You Think You've Got Problems...

Ha! SH5....

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...submarine.html





Harbour collisions? And you thought it was a bug....

[Westbroek]

They ought to let subsim.com members handle those subs. They'd actually be treated with the respect they deserve.

[mcarlsonus]

To refer to the New Orleans as a, "transport ship" is an insult to the entire San Antonio class!

Otherwise - oops, BUT, no one was seriously injured or died and, secondly, a few new berths have opened up for promising sailors!

[Moeceefus]

Originally Posted by rededge

Ha! SH5....

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...submarine.html





Harbour collisions? And you thought it was a bug....

scary. what a wake up call. even after the article explained what happened and disciplinary actions taken, some idiot had to post about how putting women on subs creates sex parties. what is wrong with people? thats like saying everyone in the navy is a fudge packer. someone also blamed our "no skills, brain dead" youth as if the young haven't always fought old mens wars. its like they didn't even read the article. the capt was discharged for his weak command and thank god. its scary to think there could even be so much goofing off in a nuclear submarine!

[mcarlsonus]

Originally Posted by rededge

Ha! SH5....

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...submarine.html





Harbour collisions? And you thought it was a bug....

Except in SH5, one would've expected the New Orleans to back up and take another run at the sub!

What the heck's going on? Recently we had that other case of that female captain of CG63 racing with another ship, nearly resulting in a major collision, thus ending HER career (well, that was ONE of the infractions! Calling ones crewmember subordinates, "lazy motherf*c*ers" is not looked upon kindly, for example...) She was TOO harsh!

[SteamWake]

Originally Posted by mcarlsonus

To refer to the New Orleans as a, "transport ship" is an insult to the entire San Antonio class!

Otherwise - oops, BUT, no one was seriously injured or died and, secondly, a few new berths have opened up for promising sailors!

Well it is in the Sun factual reporting is not their strong point.

[TwistedFemur]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Well it is in the Sun factual reporting is not their strong point.

Yes, but the britons take what they say as fact. Sort of like todays youth getting thier news from "The Daily Show"



Jus sayin

[robbo180265]

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Well it is in the Sun factual reporting is not their strong point.

Hehe you beat me to it.

The Sun never lets the truth get in the way of a good story.

[robbo180265]

Originally Posted by TwistedFemur

Yes, but the britons take what they say as fact. Sort of like todays youth getting thier news from "The Daily Show"



Jus sayin

Alas it is a popular paper (God knows why) however I'm not sure that its stories are taken too seriously, indeed most of the stories in it are about footballers or which Z list celeb is seeing X.

The rest of us ( the ones who can read) read the other "good papers"

Looking at the photo, it appears that the whole conning tower has been sheared away from the hull by the impact

Reported here too-

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worl...hip-crash.html

[mcarlsonus]

Originally Posted by rededge

Looking at the photo, it appears that the whole conning tower has been sheared away from the hull by the impact

Reported here too-

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worl...hip-crash.html

Judging from lack of sail displacement, I suspect the anechoic coatings split due to the impact. Anyway, would've been comical to put some luff into that blue and white tarpaulin!

[Philipp_Thomsen]

Obviously done or purpose.

Money, my friends.

Same reason WW2 made some people really millionaire.

[kylania]

Originally Posted by mcarlsonus

Judging from lack of sail displacement, I suspect the anechoic coatings split due to the impact. Anyway, would've been comical to put some luff into that blue and white tarpaulin!

The side angle doesn't show just how bad it was:
(click to super enlarge)

[LiveGoat]

So when is the Navy releasing an AI patch?

[mcarlsonus]

Originally Posted by kylania

The side angle doesn't show just how bad it was:
(click to super enlarge)

By golly you're RIGHT! Judging from the damage shown in the first photo and the position of the tarpaulin, I was assuming the sail hit the New Orleans - HARD - at nearly a 90-degree angle and then slid off to starboard - which appears to be the case. However, my mistake was looking at the leading edge of the sail, which on an LA-class DOES have a bit of a pronounced, "rake." Considering the keel depth of the N.O., which I assume to be similar to other littoral combat vessels, or about 10ft/3.1m, it appears the sub was submerged, yet above periscope depth, thus rendering the claim of inattention due to loud music from, "external speakers" immaterial. Even so, after the sub/surface vessel disaster involving fatalities in February, 2001, followed by a similar, but non-fatal, collision in January, 2007, it appears the US Navy has, yet again, failed to convince Commanding Officers to follow SOP - specifically, unless it's an emergency, pop up to P-depth and have a 360-degree look-see out the window prior to executing the, "Surface" maneuver!

GOOD FIND, by the way! I, for one, appreciate it!