View Full Version : HMS Astute Grounded
Captain Nemo
10-22-10, 06:04 AM
See http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-11605365
Nemo
I really wish they would stop doing that to our boats...it can't be healthy... :hmmm:
Captain Nemo
10-22-10, 06:12 AM
Especially when they are brand new:DL.
Nemo
Latest scuttle is that it'll be 3-4 hours before they can get her moved and it's the rudder that's stuck.
http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/49613000/jpg/_49613917_sub_464.jpg
Really not the sort of thing that you want happening right after the budget cuts, particularly not to a brand new sub that's not even in proper service yet! :damn:
HunterICX
10-22-10, 06:20 AM
I'll bet Nelson is doing a facepalm right now.
HunterICX
I'll bet Nelson is doing a facepalm right now.
HunterICX
Facepalm whilst spinning...I'd like to see that... *fetches shovel*
Betonov
10-22-10, 06:52 AM
Facepalm whilst spinning...I'd like to see that... *fetches shovel*
Connect him to a power generator and you have a cheap source of unlimited power
Bill Nichols
10-22-10, 07:32 AM
See news articles about Astute's grounding on Subsim's news page, just above the item, "Navy picks submarines that will carry first women".
Coincidence?
:lost:
Weiss Pinguin
10-22-10, 08:34 AM
http://www.geekologie.com/2009/02/17/sub%20crash.jpg
Jimbuna
10-22-10, 08:52 AM
It just hasn't been a good week for the RN :doh:
TLAM Strike
10-22-10, 09:24 AM
That's it! No more navy for you! Effective tomorrow transfer all British naval assets to Norfolk naval base. American will now take over sea based defense of your rocky little island... :doh:
Facepalm whilst spinning...I'd like to see that... *fetches shovel*
and thus began Oberon of the Dead...
Somebodies career just ended!
XabbaRus
10-22-10, 11:01 AM
1900 BST they are going to try and float it.
In silt and not rocks so it might not be too bad.
TLAM Strike
10-22-10, 11:15 AM
In silt and not rocks so it might not be too bad.
Unless that silt got sucked in to the reactor cooling loop. :dead:
and thus began Oberon of the Dead...
http://nuuniform.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/c5a3a39374ercise.jpg.jpg
Anyway:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8p2LuvoXKmU
Cameras out Russian agents! The propulsor came out of the water a bit at low tide, so snappy snappy. :haha:
Oh dear...oh dear...I don't know whether to laugh or cry... :hmmm:
Oh, and of course:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-11606046
Crappy shingle rocks up there.... but why that close.
Hi all btw :arrgh!:
frau kaleun
10-22-10, 12:01 PM
It just hasn't been a good week for the RN :doh:
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1353/5105426198_2fefe9291c.jpg
:O:
Who is me?
An old-timer who can't remember his password or the email the account was set up on :rotfl2:
An old-timer who can't remember his password or the email the account was set up on :rotfl2:
Jesus, can't you people stick to one email addy and 2-3 passwords. :O:
Jesus, can't you people stick to one email addy and 2-3 passwords. :O:
I normally do, but since my account was setup in 2001 and last used 10-18-2009 05:02 PM ive forgotten it :har:
And she's off:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-highlands-islands-11609870
Jimbuna
10-22-10, 01:00 PM
Aside from attack capabilities, it is able to sit in waters off the coast undetected, delivering the UK's special forces where needed or even listening to mobile phone conversations.
But not all of the time :DL
But not all of the time :DL
Well...they got the sitting in the waters off the coast bit right... :hmmm:
ETR3(SS)
10-22-10, 01:16 PM
You know it's really sad to see the submarine force not just in the US but in the UK as well having these silly accidents. Gone are the days of the Batfish (SSN) and her superb crew.:nope:
@TLAM Judging by the exhaust coming out of the sail I'd say they shut down the Main and Aux Seawater Pumps and were running off the battery with the diesel generator going. Well, at least that's what they should have done.
Jimbuna
10-22-10, 01:17 PM
I wonder if every spare crew member was ordered forrad to help lift the tail? :DL
I wonder if every spare crew member was ordered forrad to help lift the tail? :DL
Good crash dive training... :hmmm:
Buddahaid
10-22-10, 01:23 PM
The effect of too much simulator training and little sea time perhaps? Nobody looking outside the window?
You know it's really sad to see the submarine force not just in the US but in the UK as well having these silly accidents. Gone are the days of the Batfish (SSN) and her superb crew.:nope:
@TLAM Judging by the exhaust coming out of the sail I'd say they shut down the Main and Aux Seawater Pumps and were running off the battery with the diesel generator going. Well, at least that's what they should have done.
Aye, it does seem like these kind of accidents are rising a bit...either that or they're less classified now or happen in places where you really can't classify it.
Agreed on the pumps. :yep:
ETR3(SS)
10-22-10, 01:27 PM
The effect of too much simulator training and little sea time perhaps? Nobody looking outside the window?I don't know about the UK training program, but ours here was more than adequate.:yep:
I don't know about the UK training program, but ours here was more than adequate.:yep:
Perisher course...
Nuff said
http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_18/perisher.htm
Makes it all the more embarrassing when things like this happen...but, I don't know who was on board or what was her mission other than a possible personnel transfer exercise.
XabbaRus
10-22-10, 01:34 PM
The thing is she must have been transiting on the surface so someone on the bridge should have seen the marker buoys in the channel.
I heard on the news that its rudder had jammed so maybe that was why it was off course.
Would they have shut the reactor down?
papa_smurf
10-22-10, 01:36 PM
Well to coin the phrase "Whoops!"
ETR3(SS)
10-22-10, 01:36 PM
I can respect Perisher that's for sure. My last XO had Brit dolphins and was a Perisher graduate. One of three in the US Navy I believe.
Herr-Berbunch
10-22-10, 01:53 PM
Perisher has 'an historical failure of 25%', but due to cutbacks they still get to command a sub :har:
Andy Cole was bad enough playing football (not handegg!)(Jim, you're not the NUFC idiot who got an Andy Cole tatoo a few days before he left, are you?) nevermind join the navy.
Jimbuna
10-22-10, 02:03 PM
Perisher has 'an historical failure of 25%', but due to cutbacks they still get to command a sub :har:
Andy Cole was bad enough playing football (not handegg!)(Jim, you're not the NUFC idiot who got an Andy Cole tatoo a few days before he left, are you?) nevermind join the navy.
No...I'm the NUFC idiot with the clubs badge in colour on my left bicep and the ECB three lions emblem on the right one.
TLAM Strike
10-22-10, 06:50 PM
Would they have shut the reactor down? Most definitely, don't want to go fouling up the home waters if the get their cooling system clogged with silt. :03:
I wonder if every spare crew member was ordered forrad to help lift the tail? :DL "All hands sally ship!" :haha:
@TLAM Judging by the exhaust coming out of the sail I'd say they shut down the Main and Aux Seawater Pumps and were running off the battery with the diesel generator going. Well, at least that's what they should have done. Yea it did look like they were running on diesels by the smoke from the snort mast. :yep:
papa_smurf
10-23-10, 06:09 AM
You would think the Royal Navy would have accurate navigation maps, or was the shingle bank constantly shifting so it can't be accurately mapped?
Anyways, someone is going to be in BIG trouble for this.
XabbaRus
10-23-10, 09:30 AM
on a related note according to the Sun there is a Russian submarine lurking around the North Sea apparently tracking a Vanguard SSBN.
They had a picture of the real Akula also know as the Typhoon SSBN and I was thinking, they have got the wrong Akula...they must be meaning the the Shcuka B - Akula SSN.
Now when they say North Sea do they mean the bit between Scotland and Norway or do they mean further north as I though a Vanguard would transit to the north easter atlantic and then far north closer to the ice cap.
Anyway interesting times.
Bubblehead Nuke
10-23-10, 10:36 PM
Looking at the photos of it, I'd say you could have walked on the stern planes. I'll bet they were JUST under the water. The stress on the hull is HUGE in situations like this. She will be in a drydock VERY soon I'll bet.
As for them running the diesel? I would say that was a prudent thing to do. With water that shallow I would have been worried about cavitation of the MSW pumps and silt injesting into the condensers. No cooling is a bad thing.
One other thing most people do not realize. There is NO SHIELDING on the side of the boats. There is SOME shielding on the top of the reactor compartment so you can walk topside at very low power levels, but NONE on the sides. As far as they were out of the water, they would have a radiological consideration to think of. There are also other operational aspects to consider. I know on a 688, we would have been shut down if that high and dry.
Its is gonna be a BAD day for somone.
No...I'm the NUFC idiot with the clubs badge in colour on my left bicep and the ECB three lions emblem on the right one.
I can vouch for all 3 of Jim's statements of fact here.:D
Kazuaki Shimazaki II
10-23-10, 11:09 PM
Perisher has 'an historical failure of 25%', but due to cutbacks they still get to command a sub :har:
Wouldn't standards (at least in terms of qualifying percentile) actually rise in times of cutbacks because ship-counts and junior crew are generally slashed harder than mid-level and senior officers?
One other thing most people do not realize. There is NO SHIELDING on the side of the boats. There is SOME shielding on the top of the reactor compartment so you can walk topside at very low power levels, but NONE on the sides. As far as they were out of the water, they would have a radiological consideration to think of. There are also other operational aspects to consider. I know on a 688, we would have been shut down if that high and dry.
Its is gonna be a BAD day for somone.
I could have lived my whole life without knowing about this part...
TLAM Strike
10-23-10, 11:39 PM
Looking at the photos of it, I'd say you could have walked on the stern planes. I'll bet they were JUST under the water. The stress on the hull is HUGE in situations like this. She will be in a drydock VERY soon I'll bet.
As for them running the diesel? I would say that was a prudent thing to do. With water that shallow I would have been worried about cavitation of the MSW pumps and silt injesting into the condensers. No cooling is a bad thing.
One other thing most people do not realize. There is NO SHIELDING on the side of the boats. There is SOME shielding on the top of the reactor compartment so you can walk topside at very low power levels, but NONE on the sides. As far as they were out of the water, they would have a radiological consideration to think of. There are also other operational aspects to consider. I know on a 688, we would have been shut down if that high and dry.
Its is gonna be a BAD day for somone.
Question... if the Reactor is SCRAMED aren't the rods dropped in to the reactor vessel in a solution of water and a moderator to stop the nuclear reaction? Doesn't that stop most of the harmful radiation? :hmmm:
The CO is going to get Scrammed I'm pretty sure of that much. Of course, there's bound to be a catalog of errors about, starting with getting so close to shore, sounding equipment either not being checked or not working. There's a hundred different failures that could have accumulated to create this incident...but at the end of the day, HMS Astute is an SSN, SSNs aren't exactly good at shallow water ops, even in friendly territory. I've heard that a personnel transfer exercise had taken place just before she caught her rudder, so that explains why she was close to shore, probably practicing SBS deployment and recovery, but there's close and then there's too close, and the two are measured by success or failure...and in this case it was a very embarrassing failure.
In regards to radiologics, since she was a distance from the shore (close but not right in) I should imagine that anyone at the shore would have only received a very low dosage, particularly since only a third or so of the side was exposed. The tugs nearby might have got a bigger dosage but since they didn't really move in close until the tide was up, they might be alright, furthermore it's possible they scrammed the reactor and are running on diesels now. They certainly had the diesels on when stuck.
The latest reports indicate that she's able to make her own way back to Faslane, (again, probably on diesels) I'm not sure if Faslane has a drydock, I think it does but it's undercover (for the Vanguards) but I wouldn't be surprised if she spends at least the rest of the year in there undergoing strict hull testing.
Not exactly the shining start for our new attack sub, let's hope that Ambush does a bit better when she's finished next year. :yeah:
Catfish
10-24-10, 09:13 AM
Hello,
" ... Aside from attack capabilities, it is able to sit in waters off the coast undetected, delivering the UK's special forces where needed or even listening to mobile phone conversations. ..."
:rotfl2:Sorry, but this somehow made me laugh.
I think she is running on Diesel judging from the exhaust fumes, most probably to keep up electricity for board systems and cooling pumps for the - most probably shut-down - reactor. Even a scrammed reactor will take some time to cool down.
From bubblehead nuke:
" ... There is NO SHIELDING on the side of the boats. There is SOME shielding on the top of the reactor compartment so you can walk topside at very low power levels, but NONE on the sides. As far as they were out of the water, they would have a radiological consideration to think of. There are also other operational aspects to consider. I know on a 688, we would have been shut down if that high and dry. ..."
This is why a always have to laugh at those official statements like
"there was no radioactivity leaking out".
What the hell do they mean ? That no radiating material itself leaked out ? This would be a major disaster.
But the reactor is radiating all the time, only that there is a lot of seawater around it which buffers most of it, although not very nice towards mother nature even when all works as it should.
The cooling water of the reactor's inner cooling system is certainly radioactive, as well as all the tubes, heat exchangers, steel and metal around becomes radioactive, when exposed to nuclear radiation for a time. I really do not even want to know what is going on in Murmansk and Severodvinsk with all those laid off and rusting boats. Ah wait, they cut out whole segments of some subs and sunk them near the coast of Novaja Semlja - immediately before leasing out the region to norvegian fishing trawlers. Nuclear propulsion has never been a "clean" technology, by the real meaning of the word. :D
Greetings,
Catfish
XabbaRus
10-24-10, 09:48 AM
Ok comments like that really annoy me.
Talking about splitting hairs. Radiation falls off with range quite quickly. As long as the pipes didn't break and the coolant didn't leak then there has been no incident.
However the wingnuts at CND don't realise that, they just assume that as soon as a nuke boat has a bump or something that that is proof nuclear powered vessels are more dangerous and at risk as if the fact they are nuclear makes them more likely to have an accident. I'd say that the bumps and scrapes that commercial shipping have had over the past decades have caused more pollution than nuke boats.
What the russians did yes is nuts, but then that is their business.
Catfish
10-24-10, 10:01 AM
Hello,
Ok comments like that really annoy me.
Talking about splitting hairs. Radiation falls off with range quite quickly. As long as the pipes didn't break and the coolant didn't leak then there has been no incident.
Well i thought here at subsim i could be a little polemic :O:
I know that radiation falls away quickly, and this was no "incident". However what do they do after the boat's or other's life cycle(s) ? Clean the steel plates with soap ? The reactor housing, or the fuel rods, make small pellets and seal them in glass masses to bury ? If they do that at all, and just don't sink the waste in a fishery area.
I just said that nuclear propulsion is not a "clean" technology if taking energy balance, including building and disposing, into account.
A breaking-up super tanker or disposing marine fuel residues into the sea has a more direct effect, i agree.
Greetings,
Catfish
Jimbuna
10-24-10, 11:29 AM
Did anyone notice the amount of crap that has already attached itself to the hull just below the surfaced waterline? :o
Jimbuna
10-24-10, 11:30 AM
I can vouch for all 3 of Jim's statements of fact here.:D
I resemble that remark http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/1853/angry8ro5.gif
Did anyone notice the amount of crap that has already attached itself to the hull just below the surfaced waterline? :o
Aye, it doesn't take long...I wonder how it affects sonar performance and signature... :hmmm:
Jimbuna
10-24-10, 11:35 AM
Aye, it doesn't take long...I wonder how it affects sonar performance and signature... :hmmm:
Me too...but I should imagine it is the same for all subs.
Me too...but I should imagine it is the same for all subs.
Indeed, I should imagine they get a scrape down or whatever the navy uses, when they put into drydock, perhaps for degaussing.
Interestingly though, on having a quick scan to see how the navy cleans the underside of its boats I came across talk of sharkskin inspired artificial coatings which might prevent algae and the like from adhering to the hull of a vessel. Perhaps this may have a future.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/2005/0505-sharkinspired_boat_surface.htm
Or...perhaps not, it is possible that this 'sharkskin' due to its design may create cavitation, however for surface ships this is not so much of a problem.
TLAM Strike
10-24-10, 12:12 PM
Indeed, I should imagine they get a scrape down or whatever the navy uses, when they put into drydock, perhaps for degaussing.
Interestingly though, on having a quick scan to see how the navy cleans the underside of its boats I came across talk of sharkskin inspired artificial coatings which might prevent algae and the like from adhering to the hull of a vessel. Perhaps this may have a future.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/2005/0505-sharkinspired_boat_surface.htm
Or...perhaps not, it is possible that this 'sharkskin' due to its design may create cavitation, however for surface ships this is not so much of a problem.
That red or green paint you see on the under side of ships is called anti-fouling paint, it makes it difficult for marine organisms to latch on but it doesn't always work and the paint only remains effective so long before stuff starts growing what had managed to latch on. When the paint stops working and you don't bother cleaning the hull it starts to look like this...
(http://img545.imageshack.us/i/fnv3ar.jpg/)[/URL][URL="http://img545.imageshack.us/i/fnv3ar.jpg/"]http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/8594/fnv3ar.th.jpg (http://img177.imageshack.us/i/20120.jpg/)
http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/3267/20120.th.jpg (http://img177.imageshack.us/i/20120.jpg/)
http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/559/20132.th.jpg (http://img512.imageshack.us/i/20132.jpg/)
XabbaRus
10-24-10, 01:16 PM
Ah catfish I agree to a point but if you take life cycle processes into account nuclear energy against such as wind power is per kilowatt of power less polluting, CO2 wise anyway.
Also the waste if dealt with properly shouldn't be too bad.
Bubblehead Nuke
10-24-10, 01:28 PM
Sorry to take so long to replay, life got in the way.
Radiation will always be present in a fully cored reactor plant. There are both long lived and short lived transuranics that will continue to give off some amount of radioactivity for some time. This boat, being VERY new will have almost NO residual radition that will be detectedable outside of the hull after a reactor scram. Please note that this is Gamma/Neutron radiation. As the plant accumulates long lived transuranics due to plant power range operations that amount of residual plant radition will increase. The measurable effect outside the shielded volumn is very minor.
There is NO release of radioactive material in this kind of incident. Just not going to happen as long as the pressure hull is intact.
About the shielding:
Shielding is HEAVY. You want just enough to do the job and nothing extra. During the operational life of the boat there will be people in front of and aft of the plant. Therefore there is shielding to protect those people. As there is nobody outside of the hull there is no reason to put shielding there. The surrounding water provides adequate shielding for low power pierside ops. There is SOME shielding in the top of the reactor compartment to protect those walking above it during power range ops when surfaced or when people need to be topside. Seeing as everyone is either inside the hull or far enough away during higher power operations there is no need to have much shielding for topside.
I suggested that the plant was scramed for the protection of those topside and for the surrounding support ships that would have come to its assistance. At the distance from shore, I would not expect any danger to those standing on the beach. A source high enough to hurt someone at that range would FRY the crew in minutes.
There are other operational issues that I could discuss, but unfortunately they are NNPI and therefore off limits.
A note to Catfish:
The water in the plant does not become radoactive. It is the impurities that are are suspended in the water that become radioactive. If you filter them all out you can DRINK the water with ZERO effects. Other materials become radioactive due to Gamma/Neutron bombardment. Over time they lose this property by the halflife of the material that was activated.
What you state about it no being clean is untrue. If you measure waste production from beginning to end, nuclear power is the cleanest of ALL the non-renewable power sources. The amount of waste materials is in the tons per plant over its LIFETIME. Dangerous yes, but VERY small in actual amount.
Anything that burns is measured in the HUNDREDS of tons a YEAR of hazardous waste material produced. If you compare the amount of waste generated vs the amount of power produced it is a no brainer.
Jimbuna
10-24-10, 02:09 PM
That red or green paint you see on the under side of ships is called anti-fouling paint, it makes it difficult for marine organisms to latch on but it doesn't always work and the paint only remains effective so long before stuff starts growing what had managed to latch on. When the paint stops working and you don't bother cleaning the hull it starts to look like this...
(http://img545.imageshack.us/i/fnv3ar.jpg/)http://img545.imageshack.us/img545/8594/fnv3ar.th.jpg (http://img545.imageshack.us/i/fnv3ar.jpg/)
http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/3267/20120.th.jpg (http://img177.imageshack.us/i/20120.jpg/)
http://img512.imageshack.us/img512/559/20132.th.jpg (http://img512.imageshack.us/i/20132.jpg/)
Rgr that....used to lift my dads fishing boat out of the water each year to blast the old off and re-apply the new.
The most expensive paint I have ever come across by a long way and strange as it may seem, the boat had to be back in the water within 24 hours of the paints application (before it dried) to be effective.
ETR3(SS)
10-24-10, 02:36 PM
Aye, it doesn't take long...I wonder how it affects sonar performance and signature... :hmmm:It creates flow noise around the hull due to the irregularities of the hull shape now. It can also slow the boat down by a knot or two. Usually about once a year or two you would drydock and pressure wash all the growth off. Then when you take her out to sea again she feels like a dragster.
XabbaRus
10-24-10, 02:49 PM
in reply to bubbleheadnuke, given you obviously can't tell us those details and I respect that, is this site monitored by those people who would kick your ass in jail?
I'm imagining yes as I have heard that the keypublishing aviation forum is monitored by the security services.
Just curious.
ETR3(SS)
10-24-10, 03:12 PM
I'm not sure if the site is monitored or not by the Navy, but there's enough submariners on this site that one of us would see it and know. While I can't speak for the others, if I saw something leaked here I'd report it to the appropriate authorities. Not trying to answer for Bubblehead Nuke, just giving my input.
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.