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