Shows Higher Toll From Crash of Submarine
By CHRISTOPHER DREW
The nuclear submarine that ran aground Saturday in the South Pacific hit so "incredibly hard" that about 60 of its 137 crew members were injured and the sailor who died was thrown 20 feet by the impact, according to internal Navy e-mail messages sent by a top admiral.
The messages said the submarine's hull was severely damaged after the head-on crash into what Navy officials believe was an undersea mountain that was not on the navigation charts. One message said the submarine, the San Francisco, was traveling at high speed, and the impact practically stopped it in its tracks and caused flooding in parts of the bow.
The messages were written by Rear Adm. Paul F. Sullivan, the commander of submarines in the Pacific. They paint a more dire picture of the accident, which occurred 360 miles southeast of Guam, than had previously been disclosed. They also hint at the extensive efforts to steady the vessel and save the sailor who died.
The e-mail indicated that the Navy had tried to evacuate the fatally injured man, Machinist Mate 2nd Class Joseph A. Ashley, within hours after he had been thrown forward and hit his head on a metal pump, which knocked him unconscious.
Petty Officer Ashley's father, Daniel L. Ashley, said in an interview he had been told that as a helicopter hovered over the choppy seas, crew members could not maneuver a stretcher carrying his son through the submarine's hatches before he died.
"They tried numerous times to maneuver him through various hatches," Mr. Ashley said. "But it just didn't happen."
Admiral Sullivan, who is based in Hawaii, sent the e-mail messages to other Navy officials. As the messages circulated within the submarine community, two people provided copies to The New York Times, and Navy officials confirmed their authenticity.
The e-mail also indicated that about 60 crew members had been injured. All the Navy had said publicly was that 23 crew members were treated for broken bones, cuts and bruises.
The messages said those 23 were hurt seriously enough that they were unable to stand their watch duties as the submarine limped back to Guam. Mr. Ashley said the submarine's captain, Cmdr. Kevin Mooney, told him by phone on Monday that among the injured crew members, "there were a lot of broken fingers, broken arms and legs and one fractured back."
Navy officials said yesterday that the rest of the injuries were minor.
The admiral's e-mail also said an outer hull ripped open at the submarine's nose, causing flooding in a dome with sonar sensors and in four of the ballast tanks used to submerge the vessel or take it to the surface.
The flooding caused the submarine to sit deeper in the water and made it hard to maneuver on the trip back to Guam. Sailors had to keep pumping pressurized air into the tanks to prevent the water from rising and to maintain buoyancy.
An inner hull, which surrounds the crew's living and work spaces, held firm, the e-mail said. The nuclear reactor and critical propulsion systems were not damaged.
In the e-mail, Admiral Sullivan did not discuss why the vessel ran aground. The Navy is investigating, and the admiral, who ultimately will have to decide whether to reprimand any of the submarine's crew members, did not respond to requests for comment.
Navy officials have said that the submarine, which was headed for Australia, appeared to have smashed into an undersea mountain that was not on its charts. Mr. Ashley, who lives in Akron, Ohio, said Commander Mooney told him the same thing on Monday.
"He said, 'On the charts we have, this is a clear area all the way through to Australia,' " Mr. Ashley said.
Navy officials said the San Francisco was traveling at 30 knots when it careened off some part of the undersea mountain range. In one of the e-mail messages, Admiral Sullivan wrote that on impact, the vessel made a "nearly instantaneous deacceleration" to about 4 knots.
Mr. Ashley said Commander Mooney told him that his son had just gotten off watch duty in the engine area and was chatting with other sailors when the accident occurred.
Mr. Ashley said his son, who was 24, "loved the Navy and that submarine" and had just re-enlisted.
Mr. Ashley said Commander Mooney, who could not be reached for comment, also told him that his son's condition seemed to worsen as sailors labored to tilt the stretcher through the evacuation hatch.
Mr. Ashley said that at the end of the conversation, Commander Mooney told him that he took full responsibility for the sailor's death. Mr. Ashley said he replied that he had heard all he needed "to know that you and your crew did everything you could do to save my son's life."
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/01/12/national/12sub.html
*
0 likes
-
Ivanova
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 29 guests