Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!ihnp4!houxm!hogpc!hogpd!jrrt From: jrrt@hogpd.UUCP (R.MITCHELL) Newsgroups: net.flame Subject: Re: USN Carrier collides with Russian sub Message-ID: <302@hogpd.UUCP> Date: Thu, 22-Mar-84 13:30:13 EST Article-I.D.: hogpd.302 Posted: Thu Mar 22 13:30:13 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 23-Mar-84 20:46:10 EST Lines: 45 rabbit!jj comments: I can't believe that neither the sub nor the carrier knew nothing of the other's presence. Comments, please, if you have real information or experience with such systems? Disclaimers: I was not on either vessel, nor I am omnipotent. Therefore I could be wrong. As a former submarine officer, I know a little bit about the games that submarines are capable of playing, and I know a bit about the detection capabilities of subs (ours and theirs). The following is my own, *unofficial* opinion. It is enormously more likely that the Kitty Hawk was ignorant of the sub, than that the sub was ignorant of the carrier. The carrier (generally) makes much more noise than even a Russian sub, and hence is easier to detect. In addition, the acoustics of sound generally favor a submerged platform detecting a surface-running vessel. Naturally, the US Navy knows this, and generally takes steps to catch any subs in the area of a carrier task force. Such steps may include bringing along an American sub to counter-detect the Russian sub, towing sonar cables, or using airborne Anti-Sub detection devices. If we had a sub along, I bet we knew where the Russian was; if not (and no one will be telling), the odds aren't great that we knew he was there. There are three reasons for a sub to be so near the surface that is may collide with a ship: the sub is preparing to surface (to go home or to recover from some onboard casualty), to raise a mast (to snorkel, catch special radio traffic, etc.), or to spy. In all these cases, a sub necessarily proceeds slowly and cautiously, to detect surface traffic and to avoid collisions. The fact that a collision occurred tells me that either the sub was deep AND couldn't hear a whole task force due to freak sonar conditions AND suffered a tremendous casualty that forced it to surface in a hurry! (say, a big fire in the Engine Room), or else it was spying and made a goof while navigating. The first situation is the only one I can imagine that would excuse the sub; the second sounds much more probable. Since the sub was reported to be chugging home, I doubt the casualty theory although I can't rule it out totally. A side question: who said the Russian didn't know we were there? Rob Mitchell hogpd!jrrt