"I Found the Subsim 2008 April Fool's Easter Egg!"
 

Nice one!

Chris

Found that easter egg :)
 

Craziness... I was wondering when I started reading about 340 women... That's too many for 2 subs, and there aren't that many female nuclear-trained officers and chiefs (I think).

Very well written Neal! Perhaps you and Brag should write something humorous? :hmm:

PD

I was a believer untill I scrolled down far enough to see the Subsim Almanac advertisement.

The coup de grâce for the article would have been if they announced the names of the new subs being commissioned for this purpose:

SSN-784 USS Amazon
SSN-785 USS Valkyrie

I figured it was a fake really quick.. glad I was right lol

I Found the Subsim 2008 April Fool's Easter Egg!
 

Yep had me going for a few minutes

I posted it to Navy Together We Served. I am sure the old salts will have a conniption fit at this one.

Very bad taste.

I'm disappointed there are still people in the world that believe women should be restricted from any job.


The people who made this fake article should be ashamed of themselves... I know they won't be though, just the way the world is.

"I Found the Subsim 2008 April Fool's Easter Egg!"
 

What is this world coming to?

Nate

Lighten up a lil bit. There are obvious and legitimate reasons why women cannot serve on submarines.

PD

"I Found the Subsim 2008 April Fool's Easter Egg!"
 

"I Found the Subsim 2008 April Fool's Easter Egg!"

:rock:

:arrgh!:

:sunny:

No kidding.

It's nothing to do with skills or capability, it's simply pure biology. You know submarines have no medical facilities, right? NONE? Here - pic of 'medical space' on an attack sub.

And, unlike a carrier/destroyer/cruiser, if someone ends up pregnant on the ship (which has happened on nearly ALL surface ships women have been stationed on with mixed-crews), you can't just land a helo on the deck to bring them to shore. Indeed, depending on where the sub is stationed, there is likely no way to get them off the boat at all without returning to dock...costing literally millions of dollars. Submarines are kind of a unique thing - very oddly designed for a specific mission, and requiring all kinds of special considerations in operations as it is.

Forget the fact that (the article in question) a submarine full of women would have other issues. I assume you know that groups of women, when living in proximity, end up with their monthly cycles in sync? I certainly respect women's ability to control this to a large extent, and in mixed-company crews, it's almost never an issue. But on a small, tightly enclosed space like a submarine? With an all-female crew? Can you IMAGINE the stress that would cause?

"I Found the Subsim 2008 April Fool's Easter Egg!"
 

Now that story has "history in the making" writen all over it :up:

Women do things all the time with little or no medical facilities. The idea of an all-women crew could certainly stop them from getting pregnant if they all just took a pregnancy test before they left. Medications can cut down on periods. Women go into space, a much more confined and arguably dangerous place.

My main disgust at the fake article though, was that it was more like a taunt. "Women will never be in subs. NAH NAH NAH" It's one thing to have those reasons and use them as an excuse in case it ever comes up, but to just rub it in their face like the fake article does, it's insulting.

Sometimes a joke is just a joke. Laugh a little; you'll live longer.

I laugh at jokes if I find them funny. I don't find this funny. Obviously I'm outnumbered here, so I'll drop it now.

I Found the Subsim 2008 April Fool's Easter Egg!
 

I suspect I am way late ... that'll teach me to start reading the SubSim e-mails FIRST when I get my mail......

--- Ed

Relax Sluissa, it's April first! You're being way too uptight to fit in on a sub's crew :)

When I see more female sailors coming through prototype that can actually turn the large valves (not just the little ones) on their own, I'll think you're right and their time has come. And no, they can't just go get someone else to do it for them. Everyone on a sub has to be able to do their own job, plus cross-training as backup. It's not just pushing buttons that makes a sub go...

Good One
 

Holy **** okay very funny. BTW the issue the USN is facing with Woman on Subs is 2 fold:
Habitability - woman currently require seperate berthing and heads
Proximity of space - there is a lot of incidental brushing as you pass another imagine getting a Dolley Parton or Anna Nicole - that would result in serious issues even if the Girl was okay and understood.
It is feasible on the SSGN/SSBN but SSN's not likely unless the US as a society relaxes some.

But ask the Aussie's how they like the female crew members (none that I spoken with are very happy with it)

Ideas fine but would be hard to implement.
 

W:oW, have women actually been in Space up to 6 Months. If there average time in Space is about 30 days, I don't see a problem or the comparison.

Now, I do like the idea of an "All Female Crew" on a Sub as long as there is no chance that any of them could get pregnant while at shore.

What would happen if just 1 lady actually came aboard and was not aware she was pregnant? I realize in most cases, women do not give birth in 6 Months but what kind of condition do you really think she would be in, say after 3 months.

Very few guys can pass the psychological and physical testing required for Sub duty. Women go through a lot of changes, both psychologically and physically during the 9 Months. These are not things a Commander and Crew need to be worried about in a Sub. Being a Nuclear Sub just adds to the problems.

Of course, if H. Clinton should win (:nope:), I'm sure it will be brought up and possibly tested though not implemented