When Nuclear Subs Collide

[3113]

That's "Nu-Cle-Ar."

HMS Vanguard and Le Triomphant were badly damaged in the crash in heavy seas earlier this month. First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Jonathon Band said the submarines came into contact at low speed and no injuries were reported. Both the UK and France insisted nuclear security had not been compromised. BBC defence correspondent Caroline Wyatt said the incident was "incredibly embarrassing" for the Ministry of Defence (MoD).

...The submarines are equipped with sonar to detect other vessels nearby but our correspondent said it might be the case that the anti-sonar devices, meant to hide the submarines from enemies, were "too effective". "This is clearly a one-in-a-million chance when you think about how big the Atlantic is," she said. The two submarines are key parts of each nation's nuclear deterrent, and would have been carrying missiles, though both the UK and France have insisted there was no danger of a nuclear incident. They were carrying around 240 sailors between them. A French naval spokesman said the collision did not result in any injuries to the crew.

Le Triomphant is based at L'Ile Longue near Brest, north-west France. HMS Vanguard arrived back in Faslane on Saturday. On 6 February, France's defence ministry had said that Le Triomphant "collided with an immersed object (probably a container)" when coming back from patrolling, and that the vessel's sonar dome was damaged. But in a subsequent statement, it admitted that the collision between the two submarines took place. "They briefly came into contact at a very low speed while submerged," the statement added.

Retired Commodore Stephen Saunders, editor of Jane's Fighting Ships, said the cause of the collision appeared to be procedural rather than technical. "These submarines should not have been in the same place at the same time," he added.
Nuclear engineer John Large told the BBC that navies often used the same "nesting grounds". "Both navies want quiet areas, deep areas, roughly the same distance from their home ports. So you find these station grounds have got quite a few submarines, not only French and Royal Navy but also from Russia and the United States."

...Meanwhile, SNP Westminster leader Angus Robertson has called for a government statement. "The Ministry of Defence needs to explain how it is possible for a submarine carrying weapons of mass destruction to collide with another submarine carrying weapons of mass destruction in the middle of the world's second-largest ocean," he said. The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament described the collision as "a nuclear nightmare of the highest order". CND chair Kate Hudson said: "The collision of two submarines, both with nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons onboard, could have released vast amounts of radiation and scattered scores of nuclear warheads across the seabed."

Full story here.

 

[trysail]

Typically, NPR went berserk over the report. Good ol' Jackie Northam breathlessly interviewed Stephen Saunders of Jane's and the poor fellow obviously and clearly had to restrain himself from bursting into laughter at Northam's unbelievable naiveté and amazing ignorance.

Northam got her knickers in a horrible NPR twist, apparently convinced that Armageddon was narrowly avoided.

Ahh, the scandal! The irresponsibility! The drama! The outrage!

 

[Weird Harold]

Typically, NPR went berserk over the report. Good ol' Jackie Northam breathlessly interviewed Stephen Saunders of Jane's and the poor fellow obviously and clearly had to restrain himself from bursting into laughter at Northam's unbelievable naiveté and amazing ignorance.

Northam got her knickers in a horrible NPR twist, apparently convinced that Armageddon was narrowly avoided.

Ahh, the scandal! The irresponsibility! The drama! The outrage!


[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT][/B]

HMS Vanguard and Le Triomphant were badly damaged in the crash in heavy seas earlier this month.

The very first statement in the article raises an important question: What were two nuclear, nuclear armed, submarines doing in close proximity at a depth where "heavy seas" could affect them? Even the English channel should be deep enough to insulate submerged vessels from the effects of "heavy seas," no?

 

[DesertPirate]

During a hurricane in the Atlantic in 79 we were taking 15 degree rolls at 159 feet
Skipper decided we would check in later and we went back to our normal 400
When we transited the English Channel it was on the surface due to how shallow it is and the traffic.
We would not dive until we crossed the 100 fathom curve (600 feet) when leaving port
When playing spook we would operate in water that was scary shallow

When missle subs are on patrol nobody else knows where they are, boomers are the quietest boats a nation can produce. My Fast Attack could hear one of our Boomers when inside 500 yards
Greatest imitation of a hole in the ocean you never heard

 

[trysail]

The very first statement in the article raises an important question: What were two nuclear, nuclear armed, submarines doing in close proximity at a depth where "heavy seas" could affect them? Even the English channel should be deep enough to insulate submerged vessels from the effects of "heavy seas," no?

WH-
Both vessels were running "quiet" and were not using active sonar. That is consistent with the report that the collision occurred at "very low speed." It is also consistent with the Froggie's initial report that their vessel had hit a container. The Froggies are not currently members of NATO's unified Naval command which has a vessel separation/avoidance scheme. As Saunders pointed out in the previously mentioned NPR interview, their prospective rejoining of NATO's unified sea command will greatly diminish the astronomically long odds of a similar future event.

 

[DesertPirate]

Allow me to add that nuclear weapons have safties that won't let them go off unless they have been fired at a target and have travelled X distance.

Boomers never go anywhere fast. They try to be ultra quiet at all times and normally travel at less than 10 knots in transit and 3 when on station

 

[CharleyH]

No offence, but not too worried.

 

[Leto Degeneres]

Politicians! How rare is the one that expects the best from the everyone, and how common the one that feeds the basest instincts of the population.

Wyatt said the incident was "incredibly embarrassing" for the Ministry of Defence (MoD).

I'll bet that's true. The two captains have probably reached the end of their career paths. A bitter pill...

"This is clearly a one-in-a-million chance when you think about how big the Atlantic is," she said. The two submarines are key parts of each nation's nuclear deterrent, and would have been carrying missiles, though both the UK and France have insisted there was no danger of a nuclear incident. They were carrying around 240 sailors between them. A French naval spokesman said the collision did not result in any injuries to the crew.

I know Ms. Wyatt was just throwing out a respectfully small number, but I wonder what the chances really are. I think they're more likely than that. Here's the most remarkable thing in this story to me: No injuries and boats were able to make port under their own power. I've read of some submarine collisions prior to this and they all seem to have been survived (though the US and USSR/Russia bandied about collisions with one of the other's submarines when one failed to return home.) Anyway, it seems the engineers and boatworks have done a pretty good job.

Retired Commodore Stephen Saunders, editor of Jane's Fighting Ships, said the cause of the collision appeared to be procedural rather than technical. "These submarines should not have been in the same place at the same time," he added.

Nuclear engineer John Large told the BBC that navies often used the same "nesting grounds". "Both navies want quiet areas, deep areas, roughly the same distance from their home ports. So you find these station grounds have got quite a few submarines, not only French and Royal Navy but also from Russia and the United States."

...shrug... I think Saunders' remark is a throw-away. The more interesting remark is Large's. I never thought about that.

...Meanwhile, SNP Westminster leader Angus Robertson has called for a government statement. "The Ministry of Defence needs to explain how it is possible for a submarine carrying weapons of mass destruction to collide with another submarine carrying weapons of mass destruction in the middle of the world's second-largest ocean," he said. The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament described the collision as "a nuclear nightmare of the highest order". CND chair Kate Hudson said: "The collision of two submarines, both with nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons onboard, could have released vast amounts of radiation and scattered scores of nuclear warheads across the seabed."

For Pete's sake! Robertson's and Hudson's statements are so self-serving, misleading, full of manipulative hyperbole...

Well, let's see. Robertson probably could have simply asked a defense specialist how two submarines could have collided. Evidently, he was less interested in that than in making a show. Of course, he didn't miss the opportunity to throw in "carrying weapons of mass destruction". He didn't throw in something like "a presumably important part of our defense which is now unavailable, the repair of which will likely be quite costly."

Hudson. Well, I guess she's wearing her agenda on her sleeve. That's fine. She's not a politician and in my way of thinking has less moral imperative to be objective. She isn't missing an opportunity to be manipulative, though. On a personal level, manipulation torques me to the extreme. "...scattered scores of nuclear warheads across the seabed." The number is 48 warheads, Ms. Hudson, if you presume that all 48 will will be nicely excised from their missiles which will in turn be nicely excised from the submarine and then salted across the seabed.

"...A nuclear nightmare of the highest order." This whole thing is pretty much a non-event in regard to "nuclear nightmare". I can think of true nuclear nightmares. Like many activists of her ilk, she misses an opportunity to further a noble end by losing her objectivity and seemingly is more interested in trying to make others look stupid or evil in the shrillest manner possible, and in that way, attempting to be "the one".

 

[trysail]

During a hurricane in the Atlantic in 79 we were taking 15 degree rolls at 159 feet
Skipper decided we would check in later and we went back to our normal 400 ....

Yikes! With no horizon to look at, that would be very uncomfortable. I suspect it wouldn't take too much time in those kind of conditions before folks would be looking for a leeward rail... and I hear those are in short supply in the Silent Service.

 

[Weird Harold]

During a hurricane in the Atlantic in 79 we were taking 15 degree rolls at 159 feet
Skipper decided we would check in later and we went back to our normal 400
When we transited the English Channel it was on the surface due to how shallow it is and the traffic.
We would not dive until we crossed the 100 fathom curve (600 feet) when leaving port
When playing spook we would operate in water that was scary shallow

That's all pretty consistent with what I know of the effect of "heavy seas" on submerged vessels.

So why were two boomers at less than 200 ft deep in the open ocean? It seems incredibly unlikely that they'd be on the same reporting schedule and at the same "quiet spot" in the Atlantic AND that both would fail to notice the other before they got close enough to collide.

 

[3113]

So why were two boomers at less than 200 ft deep in the open ocean? It seems incredibly unlikely that they'd be on the same reporting schedule and at the same "quiet spot" in the Atlantic AND that both would fail to notice the other before they got close enough to collide.

I suspect that England and France are at war again. Secretly of course.

 

[wafflemtl]

I suspect that England and France are at war again. Secretly of course.

Did we ever stop ?

 

[EesomeBeastie]

The two captains have probably reached the end of their career paths.

But with HMS Nottingham running aground a few years back, the captain of the Vanguard will have company in the "Whoops, there goes the paintwork" club.

 

[oggbashan]

Did we ever stop ?

No.

However, the chances of this happening are about as remote as two fleas travelling from opposite sides of Texas deciding to jump at the same time and meeting in mid-air.

It is a real freak of an accident.

Boomers are supposed to be invisible. Hitting another one is almost impossible.

Only the French and British could be so skilled at hiding from each other so successfully that they bump.

Og

 

[wafflemtl]

...
Boomers are supposed to be invisible. Hitting another one is almost impossible.
..

Can I rephrase that : "Boomers are supposed to be invisible. That's why hitting another one is possible." ?

I didn't listen to the French news today but I'm amazed that nobody spins the story in their favor saying the being undetectable is what they are looking for and that this incident prove they achieve exactly that.

 

[DesertPirate]

Can I rephrase that : "Boomers are supposed to be invisible. That's why hitting another one is possible." ?

I didn't listen to the French news today but I'm amazed that nobody spins the story in their favor saying the being undetectable is what they are looking for and that this incident prove they achieve exactly that.

I really want to make a crack qbout the French sub running astern (in reverse)

 

[Leto Degeneres]

I really want to make a crack qbout the French sub running astern (in reverse)

That's funny, and since you mention it, there must be a subtle reference in there about the inadvisability of topping from the bottom.

 

[DesertPirate]

That's funny, and since you mention it, there must be a subtle reference in there about the inadvisability of topping from the bottom.

No, just the usual crack about the French always running away

 

[oggbashan]

No, just the usual crack about the French always running away

From the damage reports it seems that it was the French that hit the British (and then they ran away).

Og

 

[cloudy]

From the damage reports it seems that it was the French that hit the British (and then they ran away).

Og

Bravely ran away, of course.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

Every navy I know of plays hide & seek with their opponents. THIS is how subs collide.

 

[DesertPirate]

From the damage reports it seems that it was the French that hit the British (and then they ran away).

Og

If the public even suspected how many colisions there had been over the years it would amaze them

Admittedly, when the boats had a steel sonar dome for a bow there was a tactic called bump and run

When the BQQ5 sonar came out in the mid 70's that ended, you don't give a Russian a nudge with a $3 million plastic dome

In the 80's the Baton Rouge became the first 688 class boat decomissioned due to the damage being too expensive to fix from a collision "up North" (think North and East of Norway).

My boat lost a sonar tranducer off the bottom along with some paint on a mountain in the Med. (Oct. 78)

 

[wafflemtl]

Bravely ran away, of course.

hmmmf
We do everythink with bravery ... .and class of course.

 

[xssve]

At least they didn't have civilians at the controls.

 

[DesertPirate]

At least they didn't have civilians at the controls.

That was an absolute failure of command. Before surfacing you stop at 150 and listen while looking through the periscope to see any shadows, then come up to periscope depth to look around. Then, surface the boat. If doing the required quarterly "Emergency Blow" You then go quickly to 400 feet and blow the tanks. If doing an Emergency Blow from test depth (required annually), a suface ship is in the area to keep civilians out of the way.
The Captain was relieved for cause, the death knell of a career, and he deserved it.