Author Missing Submarine  (Read 1929 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #120 on: November 24, 2017, 04:33:16 PM »
From the Wiki article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ARA_San_Juan_(S-42)#Operational_history

A mid-life update on the San Juan was carried out in Argentina between 2008 and 2013, taking longer than expected due to budget constraints. The upgrade cost around 100 million pesos ($12.4 million) and comprised more than 500,000 work hours during which the submarine was cut in half and had its four MTU engines and batteries replaced. The updates were carried out at the Argentine Industrial Naval Complex's (CINAR) Tandanor and Storni shipyards.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #121 on: November 24, 2017, 05:12:39 PM »

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #122 on: November 24, 2017, 06:13:01 PM »
I’m thinking Chile.

...given the ebb and flow of geopolitics and all.


Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #123 on: November 24, 2017, 07:52:46 PM »
No but the Brits would certainly be protective of their commercial interests which is the point I’m trying to make here.  I will preface what follows by saying that there are no confirmed facts at this time supporting the possible scenario that I describe.  On the other hand it cannot be dismissed out of hand.

A primary mission of Navies world wide is to protect their nation’s commercial interests (re Alfred T. Mahon) and assetts, submarines included, are deployed to do just that.  It is entirely possible, if not likely, that the Brits have submarine(s) on patrol in the area of the Falklands to protect what is certainly a huge investment of capital in oil exploration and production in contested waters. 

As you probably know submarines of the U.S. and Russia had a number of close encounters during the Cold War which sometimes resulted in collisions that were not made known to the public at the time. (I have heard such operations in which opposing forces attempt to block the others progress  or muscle it into changing course as ”bump and run.”

I think it well within the realm of possibility that such and occurrence may have happened.  The San Juan would not fare well in a collision with a much larger Brit SSN.  Also, if the San Juan were to have made the mistake of opening a torpedo tube breech door after having closed to within torpedo range of the SSN (or done anything that could have been interpreted/misinterpreted as a hostile act) it would be incumbent on the CO of the SSN to take it out.

Again, there is nothing more than the track of the San Juan which appears to intersect the area in which the Brits have a huge interest and the fact the Argentines were so quick to dismiss reports of “a non-nuclear explosion” to suggest that this may have happened but I think that you have been too quick to rule out the possibility.

Given the assumptions you've made, clearly the situation you described could have taken place.  I think it's highly unlikely,  but as you said, not outside the realm of possibility. Taking that train of thought, could have even been a "Bedford Incident" type scenario.  The point I made earlier about the USN and CBCTO taking a week to alert the Argentines (and the rest of the world?) they detected an explosion about the time the sub went missing is a puzzler and could even support an effort to cover up such an incident.

I do find the post "Up All Night" made about the Argies doing their own mid-life update to be noteworthy.  I would suspect most smaller nations return their subs to their manufacturers for that type of maintenance, can't believe too many countries have the expertise and tooling to undertake such work.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #124 on: November 24, 2017, 08:30:16 PM »
Given the assumptions you've made, clearly the situation you described could have taken place.  I think it's highly unlikely,  but as you said, not outside the realm of possibility. Taking that train of thought, could have even been a "Bedford Incident" type scenario.  The point I made earlier about the USN and CBCTO taking a week to alert the Argentines (and the rest of the world?) they detected an explosion about the time the sub went missing is a puzzler and could even support an effort to cover up such an incident.

I do find the post "Up All Night" made about the Argies doing their own mid-life update to be noteworthy.  I would suspect most smaller nations return their subs to their manufacturers for that type of maintenance, can't believe too many countries have the expertise and tooling to undertake such work.

One of the articles I posted talked about the 2013 “update” being less than optimal.  I think that there is much about this incident that is open to question.  Unfortunately, we will probably never know truth. 

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #125 on: November 25, 2017, 06:21:59 PM »

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #126 on: November 26, 2017, 12:16:49 AM »


https://warisboring.com/american-and-chinese-troops-work-together-in-oregon/

Ironically the same time the US and Russians navies are conducting a joint search/recovery operation off the coast of Argentina, US and Chinese troops are working together in Oregon to learn from one another to develop improved disaster relief operation skills.   How about that, joint operations by the US military with longtime advesaries Russia and the PRC in the same week.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #127 on: November 26, 2017, 03:15:32 AM »
The below video talks about the UK’s considerable naval presence in the Falklands since the war and the likelihood that they were tracking the San Juan for “security and training purposes.”


Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #128 on: November 26, 2017, 10:54:13 AM »
The below video talks about the UK’s considerable naval presence in the Falklands since the war and the likelihood that they were tracking the San Juan for “security and training purposes.”



Assuming there was a RN warship in the area, the bit about the "security and training purposes" comes as no surprise.  I would think most nations of the world with the therewithal would do the same given an opportunity. Wouldn't it be analogous to intercepting and escorting away potential adversary aircraft skirting a nation's airspace?

Depending on how one defines "considerable", the statement about the UK naval presence in the region might be a stretch.  Routinely their only "warship" in the region is a polar survey ship. It was HMS Endurance, but think it was scarped in the past few years. Not sure what, if anything, replaced it on a full time basis.  The RN is unbelievable weak, just a few weeks ago I read they have less than 20 total frigates and destroyers to meet worldwide commitments, but not all of them are seaworthy at any one time.  They are also facing significant manning shortages as well, they've had to pay off flagship HMS Ocean and are in the process of potentially doing the same with their two amphibious assault ships.  Sadly the once proud RN is often reduced to showing the flag using Royal Fleet Auxiliaries, civilian crewed tankers and supply ships. Even worse, the Brits have no fixed wing maritime patrol/anti-submarine aircraft, although they hope to purchase some P-8s.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #129 on: November 26, 2017, 10:58:21 AM »
Collisions, missing planes, missing subs now; it's almost like we're engaged in combat operations and only the stupidest dumbass in the world can't see how obvious it is! :) KIDNOSTAD!!!

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #130 on: November 26, 2017, 03:24:44 PM »
Assuming there was a RN warship in the area, the bit about the "security and training purposes" comes as no surprise.  I would think most nations of the world with the therewithal would do the same given an opportunity. Wouldn't it be analogous to intercepting and escorting away potential adversary aircraft skirting a nation's airspace?

Depending on how one defines "considerable", the statement about the UK naval presence in the region might be a stretch.  Routinely their only "warship" in the region is a polar survey ship. It was HMS Endurance, but think it was scarped in the past few years. Not sure what, if anything, replaced it on a full time basis.  The RN is unbelievable weak, just a few weeks ago I read they have less than 20 total frigates and destroyers to meet worldwide commitments, but not all of them are seaworthy at any one time.  They are also facing significant manning shortages as well, they've had to pay off flagship HMS Ocean and are in the process of potentially doing the same with their two amphibious assault ships.  Sadly the once proud RN is often reduced to showing the flag using Royal Fleet Auxiliaries, civilian crewed tankers and supply ships. Even worse, the Brits have no fixed wing maritime patrol/anti-submarine aircraft, although they hope to purchase some P-8s.
.

So you don’t believe what the narrator states very clearly.  It seems to me that you have ignored what I consider to be plausible reportage and pertinent facts and are employing perposterously long winded philosophy-based rationalization to avoid conceding a point.  I think there is nothing to be gained by further discussion with you on the matter. 

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #131 on: November 26, 2017, 08:22:39 PM »
.

So you don’t believe what the narrator states very clearly.  It seems to me that you have ignored what I consider to be plausible reportage and pertinent facts and are employing perposterously long winded philosophy-based rationalization to avoid conceding a point.  I think there is nothing to be gained by further discussion with you on the matter.

Sorry you feel that way, but as you wish.  I always try to be polite and respectful, have certainly always been toward you.  Reasonable people can disagree without being disagreeable.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #132 on: November 26, 2017, 08:54:19 PM »
Reasonable people can disagree without being disagreeable.


Let's sit down and discuss that in front of a national monument while smoking a joint--you don't have to inhale.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #133 on: November 26, 2017, 08:57:00 PM »

Let's sit down and discuss that in front of a national monument while smoking a joint--you don't have to inhale.

As long as I don't have to have sex with Hillary like that other guy, works for me.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #134 on: November 26, 2017, 09:00:23 PM »
Kidnostad is just a lying jackass poser Uncle Duke. Ignore him or shit on him, but don't address him as your equal. He's lower than shark shit, and a living joke.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #135 on: November 26, 2017, 09:01:10 PM »
He's lower than shark shit, and a living joke.


Still--superior to a Clinton presidency.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #136 on: November 26, 2017, 09:18:01 PM »
Sorry you feel that way, but as you wish.  I always try to be polite and respectful, have certainly always been toward you.  Reasonable people can disagree without being disagreeable.

When you insult my intelligence, you disrespect me.  If I were being truly disrespectful to you, I would have accused you of being intellectually dishonest, but, we’ll leave it where it lies.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #137 on: November 28, 2017, 09:02:56 AM »
Last memo from missing Argentine submarine reveals start of a battery fire FROM SEAWATER LEAKING INTO THE SUB

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/28/last-memo-missing-argentinian-submarine-reveals-start-battery/

“Entry of sea water through the ventilation system into battery tank No. 3 caused a short circuit and the beginnings of a fire in the battery room. Bow batteries out of service. At the moment in immersion propelling with split circuit. No updates on personnel, will keep informed,” the document obtained by the channel A24 said.

The message was purportedly sent by the commander of the ARA San Juan by radio and received as a transcription. A24 did not say how it had obtained the document, on which the Argentine Navy has not commented.

“Entry of sea water through the ventilation system into battery tank No. 3 caused a short circuit and the beginnings of a fire in the battery room. Bow batteries out of service. At the moment in immersion propelling with split circuit. No updates on personnel, will keep informed,” the document obtained by the channel A24 said.

The message was purportedly sent by the commander of the ARA San Juan by radio and received as a transcription. A24 did not say how it had obtained the document, on which the Argentine Navy has not commented.

It also goes into greater detail regarding the faults allegedly suffered by the ARA San Juan. The Navy waited five days to confirm rumours the submarine had suffered a battery fault, and then insisted it was unrelated to the disappearance.

The message is also likely to raise further questions over the Navy’s decision to wait two days to begin a physical search for the ARA San Juan. While the force has insisted this was in accordance with protocol for a submarine that had lost communication, the existence of such faults has generated doubts over that decision.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #138 on: November 28, 2017, 11:43:40 AM »
Last memo from missing Argentine submarine reveals start of a battery fire FROM SEAWATER LEAKING INTO THE SUB

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/28/last-memo-missing-argentinian-submarine-reveals-start-battery/

“Entry of sea water through the ventilation system into battery tank No. 3 caused a short circuit and the beginnings of a fire in the battery room. Bow batteries out of service. At the moment in immersion propelling with split circuit. No updates on personnel, will keep informed,” the document obtained by the channel A24 said.

The message was purportedly sent by the commander of the ARA San Juan by radio and received as a transcription. A24 did not say how it had obtained the document, on which the Argentine Navy has not commented.

“Entry of sea water through the ventilation system into battery tank No. 3 caused a short circuit and the beginnings of a fire in the battery room. Bow batteries out of service. At the moment in immersion propelling with split circuit. No updates on personnel, will keep informed,” the document obtained by the channel A24 said.

The message was purportedly sent by the commander of the ARA San Juan by radio and received as a transcription. A24 did not say how it had obtained the document, on which the Argentine Navy has not commented.

It also goes into greater detail regarding the faults allegedly suffered by the ARA San Juan. The Navy waited five days to confirm rumours the submarine had suffered a battery fault, and then insisted it was unrelated to the disappearance.

The message is also likely to raise further questions over the Navy’s decision to wait two days to begin a physical search for the ARA San Juan. While the force has insisted this was in accordance with protocol for a submarine that had lost communication, the existence of such faults has generated doubts over that decision.

This makes the most sense to me.  In an earlier post I said that loss of the sub could be the result of a battery fire or explosion due a buildup of hydrogen or even the production of phosgene.

When they talk about the ventilation system in this context, they are  referring primarily to the system of piping and valves that brings fresh air into the ship through the induction mast or snorkel so that the diesel can be operated to charge batteries.  Of course, if the ship is running on the surface, sufficient  air to run the diesel is inducted through open hatches In fact the running diesel will suck air into the sub and refresh the ships atmosphere.  You can actually feel a strong vacuum when going topside.  When a sub is engaged in  operations in which it dos not want it’s presence to be visually or electronically detected primarily by radar it will snorkel.  This is often done in training and almost always on patrol.  This involves the sub runnng just under the surface with only the snorkel mast breaking the surface so as to avoid  detection by eyeball observation or radar.

When snorkeling in rough seas the head valve on the snorkel will slam shut when water is detected by electronic sensors colocated  in the mast head.  This causes a very uncomfortable vacuum in the boat that is present until the vale opens again or the diesel is shutdown and this cycling can happen a number of times during the course of the evolution.  (One of the first things I was told when the headvalve was cycling as described is that if you get a fury feeling in your throat you need to swallow real hard because it’s your asshole)

It is very possible that due to some failure of an electronic or mechanical component that seawater entered the mast and flooded the connected diesel and battery through ventilation system piping.  (Don’t think airducts here.  The ventilation system is a system of welded piping and valves that distributes air most directly to the diesel but also throughout the ship.). It’s easy to imagine a cascading catastrophic casualty involving flooding of the diesel and a battery fire/explosion in the above circumstances

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #139 on: November 28, 2017, 12:09:45 PM »
If I were being truly disrespectful to you, I would have accused you of being intellectually dishonest, but, we’ll leave it where it lies.


Oooh! Oooh! Ask him about the nanotech! Ask him!!

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #140 on: November 28, 2017, 12:36:42 PM »
This makes the most sense to me.  In an earlier post I said that loss of the sub could be the result of a battery fire or explosion due to a buildup of hydrogen in the battery compartment or even the production of phosgene.

When they talk about the ventilation system in this context, they are  referring primarily to the system of piping and valves that brings fresh air into the ship through the induction mast or snorkel so that the diesel can be operated to charge batteries.  Of course, if the ship is running on the surface, sufficient  air to run the diesel is inducted through open hatches.  In fact the running diesel will suck air into the sub and refresh the ships atmosphere quickly.  You can actually feel a strong vacuum when going topside.  When a sub is engaged in operations in which it does not want it’s presence to be visually or offer an easily detectable sonar profile it will snorkel.  This is often done in training and almost always on patrol.  This involves the sub runnng just under the surface with only the snorkel mast breaking the surface so as to avoid detection by eyeball observation or radar.

When snorkeling in rough seas the head valve of the snorkel will slam shut when water is detected by electronic sensors also located in the mast head.  This causes a very uncomfortable vacuum in the boat that is present until the valve opens again or the diesel is shutdown and this cycling can happen a number of times during the course of the evolution.  (One of the first things I was told when the headvalve was cycling as described is that if you get a furry feeling in your throat you need to swallow real hard because it’s your asshole)

It is very possible that due to some failure of an electronic or mechanical component that seawater entered the mast and flooded the connected diesel and battery through ventilation system piping.  (Don’t think airducts here.  The ventilation system is a system of welded piping and valves that distributes air most directly to the diesel but also throughout the ship.). It’s easy to imagine a cascading catastrophic casualty involving flooding of the diesel and a battery fire/explosion in the above circumstances


My last post was written in a hurry and contained a lot of typos that I have attempted to correct.   Also, I’m an old dude so gimme a break.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #141 on: November 28, 2017, 02:38:45 PM »
Last memo from missing Argentine submarine reveals start of a battery fire FROM SEAWATER LEAKING INTO THE SUB

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/28/last-memo-missing-argentinian-submarine-reveals-start-battery/

“Entry of sea water through the ventilation system into battery tank No. 3 caused a short circuit and the beginnings of a fire in the battery room. Bow batteries out of service. At the moment in immersion propelling with split circuit. No updates on personnel, will keep informed,” the document obtained by the channel A24 said.

The message was purportedly sent by the commander of the ARA San Juan by radio and received as a transcription. A24 did not say how it had obtained the document, on which the Argentine Navy has not commented.

“Entry of sea water through the ventilation system into battery tank No. 3 caused a short circuit and the beginnings of a fire in the battery room. Bow batteries out of service. At the moment in immersion propelling with split circuit. No updates on personnel, will keep informed,” the document obtained by the channel A24 said.

The message was purportedly sent by the commander of the ARA San Juan by radio and received as a transcription. A24 did not say how it had obtained the document, on which the Argentine Navy has not commented.

It also goes into greater detail regarding the faults allegedly suffered by the ARA San Juan. The Navy waited five days to confirm rumours the submarine had suffered a battery fault, and then insisted it was unrelated to the disappearance.

The message is also likely to raise further questions over the Navy’s decision to wait two days to begin a physical search for the ARA San Juan. While the force has insisted this was in accordance with protocol for a submarine that had lost communication, the existence of such faults has generated doubts over that decision.

Argentina missing sub: Water entered snorkel causing short circuit - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-latin-america-42151569

Similar story content to Up All Night's link, but the key difference is talk of imploding/implosion in the BBC article vice exploding/explosion in every other source I've seen. (From article, "The Argentine navy said it could have been the sound of the submarine imploding".)  This is a significant difference, explosion implying either an attack on the sub, or an blast from some internal source (bomb, accumulation and/or detonation of gases, sub contained weapon like a tordepo warhead going off etc.).  Implosion, on the other hand, would tend to imply the sub collapsed violently inward. 

All subs have a crush depth, but a sub that had received an "update" from a questionably capable source within Argentina might not have had the structural integrity of the original design/construction.  Assuming the vessel is found, metallurgists and material scientists will be able to determine if the structural failure came from the outside in or the inside out using the same principles and processes used to determine why an aircraft came apart in flight.

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #142 on: November 28, 2017, 05:08:57 PM »
It may have been an implosion.  A cascading casualty is by definition an event wherein a casualty in one element of a system can cause the failure of components in that system and other systems like the ships electrical systems, the high pressure air system, the trim and drain system, the hydraulics system and ship’s control system to include the humans that operate the systems.  U.S.  Submarine crews constantly conduct drills in which that is the scenario. Even though there is redundancy in all critical components, I can easily visualize a number of scenarios that could result in the sub exceeding crush depth. 

Metal fatigue and faulty welds in the pressure hull are also a possibility.  When a U.S. SUbmarine has undergone overhaul it goes through sea trials in which it is taken to test depth before it is placed back in service.  (It also is required to go to test depth periodically while in service.)  In no case has it been determined that a U.S. submarine was lost or even endangered because of metal fatigue or faulty welds.  I don’t know how competent the Argentines are in shipbuilding and overhaul and the batteries on the San Juan were  replaced during the 2014 overhaul which involved the boat literally being cut in half (as is the case with older nukes that undergo a refueling overhaul.). Interestingly, experts claim that welds in the pressure hull that rejoin the submarine halves are stronger than the hull itself. 

A lot will be learned from a forensic examination of photos of the remaining hulk and the debris field, but it may be impractical to raise any significant portion of the ship due to the ocean depth.  This was true in the case of the Scorpion.  I think that some bits of the Thresher may have been recovered

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #143 on: November 28, 2017, 06:53:44 PM »
Below is latest Argentine Navy report on missing submarine updated 6:33 PM today.  Note entry for time 10:31 indicates an explosion was heard.  Expect more conflicting reports.


http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/28/americas/argentina-submarine/index.html

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #144 on: December 10, 2017, 10:18:43 PM »

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #145 on: December 11, 2017, 03:05:58 AM »

Oooh! Oooh! Ask him about the nanotech! Ask him!!


Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #146 on: December 11, 2017, 03:10:35 AM »
What the hell does Argentina need submarines for exactly, don't they have loans to pay off?

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #147 on: December 11, 2017, 03:26:09 AM »
What loans? The money is made out of thin air! Only suckers pay back shit that some other guy just fucking made up one day for the fuck of it!

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #148 on: December 11, 2017, 05:56:26 AM »
What loans? The money is made out of thin air! Only suckers pay back shit that some other guy just fucking made up one day for the fuck of it!

Soon there will only be sleep for you...eternal sleep. Peaceful!  :)

Re: Missing Submarine
« Reply #149 on: December 11, 2017, 09:17:00 AM »
What loans? The money is made out of thin air! Only suckers pay back shit that some other guy just fucking made up one day for the fuck of it!

You may be a bad credit risk