Submarine lost

[henry d]

4 hours ago, NoBodyImportant said:

Prayers for the families.  But in reality what’s the point on Indonesia having a sub from the 70s. Any real navy could track and destroy it from 1000 miles away. Just seems like a waist of life and money to field such outdated technology.  The money they put into maintenance could probably buy a nice AA battery or something.  

Well that excludes the US navy, as I remember it they couldn't find their own backsides with a map and a torch.

[DUNKS]

I have nothing but the greatest respect for the poor lost sailors and Their families.

But I have personal experience of countries given armament they are not capable of operating safely. This is what happens to a perfectly good Royal Navy destroyer.In collision with an Indian cruiser whos crew cannot read signals. I was in the forrard lower messdeck at the time. Bottom porthole. Him up there was on my side that night.

Perfectly good ship written off.

 

[Mice!]

1 hour ago, DUNKS said:

I have nothing but the greatest respect for the poor lost sailors and Their families.

But I have personal experience of countries given armament they are not capable of operating safely. This is what happens to a perfectly good Royal Navy destroyer.In collision with an Indian cruiser whos crew cannot read signals. I was in the forrard lower messdeck at the time. Bottom porthole. Him up there was on my side that night.

Perfectly good ship written off.

 

Wow, that's some collision. 

I have been wondering why Indonesia would need a submarine?

[NoBodyImportant]

3 hours ago, henry d said:

Well that excludes the US navy, as I remember it they couldn't find their own backsides with a map and a torch.

I feel confident the US navy could track a diesel sub from the 70s. 

[Vince Green]

1 hour ago, DUNKS said:

I have nothing but the greatest respect for the poor lost sailors and Their families.

But I have personal experience of countries given armament they are not capable of operating safely. This is what happens to a perfectly good Royal Navy destroyer.In collision with an Indian cruiser whos crew cannot read signals. I was in the forrard lower messdeck at the time. Bottom porthole. Him up there was on my side that night.

Perfectly good ship written off.

 

left hand down a bit................

[Jega]

Pray god it was a quick peaceful end for these guys.

Respect for all the crew and condolences to all they left behind .

[12gauge82]

10 hours ago, henry d said:

Well that excludes the US navy, as I remember it they couldn't find their own backsides with a map and a torch.

For a country who's navy can't in your words "find their own backsides with a map and a torch", they do fairly well in my book at being the world's most powerful military! 

[harrycatcat1]

10 hours ago, henry d said:

Well that excludes the US navy, as I remember it they couldn't find their own backsides with a map and a torch.

What made you say that?

[Dave-G]

Shtoppit now, everyone knows henry's always right. 

[mossy835]

9 hours ago, DUNKS said:

I have nothing but the greatest respect for the poor lost sailors and Their families.

But I have personal experience of countries given armament they are not capable of operating safely. This is what happens to a perfectly good Royal Navy destroyer.In collision with an Indian cruiser whos crew cannot read signals. I was in the forrard lower messdeck at the time. Bottom porthole. Him up there was on my side that night.

Perfectly good ship written off.

 

 

 

who was in the crows nest uncle albert.

[DUNKS]

2 hours ago, mossy835 said:

 

 

who was in the crows nest uncle albert.

Yep. Except it was dark!!!

[Raja Clavata]

On 24/04/2021 at 09:48, Jaymo said:

The whole reason for a sub is stealth!

A tracking device of any type surely is undesirable and even if left dormant, could accidentally be switched on at in opportune moment.

We have Emergency Locator Beacons that can be manually triggered of in the event of an impact. Yet the damn things occasionally set themselves off.

More pilot / passenger finger trouble in most cases 😉 

[henry d]

13 hours ago, harrycatcat1 said:

What made you say that?

STANAFORLANT 1986, they were abjectly awful in every aspect, they even hid in the minches when the rest of the group were on exercise west of the Outer Hebrides in a force 8+, but get this, they didn't even tell us! We thought that they had sunk!

**EDIT** That is just one instance.

Edited April 27, 2021 by henry d

[oldypigeonpopper]

Hello, I remember my dad having a few photos of ships broken in half and sinking , all crew saved, how does this happen, he was a chief petty officer down in the engine room, I still remember as a 5 / 6 year old going down all the steps 🙄 back then when ship got back to port, Portsmouth they put on a big party on board, 1955/ 1956 , he was on lots of ship but only remember HMS Bermuda ? RIP to those in the sub 

Edited April 27, 2021 by oldypigeonpopper

[DUNKS]

Happens in all branches of the armed services. Playing at war if realistic is always dangerous. My particular incident was Indian ocean, night exercise darkened ship radar and radio silence lots of ships steaming flat out, perhaps 32knots line abreast whole fleet ordered to do 90degree starboard turn signal by lamp from flagship we all turned but the cruiser the Mysore which we had sold to the Indian navy did not. So we smacked into her. Very few of us below decks thank goodness. Forrard messdeck squashed flat. Only one sailor in there.

This was 1959.

Edited April 27, 2021 by DUNKS

[harrycatcat1]

2 hours ago, henry d said:

STANAFORLANT 1986, they were abjectly awful in every aspect, they even hid in the minches when the rest of the group were on exercise west of the Outer Hebrides in a force 8+, but get this, they didn't even tell us! We thought that they had sunk!

**EDIT** That is just one instance.

Do you really think that justifies your previous statement 🤔 something that supposedly happened nearly 40 years ago? 

" Well that excludes the US navy, as I remember it they couldn't find their own backsides with a map and a torch."

[henry d]

5 hours ago, harrycatcat1 said:

Do you really think that justifies your previous statement 🤔 something that supposedly happened nearly 40 years ago? 

" Well that excludes the US navy, as I remember it they couldn't find their own backsides with a map and a torch."

No, that's why I put just one instance. From the same tour the US navy would not pass through the straights of Hormuz after a tanker was hit by an Exocet in it's fwd hold, fortunately it didn't detonate.

I was in for another 4 years and have friends who did their 22, some even retired and were kept on as a civilian in the same post, and the stories are the same, incompetence, and inability.

[12gauge82]

2 hours ago, henry d said:

 

I was in for another 4 years and have friends who did their 22, some even retired and were kept on as a civilian in the same post, and the stories are the same, incompetence, and inability.

So much so that their naval might is virtually unchallenged in the world. Nice logic Henry! 

[Vince Green]

There are many functions for a sub other than combat/ attack role. And even that depends on who you are up against, you can stomp around in your own back yard bullying the neighbours if they are lower in the food chain.

It is fairly clear now that the Germans in 1944/45 used subs to transport 40 tons (at least) of stolen gold to Argentina. Plus a lot of high ranking Nazis.

[NoBodyImportant]

On 26/04/2021 at 01:28, WalkedUp said:

Anti Aircraft. I thought you meant Energizer initially. Overslept today and evidently still not fully wake. 

😂 yeah,  I just don’t see value in keeping a 70s sub operational. 

[Lloyd90]

15 hours ago, Vince Green said:

 

It is fairly clear now that the Germans in 1944/45 used subs to transport 40 tons (at least) of stolen gold to Argentina. Plus a lot of high ranking Nazis.

Where did you read that Vince? 
 

Interesting topic of discussion. 

[henry d]

4 hours ago, NoBodyImportant said:

😂 yeah,  I just don’t see value in keeping a 70s sub operational. 

USS Blue Ridge?

[henry d]

On 26/04/2021 at 11:29, DUNKS said:

I have nothing but the greatest respect for the poor lost sailors and Their families.

But I have personal experience of countries given armament they are not capable of operating safely. This is what happens to a perfectly good Royal Navy destroyer.In collision with an Indian cruiser whos crew cannot read signals. I was in the forrard lower messdeck at the time. Bottom porthole. Him up there was on my side that night.

Perfectly good ship written off.

 

Nasty! We got shoved out of the way by a soviet frigate off the Kola Peninsula, but just damaged the ceremonial ladder fairlead and a big dent in the ship side. We got too close during another ships torpedo firing drills and they got uppity.

[Downforce]

On 26/04/2021 at 12:49, Mice! said:

I have been wondering why Indonesia would need a submarine?

It seems;

Indonesia has expressed interest in acquiring more submarines to protect national interests and guard resources and sea-lanes. In 2006, Agence France-Presse reported that Indonesia was contemplating buying a total of 12 submarines from Russia, South Korea, or China. Owing largely to budgetary constraints, these procurements did not materialize; nevertheless, officials from TNI-AL continue to express aspirations for a large submarine fleet. [5] In 2010 Deputy Naval Chief of Staff Vice Admiral Marsetio expressed his belief that Indonesia needed 39 more submarines to protect the country's vast marine territory against external threats. [6] Media reports citing Indonesia's Defense Strategic Plan 2024 note that the document is aiming for a capability of at least 10 submarines. [7]

[Mice!]

5 hours ago, Downforce said:

It seems;

Indonesia has expressed interest in acquiring more submarines to protect national interests and guard resources and sea-lanes. In 2006, Agence France-Presse reported that Indonesia was contemplating buying a total of 12 submarines from Russia, South Korea, or China. Owing largely to budgetary constraints, these procurements did not materialize; nevertheless, officials from TNI-AL continue to express aspirations for a large submarine fleet. [5] In 2010 Deputy Naval Chief of Staff Vice Admiral Marsetio expressed his belief that Indonesia needed 39 more submarines to protect the country's vast marine territory against external threats. [6] Media reports citing Indonesia's Defense Strategic Plan 2024 note that the document is aiming for a capability of at least 10 submarines. [7]

Very strange.