Swim Bike Run
Slowtwitch.com
  • Login >
Slowtwitch.com
Search menu
Hot Forum Topics

Poll

Best Recent Tech for Tri
What is the most beneficial recent bike tech used in tri bikes
View Results


Home > Forum > Lavender Room > So what is the takeaway here? Sub collision

Lavender Room

Back To ForumPrint Thread

Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Tri
Classifieds
Lavender
Jobs
Notices
Re: So what is the takeaway here? Sub collision [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
chaparral
Nov 27, 21 11:15
Post #26 of 42 (663 views)
slowguy wrote:
Steve Hawley wrote:
Would that include something like a submerged cargo container that had called off a ship. A unforeseen obstacle that’s simply adrift?

/r


It’s really just as simple as whether or not both objects are moving, or if one is stationary.

Everything is moving, depending on your frame of reference (if we are going to be pendants).
Quote Reply
Re: So what is the takeaway here? Sub collision [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
eb
Nov 27, 21 12:00
Post #27 of 42 (648 views)
slowguy wrote:
eb wrote:
Steve Hawley wrote:
Would that include something like a submerged cargo container that had fallen off a ship. A unforeseen obstacle that’s simply adrift?

/r


Uhoh, now we're gonna' need slowguy to explain flotsam and jetsam as well as collision and allision. :-)


Don’t forget lagan and derelict.

Was not previously aware of "lagan". Thanks, I always am buoyed by the prospect of learning new vocabulary!
Quote Reply
Re: So what is the takeaway here? Sub collision [eb] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
softrun
Nov 27, 21 12:02
Post #28 of 42 (645 views)
Never heard about an accident involving a Chinese submarine. Are they just so good or they don't go out?
Quote Reply
Re: So what is the takeaway here? Sub collision [Steve Hawley] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
eb
Nov 27, 21 12:04
Post #29 of 42 (642 views)
Steve Hawley wrote:
Well there is talk on some forums that our Chinese friends have seeded certain areas with tethered cargo containers. It’s a passive minefield if you will. Non explosive. They’ve a map to it and we’ve not. Tricksy

/r

I had not heard that. Tethered below the surface, presumably?
Quote Reply
Re: So what is the takeaway here? Sub collision [gofigure] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Clutch Cargo
Nov 27, 21 12:13
Post #30 of 42 (641 views)

Quote Reply
Re: So what is the takeaway here? Sub collision [softrun] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Clutch Cargo
Nov 27, 21 12:17
Post #31 of 42 (639 views)
softrun wrote:
Never heard about an accident involving a Chinese submarine. Are they just so good or they don't go out?

And you more then likely won’t.
They have a fair amount of submarines as many or more than the US.
Quote Reply
Re: So what is the takeaway here? Sub collision [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gofigure
Nov 27, 21 12:32
Post #32 of 42 (631 views)
slowguy wrote:
gofigure wrote:
slowguy wrote:
gofigure wrote:
slowguy wrote:
First, this wasn't a collision. It was an allision.

Second, I think current estimates are that less than 10% of the sea floor has been charted and surveyed using modern sonar systems. Certainly, some areas are better charted than others, but I don't necessarily think it's an issue with charting. A similar allision occurred in 2005, and I'm sure there are other examples.

There's some discussion I'm following in the professional forums, but I haven't seen anything solid enough to repeat. Just speculation at this point. However, it seems a bunch of officers and Sailors got fired, above and beyond just the CO, XO and COB. That generally signals to me a lack of compliance with processes and procedures.


About charting. I was trying to make an allusion to our intelligence products versus others intelligence and that, while I see the need for surface nautical charts to be commercially available and unclassified, one would think that the sub forces would guard as secret their more full *understanding* of the realm down below and not want to share it with adversaries. Hence not really uncharted. And it may just be that our sub forces have in the past not really done much work in that neck of the woods until lately.

Interesting revelation about more that the usual 3 suspects and reliefs for cause. One wonders if there are more rocks that need turned over.


We definitely have seabed information that’s classified, but usually more because of the technology used to gather it, or because giving away precisely where we have data might also give away our intentions. It’s not really an “intelligence” issue.

For example, if you go to Google maps and search for a route to get to Sam’s Club, an enemy might surmise that you intend to go to Sam’s Club at some point. And if they know the exact route you plotted, they might be able to put some sort of obstruction in your way, or just monitor the route so that they know you’re on your way before you get there.


So back to what is the takeaway.

Knowing a seabed better than an adversary is an intelligence product in my book. That terra firma hunk which got run into is now charted, and that chart is now considered classified.

When and if hostilities commence in that sea, it is nice to know we can hide among the sea mounts and not run into them while the bad guys do the alliding . Sorry to hear that a CO XO and COB were casualties in this effort.

Since we’re discussing terms, knowledge of natural state of the seabed isn’t really “intelligence.” Intelligence typically refers to information we collect and analyze about adversaries. Knowing the seabed well is important, but it’s mostly just understanding the operating environment. Just because it might be classified, and has military importance, doesn’t make it “intelligence.” Now if we were talking about knowing about adversary sensors or technology that’s on the seabed, that would qualify.

Semantics.

Fine. Semantics and being pendantic , I get it. How about this. I now know of an unknown sea mount. I think I will use my intelligence and decide to keep this a secret that is unknown to even my best friends until I determine they have a need to know. I will also use my intelligence staff to help discern whether my new secret remains a secret such that I can use it for my tactical advantage.
Quote Reply
Re: So what is the takeaway here? Sub collision [Steve Hawley] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Bumble Bee
Nov 27, 21 16:50
Post #33 of 42 (596 views)
Steve Hawley wrote:
We’ve all read Hunt For Red October so we’re one step from having our own dolphin badges.

And fully aware of undersea mapping criticality

Undersea obstacles! Naw. Let’s crank this bitch up! Full ahead.

/r

As a freshman at A&M, we got secret clearances. We studied the Soviet fleet and were told it was all classified. That summer, Hunt for Red October came out and all that "classified" stuff we were taught was in the book!
Quote Reply
Re: So what is the takeaway here? Sub collision [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
ryans
Nov 27, 21 17:19
Post #34 of 42 (586 views)
Thank you. Appreciate the clarification. Always fun to learn details like that.
Quote Reply
Re: So what is the takeaway here? Sub collision [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
chriskal
Nov 27, 21 21:58
Post #35 of 42 (544 views)
windywave wrote:
slowguy wrote:
First, this wasn't a collision. It was an allision.

Second, I think current estimates are that less than 10% of the sea floor has been charted and surveyed using modern sonar systems. Certainly, some areas are better charted than others, but I don't necessarily think it's an issue with charting. A similar allision occurred in 2005, and I'm sure there are other examples.

There's some discussion I'm following in the professional forums, but I haven't seen anything solid enough to repeat. Just speculation at this point. However, it seems a bunch of officers and Sailors got fired, above and beyond just the CO, XO and COB. That generally signals to me a lack of compliance with processes and procedures.


I had to look up allision.

Learned a new word today

I wrote it on the roll of TP in our master. Alas, it is gone.
Quote Reply
Re: So what is the takeaway here? Sub collision [gofigure] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
tri_kid
Nov 28, 21 1:45
Post #36 of 42 (524 views)
Given that US navy ships have collided with the best radar known to man, it doesn't surprise me at all.
Quote Reply
Re: So what is the takeaway here? Sub collision [tri_kid] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gofigure
Nov 28, 21 6:24
Post #37 of 42 (490 views)
tri_kid wrote:
Given that US navy ships have collided with the best radar known to man, it doesn't surprise me at all.

I respond pointing you to automaticjack's post #2. This man has first hand experience. Were he at liberty to share with you his sea stories, I am confident your feelings may change.

That said, I shared your concerns about our surface navy back some 4 years ago and how they could not process radar information in order to avoid running into oncoming vessels. We once used eyeballs and brains to avoid and that seemed to work well. I hope you can appreciate that shit can happen to even the best trained and led crews.
Quote Reply
Re: So what is the takeaway here? Sub collision [gofigure] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
slowguy
Nov 28, 21 7:20
Post #38 of 42 (469 views)
gofigure wrote:
tri_kid wrote:
Given that US navy ships have collided with the best radar known to man, it doesn't surprise me at all.


I respond pointing you to automaticjack's post #2. This man has first hand experience. Were he at liberty to share with you his sea stories, I am confident your feelings may change.

That said, I shared your concerns about our surface navy back some 4 years ago and how they could not process radar information in order to avoid running into oncoming vessels. We once used eyeballs and brains to avoid and that seemed to work well. I hope you can appreciate that shit can happen to even the best trained and led crews.

Technology is almost never the issue with this sort of incident.

That said, it’s probably a stretch to claim that our ships have the best radars known to man. Everything on our ships is taxpayer funded, frequently out of date by the time it gets procured and installed, and over-engineered for redundancy and life at sea.
Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: So what is the takeaway here? Sub collision [windywave] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
hammond
Nov 28, 21 7:22
Post #39 of 42 (469 views)
windywave wrote:
slowguy wrote:
First, this wasn't a collision. It was an allision.

Second, I think current estimates are that less than 10% of the sea floor has been charted and surveyed using modern sonar systems. Certainly, some areas are better charted than others, but I don't necessarily think it's an issue with charting. A similar allision occurred in 2005, and I'm sure there are other examples.

There's some discussion I'm following in the professional forums, but I haven't seen anything solid enough to repeat. Just speculation at this point. However, it seems a bunch of officers and Sailors got fired, above and beyond just the CO, XO and COB. That generally signals to me a lack of compliance with processes and procedures.


I had to look up allision.

Learned a new word today

Glad I wasn’t the only one
Quote Reply
Re: So what is the takeaway here? Sub collision [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gofigure
Nov 28, 21 7:52
Post #40 of 42 (456 views)
Roger, concur technology is seldom the culprit for at sea bumps in the night; or bumps in the *dark* sea at depth for that matter. So help an old salt out. Re: technology and radars being the best ever known. There was a time when a contact became "lost in sea return" of the surface search radar. Has technology done away with sea return and raw reflected radar blips just as it has the grease boards and maneuvering board pads of paper? The last contact I reported out to the bridge as being lost in sea return ended up not colliding with us but rather it started shooting at us. And would not you know it, but it was in the South China Sea on a freedom of navigation mission.
Quote Reply
Re: So what is the takeaway here? Sub collision [gofigure] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
slowguy
Nov 28, 21 8:14
Post #41 of 42 (446 views)
gofigure wrote:
Roger, concur technology is seldom the culprit for at sea bumps in the night; or bumps in the *dark* sea at depth for that matter. So help an old salt out. Re: technology and radars being the best ever known. There was a time when a contact became "lost in sea return" of the surface search radar. Has technology done away with sea return and raw reflected radar blips just as it has the grease boards and maneuvering board pads of paper? The last contact I reported out to the bridge as being lost in sea return ended up not colliding with us but rather it started shooting at us. And would not you know it, but it was in the South China Sea on a freedom of navigation mission.

Sea clutter is still very much a thing.
Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: So what is the takeaway here? Sub collision [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
eb
Nov 28, 21 9:39
Post #42 of 42 (430 views)
slowguy wrote:
gofigure wrote:
Roger, concur technology is seldom the culprit for at sea bumps in the night; or bumps in the *dark* sea at depth for that matter. So help an old salt out. Re: technology and radars being the best ever known. There was a time when a contact became "lost in sea return" of the surface search radar. Has technology done away with sea return and raw reflected radar blips just as it has the grease boards and maneuvering board pads of paper? The last contact I reported out to the bridge as being lost in sea return ended up not colliding with us but rather it started shooting at us. And would not you know it, but it was in the South China Sea on a freedom of navigation mission.


Sea clutter is still very much a thing.

Indeed. It will always be a thing for radar - since there is no possible way to eliminate Bragg scattering.
Quote Reply
Prev Next
Back To ForumPrint Thread

Our Partners

transition-DOT-area-AT-slowtwitch-DOT-com

Advertise with us

©1999-2024 Slowtwitch, Inc., and Slowtwitch.com
Reproduction of material from any Slowtwitch.com page
without written permission is strictly prohibited.