KBJCpilot
Topic Author
Posts: 210
Joined: Mon May 21, 2012 7:12 pm

Well, That Sucks- Aegis Vs. Fast Attack Collide

Mon Oct 15, 2012 3:28 am

"A U.S. Navy Aegis cruiser collided with a nuclear-powered submarine during exercises off the East Cost on Saturday, collapsing the sonar dome on the cruiser and possibly causing other damage, but no injuries, U.S. Navy officials said."

Two CO's will be kissing their careers goodbye.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...idUSBRE89D00X20121014?feedType=RSS
Samsonite, I was way off!
 
boacvc10
Posts: 469
Joined: Tue Jul 25, 2006 2:31 pm

RE: Well, That Sucks- Aegis Vs. Fast Attack Collide

Mon Oct 15, 2012 4:14 am

This puzzles me. I'm only going on by some cursory knowledge, but wouldn't the Sub commander have had a report from sonar that a ship was so nearby, as he surfaced? I understand that (ala, perhaps Titanic) a warship cannot turn on a dime, and hopefully tried to make a turn away from a direct collision, but how much time would they have had to respond, and could the cruiser have made it?

I read elsewhere that the sonar dome of the ship is totally unpressurized due to contact, and that would have been about the depth of the submerged deck of the sub (guess!) so do we have a case of the ship running over a sub (joke!) or a ship and a sub meeting side by side. In that case, the sub hull is a pretty tough cookie then. But it would have left a big dent, right?
Up, up and Away!
 
NBGSkyGod
Posts: 812
Joined: Sun May 30, 2004 7:30 am

RE: Well, That Sucks- Aegis Vs. Fast Attack Collide

Mon Oct 15, 2012 11:48 am

Quoting KBJCpilot (Thread starter):
Two CO's will be kissing their careers goodbye.

It will depend on who was not where they were supposed to be. BZ to the watches for seeing the parascope before the collision giving the captain enough time to at least slow the ship down. Hopefully they get some awards for their actions.

At least they can still pull over and exchange insurance information.
Pilots are idots, who at any given moment will attempt to kill themselves or others.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 14002
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

RE: Well, That Sucks- Aegis Vs. Fast Attack Collide

Mon Oct 15, 2012 12:03 pm

Quoting boacvc10 (Reply 1):
wouldn't the Sub commander have had a report from sonar that a ship was so nearby, as he surfaced?

Playing armchair admiral, I'd have to say this is mostly on the sub commander. Both ships certainly should have been darn aware of each other's presence, but it was the submarine commander's decision to surface that's the proximate cause of the incident.

Quoting boacvc10 (Reply 1):
I read elsewhere that the sonar dome of the ship is totally unpressurized due to contact, and that would have been about the depth of the submerged deck of the sub (guess!) so do we have a case of the ship running over a sub (joke!) or a ship and a sub meeting side by side. In that case, the sub hull is a pretty tough cookie then. But it would have left a big dent, right?

That really depends on exactly how fast they were going when the collision happened.

The sub hull is indeed tough, but more so the inner hull (which is what protects the crew) rather than the outer hull (which is used to store ballast water needed to raise or lower the sub).

It sounds like a glancing blow, otherwise we'd be reading of how the cruiser's propellers sliced away at the sub.
Inspiration, move me brightly! Light the song with sense and color.
Hold away despair, more than this I will not ask.
Faced with mysteries dark and vast, statements just seem vain at last.
Some rise, some fall, some climb, to get to Terrapin!
 
MarSciGuy
Posts: 453
Joined: Thu Jun 28, 2007 12:14 pm

RE: Well, That Sucks- Aegis Vs. Fast Attack Collide

Fri Oct 19, 2012 3:42 pm

Quoting boacvc10 (Reply 1):

This puzzles me. I'm only going on by some cursory knowledge, but wouldn't the Sub commander have had a report from sonar that a ship was so nearby, as he surfaced? I understand that (ala, perhaps Titanic) a warship cannot turn on a dime, and hopefully tried to make a turn away from a direct collision, but how much time would they have had to respond, and could the cruiser have made it?

I read elsewhere that the sonar dome of the ship is totally unpressurized due to contact, and that would have been about the depth of the submerged deck of the sub (guess!) so do we have a case of the ship running over a sub (joke!) or a ship and a sub meeting side by side. In that case, the sub hull is a pretty tough cookie then. But it would have left a big dent, right?

While I'm not a military person and thereby don't know the specifics on cruiser/destroyer propulsion, BUT many modern Civilian ships are equipped with bow thrusters or Azi Pods (Azimuthing Pods) that allow for a great level of maneuverability. A NOAA Ship I was aboard a decade ago had both and instead of doing the Williamson turn they would spin the pods forward and full power, stopping the 274' ship going 16 kts in a ships' length... it was rarely done other then actual MOB drills or incidents, as that maneuver puts a huge amount of stress on the structure and fittings of the vessel.

Cheers! (now back to cleaning the house as the baby is about to return from an appt   )
"There weren't a ton of gnats there where a ton of gnats and their families as well!"
 
astuteman
Posts: 6346
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Well, That Sucks- Aegis Vs. Fast Attack Collide

Fri Oct 19, 2012 5:21 pm

Quoting Revelation (Reply 3):
but it was the submarine commander's decision to surface that's the proximate cause of the incident.

As a technicality, the article doesn't say he decided to "surface", but was at periscope depth.

Whether the cruiser knew the sub was there before they saw the periscope is a good question - the alarm being raised by the sighting of the periscope suggests they might not have, but we don't know.
I can't imagine the sub didn't know there was a cruiser steaming at some speed within stone throwing distance

Gut feel? Just rank bad seamanship on the part of the sub's OOW.
Seen that before.........  
Quoting boacvc10 (Reply 1):
I read elsewhere that the sonar dome of the ship is totally unpressurized

It will probably be free-flood (be full of sea-water), to allow the incoming sound waves to propagate right through the medium of the water until they impact the transducers..

Rgds
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2499
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: Well, That Sucks- Aegis Vs. Fast Attack Collide

Sat Oct 20, 2012 12:25 am

Quoting MarSciGuy (Reply 4):
While I'm not a military person and thereby don't know the specifics on cruiser/destroyer propulsion, BUT many modern Civilian ships are equipped with bow thrusters or Azi Pods (Azimuthing Pods) that allow for a great level of maneuverability. A NOAA Ship I was aboard a decade ago had both and instead of doing the Williamson turn they would spin the pods forward and full power, stopping the 274' ship going 16 kts in a ships' length... it was rarely done other then actual MOB drills or incidents, as that maneuver puts a huge amount of stress on the structure and fittings of the vessel.

The Tico's are traditionally laid out; no bow thrusters, twin screws. Warship construction have not fully embraced Azi Pods or bow thrusters yet.
 
BladeLWS
Posts: 358
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 12:41 pm

RE: Well, That Sucks- Aegis Vs. Fast Attack Collide

Sat Oct 20, 2012 1:09 am

Quoting ThePointblank (Reply 6):

The Tico's are traditionally laid out; no bow thrusters, twin screws. Warship construction have not fully embraced Azi Pods or bow thrusters yet.

Ticos have a traditional layout but that's where the similarity ends. Those ships are powered by gas turbines and variable pitch propellers, you can get immediate full astern power with a few seconds of going from flank to full back. IIRC you can stop a ship that size within a boat length or two but if you're to close it doesn't really matter.

There was a breakdown command on the sub that caused this to happen. Sonar must validate the area as clear, and the OOD or CO will visually confirm the surface picture via the scope before coming up, unless it's an emergency blow.
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2499
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: Well, That Sucks- Aegis Vs. Fast Attack Collide

Sat Oct 20, 2012 2:25 am

Quoting BladeLWS (Reply 7):
Ticos have a traditional layout but that's where the similarity ends. Those ships are powered by gas turbines and variable pitch propellers, you can get immediate full astern power with a few seconds of going from flank to full back. IIRC you can stop a ship that size within a boat length or two but if you're to close it doesn't really matter.

There was a breakdown command on the sub that caused this to happen. Sonar must validate the area as clear, and the OOD or CO will visually confirm the surface picture via the scope before coming up, unless it's an emergency blow.

Indeed, but the the more exotic azi pod thrusters have not fully been embraced by warship designers.

Warship designers have used Voith Schneider Propellers in the past, but realistically, only for ships that require lots of maneuverability and can sacrifice speed, such as minesweepers. A big switch has been for newer designs to use Integrated electric propulsion, which considering the increasing electrical demands on warships today, is a necessary switch.

Quoting BladeLWS (Reply 7):
There was a breakdown command on the sub that caused this to happen. Sonar must validate the area as clear, and the OOD or CO will visually confirm the surface picture via the scope before coming up, unless it's an emergency blow.

Indeed. I will not be surprised to see the CO of sub to be removed from duty at the very minimum. The captain of the cruiser will probably still continue to serve on the ship.
 
astuteman
Posts: 6346
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Well, That Sucks- Aegis Vs. Fast Attack Collide

Sun Oct 21, 2012 7:17 am

Quoting boacvc10 (Reply 1):
In that case, the sub hull is a pretty tough cookie then. But it would have left a big dent, right?

Didn't see this earlier. But no. The sonar dome would be lucky to scratch the sub's hull, much less dent it. Might pull some tiles off  

It could easily make a nice mess of the free-flood fore and aft ends, hydroplanes, rudders, bridge-fin (that'll be the "sail" to all you gents from across the pond   ), or casings (if US SSN's had any)

Rgds
 
User avatar
DarkSnowyNight
Posts: 1797
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 7:59 pm

RE: Well, That Sucks- Aegis Vs. Fast Attack Collide

Sun Oct 21, 2012 12:04 pm

Quoting NBGSkyGod (Reply 2):

At least they can still pull over and exchange insurance information.

Nahh, that'll buff right out.

Quoting Revelation (Reply 3):

It sounds like a glancing blow, otherwise we'd be reading of how the cruiser's propellers sliced away at the sub.

Well... Are the cruiser's screws made of the same metal? I always thought that there they traded some brute strength away to get a more corrosion resistant metal. I always figured that's why they were made (or is just coated with) from brass.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 5):
Whether the cruiser knew the sub was there before they saw the periscope is a good question - the alarm being raised by the sighting of the periscope suggests they might not have, but we don't know.
I can't imagine the sub didn't know there was a cruiser steaming at some speed within stone throwing distance

Yeah, you'd think a cruiser's screws would be audible through the sub's hull even without needing the sonar suite for that one. Should have been louder than a train wreck at that range.

Quoting astuteman (Reply 5):

It will probably be free-flood (be full of sea-water), to allow the incoming sound waves to propagate right through the medium of the water until they impact the transducers..

Hmmm.. Interesting. I had previously assumed it was pressurized to avoid balance issues. But I guess having a water medium right up to the 'phones probably does save quite a lot of processing power what with not having to compute out the massive speed of sound differences between water and sea level air. Good point.
Be A Perfectionst, You're Nothing If You're Just Another; Something Material, This Isn't Personal...
 
astuteman
Posts: 6346
Joined: Mon Jan 24, 2005 7:50 pm

RE: Well, That Sucks- Aegis Vs. Fast Attack Collide

Sun Oct 21, 2012 2:22 pm

Quoting Darksnowynight (Reply 10):
I had previously assumed it was pressurized to avoid balance issues. But I guess having a water medium right up to the 'phones probably does save quite a lot of processing power what with not having to compute out the massive speed of sound differences between water and sea level air. Good point.

A reference....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bulbous_bow

Quote:
The entire compartment is flooded with water and the acoustic window of the bulb is made of fiber-reinforced plastic or another material (such as rubber) transparent to underwater sounds as they are transmitted and received.

Amazing what you can find out from Wiki....  

Rgds
 
User avatar
kc135topboom
Posts: 11007
Joined: Sun Jan 30, 2005 2:26 am

RE: Well, That Sucks- Aegis Vs. Fast Attack Collide

Sun Oct 28, 2012 11:38 pm

Is it just me or does this collission sound similar to the USS Greenville (SSN-772) and the Ehime Maru back in 2001?
 
Woodreau
Posts: 1197
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2001 6:44 am

RE: Well, That Sucks- Aegis Vs. Fast Attack Collide

Mon Oct 29, 2012 4:55 am

Quoting Darksnowynight (Reply 10):
Yeah, you'd think a cruiser's screws would be audible through the sub's hull even without needing the sonar suite for that one. Should have been louder than a train wreck at that range.

It depends if the prairie masker was in use or not. If it was in use the acoustic signature of the surface ship is significantly reduced.

If its an exercise, there is usually a designated safety course for the participants to come to if there is an unexpected sighting of a periscope or submarine. And during routine operations there usually are designated operating "water space" areas that are supposed to separate submarines from other submarines and surface ships laterally vertically and in time.
Bonus animus sit, ab experientia. Quod salvatum fuerit de malis usu venit judicium.
 
ThePointblank
Posts: 2499
Joined: Sat Jan 17, 2009 11:39 pm

RE: Well, That Sucks- Aegis Vs. Fast Attack Collide

Mon Oct 29, 2012 9:36 am

Quoting KC135TopBoom (Reply 12):
Is it just me or does this collission sound similar to the USS Greenville (SSN-772) and the Ehime Maru back in 2001?

Very similar. Also similar in terms of what happened between the USS Hartford and USS New Orleans.
 
L-188
Posts: 29881
Joined: Wed Jul 07, 1999 11:27 am

RE: Well, That Sucks- Aegis Vs. Fast Attack Collide

Mon Oct 29, 2012 6:32 pm

Interesting thing is that histirically there are many documented US-Soviet sub collisions

And those are just the ones we know about
OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: flyingturtle and 6 guests