Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Submarines Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Best Submarines///
On Watch    7/15/2004 1:50:22 AM
link Which of these navies has the best submarine?...due to what some consider an overconcentration on engineering caused by the influence of Hyman G. Rickover). However, the United States Navy, through sheer volume of numbers and solid training (albeit not as good as the British) probably has the best force overall. ? Harold C. Hutchison Hmmmmmm...Now, what was that I heard about the Brits Pride & Joy tied to the pier at Gibraltar for 6 months(or more?) and the rest of their submarine fleet restricted to Port? Here's a U.S. Nuke Submarine Song, that illustrates for the layman an idea of the "Engineering" effort required from a crew in the US Fleet. Sing it, to the tune of ?GHOST RIDERS IN THE SKY?. Machinery Two had just sat down one early afternoon, He glanced into the tunnel not expecting any gloom. When all at once a mighty herd of red hats did he see, A plowin? through machinery one?and bringin?misery. Refrain: Yip-ee-i-ay?yip-ee-i-o! Drill mongers are no fun. The drills they planned were scramming and a loss of one TG, The ERS was in the head where he had gone to pee. The AEA was cleaning and rebrushing an MG, The EOOW was a?sleeping??the RO it was me! (Refrain) The trainees were assembled and a ring placed in their nose, They were told they had to play the game or get beat with a hose. They ran flooding, famine, petilence, and miseries untold. I sat there at my panel and watched the plant go cold. (Refrain) To do our job, that?s open valves and shut these breakers quick, We had to skip the breakfast served, or we would all be sick. The eggs were runny, sausage raw, and pancakes way too thick. I hated what was happening?I?d rather suck?(Refrain) The Noseconers had a drill, we all sucked rubber then, You could tell it wasn?t going well, ?cause tempers were real thin. The hotline, it was all bitched up, and Launcher?s lights were dim, Then Newsome pulled the lever?and blew San 2 on him. (Refrain) They grabbed an off-watch section and they dragged them to the brief, They told them of the drills they planned and ninety kinds of grief. They talked of scrams and fires and floods and loss of lots of sleep, I haven?t had this much fun since?I got Herpes from a toilet seat! (Refrain) Original was by "Fat Fonda" USS J.K.POLK SSBN645 (BLUE), circa 1969
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8   NEXT
Tercio    RE:SSK's top ten?   11/29/2004 3:33:36 AM
gf0012-aust, thanks!!!. Tercio
 
Quote    Reply

HorribleSailor    RE:SSK's top ten?   11/29/2004 12:35:34 PM
I'm intrigued, gf0012-aust, that you don't even credit the ex-Upholders ('Victorias'?) with a place in the top 10. I appreciate they've had a lot of problems recently, but don't you think this might be the same attitude that was shown to the 'Collins' when they had initial problems? Certainly in their brief RN service they were viewed (by those who operated them) as excellent boats, being designed to incoroporate lessons learnt in the 'Trafalgars'..
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust    SSK's top ten? - HorribleSailor   11/29/2004 3:45:27 PM
I get your point, I guess I left them out because I once attended a briefing where we were using the Upholders as a comparison platform against the Collins. The seeion included comments from a couple of UK sub drivers and related to platform problems, fault resolution problems etc... at that point (2001) they were definitely not regarded as top end vessels, but they were in the same boat (NPI) where with a lot of money and approp project management, they were considered to have lots of potential. If someone had asked me about this list 2 years ago, I wouldn't have included the Collins Class at all, so I am trying to be scupulously honest from what I know of the diff platforms. I'd argue (and it may be a moot point) that if the Canadian Govt bites the bullet and undertakes some extra work, they would clearly be in the top 10. The poms rarely make crap, and they haven't really done it with subs since the Oberon. The Oberon for decades was regarded as the quietest sub in the world - one would assume that the poms would not "upgrade" to a lesser capability. Unfortunately, superficially, the Upholders through various reasons never achieved the same reputation. I'd argue that it was a legacy of Project Management and possibly interdepartmental indolence that caused that. basically, UK politicking stuffed up a world class platform, whether someone (like canada) is prepared to bite the bullet and rectify that is another issue. personally I know of any number of USN operaters and people within NAVSEA who would love to have the Upholders as an aggressor force - and that was the big "white hope" circa 2001-2002. They're not in the list because of that - if it was a list based on perceived potential, then yes, I would have stuck them in.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust    RE:Best Submarines/// - oops   11/29/2004 3:52:46 PM
apols for the typos and grammar in prev, but I'm trying to eat, dress and type while trying to avoid crushing the dog all at the same time...
 
Quote    Reply

On Watch    RE:Best Submarines/// evolutions & casualty reports   7/31/2005 3:07:56 AM
Hmmmmmmmmmmmm? Just a case of a journo with an axe to grind? Water over the Bridge? Or, indicators of larger problems with the 6-pack sub fleet downunder? Just asking, so don't go gettin tempermental! Especially you black-gangers in the Battery Shop! Submarine fleet riddled with risks By Cameron Stewart July 30, 2005 THREE of Australia's six Collins-class submarines have suffered potentially "catastrophic" fires, floods or equipment faults at sea. An explosive internal navy report on submarine safety hazards - written in May 2002 and obtained by The Weekend Australian - reveals that the six subs were plagued by far more serious safety issues than has been publicly admitted. The report, which details the contents of "hazard logs" for the entire fleet, looked at 468 reported hazards and found 67 of these to be "unacceptable" faults that needed to be "promptly resolved". It also criticises the navy for adopting an "out of sight and out of mind" attitude to less serious faults on the multi-billion-dollar subs - widely considered Australia's most valuable defence asset. The report, which was distributed to 26 naval commanders, revealed several potentially "catastrophic" incidents at sea, including a fire on board HMAS Waller and damage to crucial battery cables aboard HMAS Farncomb and HMAS Sheean. Nine months after the report was written, HMAS Dechaineux (pictured) and her crew of 55 almost sank after suffering a major flood off the coast of Perth - as revealed for the first time in The Weekend Australian last Saturday. link Let's Roll
 
Quote    Reply

southern cross    RE:Best Submarines/// evolutions & casualty reports   7/31/2005 3:18:43 AM
OW, look at the date, a report from 2002 is hardly newsworthy. Much has happened in that time. I think it is a whole journe culture with papers to sell, money to make, and facts and recent reports to throw in the bin whilst they waste energy searching for old artifacts.
 
Quote    Reply

AMTP10E    RE:Best Submarines/// evolutions & casualty reports   7/31/2005 3:38:08 AM
As usual, the ferging media hear half a story (and in this case, a very old and no longer the same story) and proclaim it as the full and complete truth. And the media wonder why they are hated by the military...
 
Quote    Reply

On Watch    RE:Best Submarines/// evolutions & casualty reports   7/31/2005 5:36:12 PM
Yes I agree with you both, some of these events occured some time ago--and that the media's agenda oftimes seems motivated only to give the MilFors a black eye. However it is significant that the Collins class fleet has been restricted from operating at depth. Particulary scary, is the mention of a failed "hose" as the cause of the flooding casualty. One would presume that in this day and age of submarine technology, that "hoses" were not the best piping material for systems working under sea pressure, especially in the "people tank"! Another critical point raised in the article was: The report shows the navy knew that the anti-flood systems on its submarines were "inadequate and dangerous" before the Dechaineux accident and reveals that a flood also occurred aboard HMAS Collins. That's quite an odious self-indictment, as is the revelation that: ...findings of those who investigated the accident could not be implemented because "funding is not available". Why aren't FUNDS available to fix these deficiencies? Yes the RAN officials said the problems had been addressed: "The issues outlined..., have not been ignored and have all been acted upon either by eliminating the risks or mitigating against them. While "mitigation of risk" can be a good thing, to a submarine crew, restricted in their operational depth it may also be a deadly thing -- in Peacetime or War time. Again, my intent was not to rundown the RAN submarines or her submariners. I was looking for some informed input -- not a 'shoot the messenger' defence of what begins to sound like a deriliction of official responsibility to the valiant men who submerge in these boats. Let's Roll
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust    RE:Best Submarines/// evolutions & casualty reports   7/31/2005 9:22:52 PM
The problem with the article (apart from the spin) is the sequencing and timing of its claims. 1) The prev govt was remiss in acknowledging and spending - the problems re that are legion 2) The current govt is responsible for spending and bringing problem resolution and identification to a closure. There was so much interaction between both countries on identification and rectification that it almost warranted a shuttle service. 3) The timeframe claimed was when the govt was mid stride fixing identified faults. 4) The Aust Press knows that the Govt and Navy will not publicly comment about claims - and often that has been to their disadvantage (esp for Navy), but they will not contribute to a feeding frenzy that was based on triggering a reaction in the first instance. It's an easy free article for the press. Lets also add in the fact that Kockums were not exactly being forthcoming and supportive of any attempts for Navy to bring in outside expertise as K were raising the notion of IP fracture or IP espionage. This was all in the middle of whether ASC were being kept, sold off internally or sold off externally. K were maximising their hold on the project and processes as they were pretty clear that they were not in favour for project handling and management for the recent past. "Last Dying Breath" response seems to be an approp expression here. There's a whole raft of other things that can be chucked onto the table here, but they won't as RAN and Govt don't add oxygen to these kinds of fires. The bottom line is that the US via USN and NAVSEA wouldn't be investing in a couple of projects with AusGov and RAN re these subs if they were duds. Water off a ducks back
 
Quote    Reply

On Watch    RE:Best Submarines///   8/3/2005 9:44:51 AM
>>"The bottom line is that the US via USN and NAVSEA wouldn't be investing in a couple of projects with AusGov and RAN re these subs if they were duds."gf0012<< Thanks for your input @^@12, and, for your confidence in the ability of the US,USN, and NAVSEA to pick a winner. However, we've had our fair share of coverups, snafus, and other assorted problems...of course I've never said the Collins boats were "duds", my opinion has been that the RAN doesn't have enough submarines in their fleet. And that the Collins Class whilst generally "punching above their weight" was just a small step in the right direction. As for the ongoing public critique of the Class here's a note that was passed to me, purported to be from a retired RAN officer. My friend, on the woes with our Collins class subs, all I can say to you is 'take a number and join the queue' as the complaints directed towards these ghastly subs are long and distinguished. Most Aussies call them "the Dud subs"!. heh heh. The latest woes are making the headlines here quite a lot nowadays and there is political concern by the opposition parties over these deathtraps!. Of course its the taxpayer who suffers the most as this misbegotten project has clocked up $7-8 billion so far and the accursed things still don't work!. I recently read that each time they go to sea, they have to take tonnes of bottled water as the water pipes on the subs are contaminated with cadmium welds and thus render the water undrinkable to the sailors on each boat!. True story!. Your're right about the hose problem of course and one really has to ask just what those clowns are doing in our navy running the show!. Cover up and incompetance is de rigeur in the RAN I'm afraid. Thanks for your interest mate, I appreciate your concern. Don't expect the govt here to do anything much less admit there is even a problem, its just too sensitive and politically embarrassing. As always the great Aussie public is leading and the term "dud subs" will be the moniker attacked to them- permanently. Let's Roll
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8   NEXT



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2012StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy