[article] Whoops Apocalypse - nearly!

mike65

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/feb/16/nuclear-submarines-collide

A Royal Navy nuclear submarine and a French vessel have been damaged in a collision deep below the surface of the Atlantic Ocean.

HMS Vanguard and Le Triomphant, which were both said to have been carrying nuclear missiles, are believed to have crashed while submerged on 3 or 4 February, according to reports. The submarines had a total of around 250 sailors on board

Defence officials told guardian.co.uk the two submarines collided in what they said was an extraordinary accident.

"They can't see each other in the water," an official said. The collision raises questions about the submarines' sonar and radar and why they did not detect one another.

The Ministry of Defence said the Vanguard returned to its base in Faslane, Scotland, with only "scrapes". A spokesman said: "We can confirm that the UK's deterrent capability has remained unaffected at all times and there has been no compromise to nuclear safety."

Vanguard, one of Britain's four V-class submarines that make up the Trident nuclear deterrent, was said to have visible dents on her hull as she was towed home last night.

Triomphant's sonar dome was reported to be extensively damaged. She has returned to Brest. Inquiries are under way on both sides of the Channel.

Yikes

Hagar

That's scary. How can they avoid something the size of a torpedo if they can't even spot something the size of a nuclear sub?


I can't get onto www.janes.com is anyone else having the same problem?




HMS VANGUARD
Launched in 1992
One of four British submarines carrying Trident nuclear missiles
Weighs 16,000 tonnes, 150m (492ft) long
Can carry 48 nuclear warheads on a maximum of 16 missiles
A two-year refit was completed in 2007 as part of a £5bn contract
Due to be replaced in 2024


LE TRIOMPHANT
Launched in 1994
One of four French ballistic missile nuclear-powered submarines (SSBN)
Displacement (submerged) 14,000 tonnes, 138m (452ft) long
Can carry 16 ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads
110 crew, including 15 officers
Submerged speed over 25 knots


Source BBC News Website

concussion

At low speeds nuclear subs will be incredibly quiet (although even while stopped their reactor will have some noise output) but as they speed up their noise levels rise aswell. A torpedo moving at high speed simply cannot be quiet due to the amount of work it's engine is doing.

Regarding the nuclear weapons, you'd have more of a safety concern from the nuclear reactor getting damaged and contaminating the sub/surrounding environment than you would from the missiles. They need a complex series of events in to occur before they do their business and once again, the main problem would be exposure of radioactive materials rather than Hiroshima type destruction.

Fratton Fred

first satellites, now submarines. I wonder what's next?

Maybe if the French learnt to drive on the correct side this sort of thing wouldn't happen

I wonder how big a Tsunami 96 warheads going off at the same time would cause?

vulcan57

In the vast expanse of the Atlantic Ocean ships can sail for days on end without seeing another ship and, I anyway, have never heard of two ships colliding in the middle of the Atlantic. Under the ocean there are even fewer vessels but these two manage to "bump" into each other! Beggars belief IMO. Were they on an exercise or something?

Hagar

No matter how silent the engines are something the length of a GAA pitch must make a blip of some sort on sonar.

Fratton Fred

If they had no idea the other was there then how come they only "Bumped" rather than crashed head on into each other. that, i would guess, would have left more than a few scratches:eek:

Duffers

SCRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPE
'Sir, what was that?'
'That, Jones, was the sound of the end of my career. Set a course to the nearest dole office.'

ex_infantry man

they probably have some sort of stealth from a sonar ping on the exteriors of the hulls?????

Hard Larry

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/0216/oil.html

Coincidence? or is there something we aren't being told?

concussion

ex_infantry man wrote: »

they probably have some sort of stealth from a sonar ping on the exteriors of the hulls?????

They would have some sort of anaechoic tiles all right. However I would be surprised if either was using it's active sonar, generally subs rely on passive 'listening' rather than an active ping which would be like shining a torch around the (very large) dark room you're trying to hide in. Your torch mightn't be able to illuminate your opponent lurking in the corner but he has definately seen your light and now knows exactly where you are. You're better off trying to listen for him moving around.

EDIT - RTE just reported they were on separate patrols...have there been instances of this happening before, cos I can't think of any!

bk

Fratton Fred wrote: »

If they had no idea the other was there then how come they only "Bumped" rather than crashed head on into each other. that, i would guess, would have left more than a few scratches:eek:

Because they were probably both travelling at only about 2 to 4 knots (very slowly). This is the whole point of SSBNs, they travel very slow to keep the noise to as low as possible (propellers on a sub make the most noise) so that they can't be detected. Above 8 knots these subs make lots of noise and would have been easily spotted via passive sonar and avoided. So it isn't surprising that this happened.

In fact this sort of thing happened frequently during the cold war and a few Nuclear reactor powered and ICBM carrying subs have already sunk without any Hiroshima like consequence.

What is interesting about this situation is that it was two allied SSBNs that collided, most previous collisions involved SSN versus SSBN or SSN versus SSN, when a SSN was closely tracking an enemy sub and got too close and bumped into it.

So it looks like one of these subs may have been playing silly buggers, tailing the other sub and crashed into it. Which is stupid as this isn't the job of a SSBN, SSBN's are supposed to be a strategic deterrent, not toys for some captain to play out his Hunt for Red October fantasy. I bet someone is going to get a court martial.

BTW The US and Royal Navy operate a joint "traffic control" system where they designate patrol zones and keep out of each others zones in order to avoid this sort of incident, no such system exists between the British and French.

cyrusdvirus

vulcan57 wrote: »

In the vast expanse of the Atlantic Ocean ships can sail for days on end without seeing another ship and, I anyway, have never heard of two ships colliding in the middle of the Atlantic. Under the ocean there are even fewer vessels but these two manage to "bump" into each other! Beggars belief IMO. Were they on an exercise or something?

There's been a couple of collisions in the Atlantic, mostly involving civilian ships like the collision between the Andrea Doria and the Stockholm, the Doria sank. When she was hit she was carrying over 1700 people. Only 46 were lost, mostly in the actual collision.

There was also a collision involving USS John F Kennedy and USS Bordelon, but i think that was off Scotland.

vulcan57

gatecrash wrote: »

There's been a couple of collisions in the Atlantic, mostly involving civilian ships like the collision between the Andrea Doria and the Stockholm, the Doria sank. When she was hit she was carrying over 1700 people. Only 46 were lost, mostly in the actual collision.

There was also a collision involving USS John F Kennedy and USS Bordelon, but i think that was off Scotland.

Ok, I stand corrected. With an area of 41 million square miles you would think that this kind of thing would be neigh-on impossible. Can understand the possibility of navy task groups that are sailing together in close proximity, having to refuel etc. at sea. Submarines are usually solitary vessels, and can operate in 3 dimentions as apposed to 2 with surface ships, and with all the technology they carry and the range finding capabilities they have, it is still a wonder how this has happened. That RN Admiral at the news conference yesterday certainly did'nt look too happy. Each country is asking the question what the other was doing in that area.

cyrusdvirus

vulcan57 wrote: »

Ok, I stand corrected. With an area of 41 million square miles you would think that this kind of thing would be neigh-on impossible. Can understand the possibility of navy task groups that are sailing together in close proximity, having to refuel etc. at sea. Submarines are usually solitary vessels, and can operate in 3 dimentions as apposed to 2 with surface ships, and with all the technology they carry and the range finding capabilities they have, it is still a wonder how this has happened. That RN Admiral at the news conference yesterday certainly did'nt look too happy. Each country is asking the question what the other was doing in that area.

Couldn't agree more. I had started a thread yesterday on this with a much less snappy title (damn you Mike65!! ) asking pretty much the same questions. I reckon there is a high possibility they were tracking each other.

Tenger

vulcan57 wrote: »

Were they on an exercise or something?

I would offer the answer that they both shadowing the Adm.Kuznetzov which 2 days ago kindly spilt fuel into the sea off the Cork coast...........

.........maybe they got news of the sub collision during refuelling and all started to laugh too much to stay still!!!

cyrusdvirus

Bramble wrote: »

I would offer the answer that they both shadowing the Adm.Kuznetzov which 2 days ago kindly spilt fuel into the sea off the Cork coast...........

.........maybe they got news of the sub collision during refuelling and all started to laugh too much to stay still!!!

Boomers wouldn't really be shadowing anyone.

What was it that the USN ssbn crews used say? "we hide with pride" or something similar

Hard Larry

gatecrash wrote: »

Boomers wouldn't really be shadowing anyone.

What was it that the USN ssbn crews used say? "we hide with pride" or something similar

Maybe the Russkies were looking for them.

Tenger

gatecrash wrote: »

Boomers wouldn't really be shadowing anyone.

A point I should have remembered!
They were SSBNs when the SSNs would be the one to do the shadowing.