HMS Astute Grounded - Page 3

Oberon · 10-22-10, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ETR3(SS)

I don't know about the UK training program, but ours here was more than adequate.

Perisher course...

Nuff said

http://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87...8/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

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Herr-Berbunch

Perisher has 'an historical failure of 25%', but due to cutbacks they still get to command a sub

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbuna

I wonder if every spare crew member was ordered forrad to help lift the tail?

"All hands sally ship!"

Quote:

Originally Posted by ETR3(SS)

@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.

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.

TarJak · 10-23-10, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbuna

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.

Kazuaki Shimazaki II · 10-23-10, 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Herr-Berbunch

Perisher has 'an historical failure of 25%', but due to cutbacks they still get to command a sub

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?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bubblehead Nuke

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

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bubblehead Nuke

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?

Oberon · 10-24-10, 07:47 AM

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.

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. ..."

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.

Greetings,
Catfish

10-22-10, 01:34 PM	#32
XabbaRus Navy Seal Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 5,330 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	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? __________________

10-22-10, 01:36 PM	#33
papa_smurf Ocean Warrior Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: High Peak, Derbyshire Posts: 2,851 Downloads: 33 Uploads: 0	Well to coin the phrase "Whoops!" __________________

10-22-10, 01:36 PM	#34
ETR3(SS) Ocean Warrior Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Between test depth and periscope depth Posts: 3,021 Downloads: 175 Uploads: 16	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. __________________ USS Kentucky SSBN 737 (G) Comms Div 2003-2006 Qualified 19 November 03 Yes I was really on a submarine.

10-22-10, 01:53 PM	#35
Herr-Berbunch Kaiser Bill's batman Join Date: May 2010 Location: AN72 Posts: 13,203 Downloads: 76 Uploads: 0	Perisher has 'an historical failure of 25%', but due to cutbacks they still get to command a sub 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. __________________

10-23-10, 06:09 AM	#38
papa_smurf Ocean Warrior Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: High Peak, Derbyshire Posts: 2,851 Downloads: 33 Uploads: 0	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. __________________

10-23-10, 09:30 AM	#39
XabbaRus Navy Seal Join Date: Sep 2001 Posts: 5,330 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	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. __________________

10-23-10, 10:36 PM	#40
Bubblehead Nuke XO Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 435 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	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.

10-24-10, 07:47 AM	#44
Oberon Lucky Jack Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 25,976 Downloads: 61 Uploads: 20	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.

10-24-10, 09:13 AM	#45
Catfish Dipped Squirrel Operative Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: ..where the ocean meets the sky Posts: 17,817 Downloads: 38 Uploads: 0	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. ..." 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. Greetings, Catfish