Astute Sub grounding 'catalogue of errors'

[oldgit]

Just out of interest,if you must have somebody up top using a MK1 eyeballs how would they normally communicate with the chap turning the wheel if a hazard should appear,such as a small craft or perhaps to avoid some floating object.Got to be some sort of intercom or even a portable vhf to sort the job ?

 

[Bav34]

As I said,you - and the other yotty know-it-alls know not of which you speak.

Oh dear, so now it gets personal. We are all know-it-alls.

The simple fact is that whether it was a sub or a hot air balloon it was actively steered to a position where it ran into trouble.

End of.

It wasn't down to the difficulties of manouvering a sub, it wasn't due to excessive winds or tides or any other outside influences.

A PERSON gave a course to steer that was not questioned by others and the boat ran aground. Procedures were not followed. Questions were not asked.

Why does this seem acceptable to you, or to put it another way, why are we not allowed an opinion without being accused of being know-it-alls?

I think the Board of Enquiry might actually agree with us as I don't imagine many promotions followed.


Oh and I've just read the addition to your post. May I suggest LESS alchohol?

 

[Vara]

As I said,you - and the other yotty know-it-alls know not of which you speak.

Think of one small point. These boats are built for stealth under the sea. The conning tower is exposed to the sea - at depth..you can't fit electronics there. If its doing a sneaky on the surface you CAN NOT have any light emitting devices there so an iPad is out too. Work the rest out for your self- if you can't then my simple explanation will be too much for such a small mind.

Cobblers, you are defending the indefensible. In a peace time non tac situation there are no excuses for that sort of incompetence.

The Boards report says as much. (I take it you've read it?).

Branch loyalty is all very well but you are tearing the ring out of it.

 

[john_morris_uk]

Just out of interest,if you must have somebody up top using a MK1 eyeballs how would they normally communicate with the chap turning the wheel if a hazard should appear,such as a small craft or perhaps to avoid some floating object.Got to be some sort of intercom or even a portable vhf to sort the job ?

Yes of course there is conning tower to ops room communication. What point are you trying to make?

PS I am slightly bemused at the thought of the submarine 'steering round' floating objects. With respect, I don't think you've been in the fin of a submarine on the surface? They don't steer like yachts or even medium/small displacement craft.

 

[maxi77]

Seems like a pretty poor ROI when we only spend £20/30K putting electronics on a yacht but £200/300M on a sub costing £3000M which cannot see a simple sandbank on it's charts - but that's what we get (don't get) for our taxes and the incompetence of the people who spend it.

That is a crass oversimplification. Will any of your electronics survive being at depths of several hundred feet, because anything that lives on a submarine bridge has to be able to survive such pressures, which is one of the reasons there is not that much kit up there. They were however plotting in the control room and knew exactly where the sandbank was, there was however a very serious breakdown in both procedures and communications. The kit on the boat was more than adequate to avoid bumping into things, in fact the kit I used 40 years ago was pretty good and would have stopped me bumping into that sandbank. I used to navigate my boat into the anchorage in Broadford with no problems in the early days of the range.

 

[john_morris_uk]

Cobblers, you are defending the indefensible. In a peace time non tac situation there are no excuses for that sort of incompetence.

The Boards report says as much. (I take it you've read it?).

Branch loyalty is all very well but you are tearing the ring out of it.

I don't think its just branch loyalty in uxb's defence. There seem to be a few people on here who don't really grasp the difficulties involved and make sweeping statements about how they manage to avoid things without realising that its not quite like that in a submarine on the surface. Now this is no excuse - but at least people ought to understand that there is a significant challenge and a large difference in the way the things are conned. Mistakes were made, and a mans career has ended, but some of the criticism has been trite and without understanding.

 

[john_morris_uk]

Of course I can see the difference between driving a sub and navving a small yacht but I still maintain that something as low tech as a £300 chart plotter keeps me off the rocks around Brittany, and if that's not available on a billion pound (?) sub then 1. It should be, 2. If for operational reasons it can't be another system should be in place. That can only be the crews fault regardless of exhaustion stress etc. Isnt this what these guys are trained to cope with?

All your post shows is that you know NOTHING about the navigational capabilities of a modern submarine. Criticise by all means - after all they made a series of mistakes, but please don't guess about kit you know nothing about.

 

[Bav34]

John, you've made the point twice about how difficult a sub is to steer on the surface and guess what? I can't disagree with you because unlike UXB's assertion I and others are NOT know-it-alls !

But this accident had NOTHING to do with manouvering.

Oh, apart from the bit where they manoeuvred it onto the sand.

 

[maxi77]

Cobblers, you are defending the indefensible. In a peace time non tac situation there are no excuses for that sort of incompetence.

The Boards report says as much. (I take it you've read it?).

Branch loyalty is all very well but you are tearing the ring out of it.

Indeed it was a very very serious cock up, probably very much down to high levels of exhaustion. At the same time the armchair sailors who make some off the iname comments that have appeared are equally indefensible.

Having read the report it was quite right that the CO was dismissed his ship, and I suspect several other officers will not have glittering careers even if they escape court martial

 

[Twister_Ken]

All your post shows is that you know NOTHING about the navigational capabilities of a modern submarine. Criticise by all means - after all they made a series of mistakes, but please don't guess about kit you know nothing about.

If the navigational capabilities of a modern sub exclude a device that would let them see they were about to park on the bricks, then something is seriously wrong.

 

[john_morris_uk]

John, you've made the point twice about how difficult a sub is to steer on the surface and guess what? I can't disagree with you because unlike UXB's assertion I and others are NOT know-it-alls !

But this accident had NOTHING to do with manouvering.

Oh, apart from the bit where they manoeuvred it onto the sand.

My second point was about the navigational capabilities and not the maneuvering qualities. However most would suggest the maneuvering ability affects how you manage the pilotage. My real gripe is that I was countering the flippant comment that a cheap chart plotter would have helped. The sub has rather better kit than a cheap chart plotter - the trouble is that the whole people-system-kit failed at various levels and there's no disputing that.

 

[john_morris_uk]

If the navigational capabilities of a modern sub exclude a device that would let them see they were about to park on the bricks, then something is seriously wrong.

Do you really think that the sub didn't have the capability of knowing where it was? It did - but they mucked up big time in operation and procedures.

I ought to be honest and admit that I know the CO and he's a very nice guy who is definitely no numpty, but whose career in command is ended because of this fiasco.

 

[kyleview]

If the navigational capabilities of a modern sub exclude a device that would let them see they were about to park on the bricks, then something is seriously wrong.

Absolutely agree without harping back with my previous quotes - plonkers on a bank in very meaning of the word.

 

[Bav34]

Well I apologise. That wasn't meant to be flippant and if it read that way I'm sorry.

I still come back to the simplicity of a gps antenna in the cockpit, on the surface, connected to a chart plotter, showing what's ahead would have caused them the same amount of consternation as me nearly going the wrong side of St Peter Port entrance in near zero viz.

Really can't see the difference.

(haven't mentioned that my Mum was a wren and that my B.I.L. had 2 1/2 rings when he died aged 30 so I really am not anti-navy )

 

[kyleview]

Well I apologise. That wasn't meant to be flippant and if it read that way I'm sorry.

I still come back to the simplicity of a gps antenna in the cockpit, on the surface, connected to a chart plotter, showing what's ahead would have caused them the same amount of consternation as me nearly going the wrong side of St Peter Port entrance in near zero viz.

Really can't see the difference.

(haven't mentioned that my Mum was a wren and that my B.I.L. had 2 1/2 rings when he died aged 30 so I really am not anti-navy )

West Coast of Scotland where things are pretty straight forward - most particular under and off the Skye Bridge to the West - things are marked for the most basic sailor - hate to say even blind (visualy impaired) and assisted sailors.

 

[maxi77]

Well I apologise. That wasn't meant to be flippant and if it read that way I'm sorry.

I still come back to the simplicity of a gps antenna in the cockpit, on the surface, connected to a chart plotter, showing what's ahead would have caused them the same amount of consternation as me nearly going the wrong side of St Peter Port entrance in near zero viz.

Really can't see the difference.

(haven't mentioned that my Mum was a wren and that my B.I.L. had 2 1/2 rings when he died aged 30 so I really am not anti-navy )

The reason you can't see the difference is you have no idea at all what a submarine bridge is like, nor what it is like to be on exercise or trials in a boat, yes they screwed up big time but having read the report it makes me and I suspect many others realise just how near the edge we went sometimes

 

[Poignard]

It doesn't need more equipment. Somebody made a mistake. People do.

 

[kyleview]

Seems pretty simple to me - buy the very best Garmin / Raymarine / Simrad kit for £1000, also Navonics for another £300 for the charts and see everything under the boat, and above even with AIS.

 

[BrendanS]

Seems pretty simple to me - buy the very best Garmin / Raymarine / Simrad kit for £1000, also Navonics for another £300 for the charts and see everything under the boat, and above even with AIS.

Even when they are submerged?

 

[NormanS]

What's with all the garbage about fancy electronics. If the people in charge of a submarine, moving on the surface, can't understand basic buoyage, then they shouldn't be there. THEY WERE ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THE BUOYS.