RN Sub run aground
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because if she is not MoD property yet she's the contractors , till signed on the. Dotted line !
2. The RN CO grounded her, not the contractor.
Regardless of 1, where is the moral justification for the Contractor paying?
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Glesga, Scotland
Age: 51
Posts: 230
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well if she is navy property the tax payer will need to pick up the repair tab.
Tell me your don't think "morals" will come into play when there is a bill possibly for several million pounds ????
Am quiet sure some one for the MoD and BAE(????) was checking the smallprint on it's contract !
Tell me your don't think "morals" will come into play when there is a bill possibly for several million pounds ????
Am quiet sure some one for the MoD and BAE(????) was checking the smallprint on it's contract !
At the risk of stating the obvious, it's difficult to comprehend how a UK submarine could have achieved this. Good design and average command skills, or average design and good command skills should have ensured that this did not occur.
Interesting statement and I can't help wondering, using the parallel that often appears in respect of aircraft accidents/incidents in other threads, if this is the point at which we should be asking Mike "All the Sevens" to clarify his personal experience of handling a very large nuclear submarine in restricted waters with only the help of a single pump-jet propulsion system.
I wouldn't be hanging anyone just yet, particularly recalling the occasion when a frigate leaving her berth at Guzz "nudged" an SSN on the day she was sailing for an "interesting" patrol. My Admiral described the situation as "the least important ship in the Navy that day striking the most important one in the Navy that day", and there was not even a BOI, far less a court martial.
Jack
Interesting statement and I can't help wondering, using the parallel that often appears in respect of aircraft accidents/incidents in other threads, if this is the point at which we should be asking Mike "All the Sevens" to clarify his personal experience of handling a very large nuclear submarine in restricted waters with only the help of a single pump-jet propulsion system.
I wouldn't be hanging anyone just yet, particularly recalling the occasion when a frigate leaving her berth at Guzz "nudged" an SSN on the day she was sailing for an "interesting" patrol. My Admiral described the situation as "the least important ship in the Navy that day striking the most important one in the Navy that day", and there was not even a BOI, far less a court martial.
Jack
No one will expect that!
Mud banks shift. I recently ran my boat aground on a mud bank only about 200 yards away from my mooring, where I had previously sailed quite safely before. The chart said I should have 2.5m at lowest tide, the draft of the boat is 2m and the tide was .5m, so a ridge of mud of about 1.0m had appeared since the last survey. Of course, if I had been watching the depth sounder, it would't have happened! I got the boat off by moving everyone to the side and lifting the keel out of the mud.
Mud banks shift. I recently ran my boat aground on a mud bank only about 200 yards away from my mooring, where I had previously sailed quite safely before. The chart said I should have 2.5m at lowest tide, the draft of the boat is 2m and the tide was .5m, so a ridge of mud of about 1.0m had appeared since the last survey. Of course, if I had been watching the depth sounder, it would't have happened! I got the boat off by moving everyone to the side and lifting the keel out of the mud.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the risk of stating the obvious, it's difficult to comprehend how a UK submarine could have achieved this. Good design and average command skills, or average design and good command skills should have ensured that this did not occur.
Interesting statement and I can't help wondering, using the parallel that often appears in respect of aircraft accidents/incidents in other threads, if this is the point at which we should be asking Mike "All the Sevens" to clarify his personal experience of handling a very large nuclear submarine in restricted waters with only the help of a single pump-jet propulsion system.
Interesting statement and I can't help wondering, using the parallel that often appears in respect of aircraft accidents/incidents in other threads, if this is the point at which we should be asking Mike "All the Sevens" to clarify his personal experience of handling a very large nuclear submarine in restricted waters with only the help of a single pump-jet propulsion system.
Astute is not "very large" in terms of nuclear submarines ..
I can categorically state that I have never run one of HM submarines aground, does that help?
At this stage, the boat should not have been anywhere near waters where there is a risk of running aground, particularly where it can be observed by all.
You probably missed the "difficult to comprehend" bit, there's a hint there somewhere.
I can categorically state that I have never run one of HM submarines aground, does that help?
No, not really, since your "statement" tells me nothing about your background, and I certainly didn't miss the fact that you seem to be unaware that ships and submarines are referred to by those who know them as "she" .....
Jack
(who has conned warships from a frigate to a fleet carrier and, oh yes, a "very large submarine" at BUTEC)
No, not really, since your "statement" tells me nothing about your background, and I certainly didn't miss the fact that you seem to be unaware that ships and submarines are referred to by those who know them as "she" .....
Jack
(who has conned warships from a frigate to a fleet carrier and, oh yes, a "very large submarine" at BUTEC)
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Yearning for sun and sea
Age: 82
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since I doubt that anyone here (or possibly very few) knows the handling capabilities of this boat, most of the foregoing is completely irrelevant.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am trying to "tug" the thread back in the direction of aviation.....
How do we class this incident, in terms that we are all familiar with?
Has he landed with his gear up or did he bust controlled airspace?
How do we class this incident, in terms that we are all familiar with?
Has he landed with his gear up or did he bust controlled airspace?
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by GF
Since I doubt that anyone here (or possibly very few) knows the handling capabilities of this boat, most of the foregoing is completely irrelevant.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: North West
Age: 73
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its just like a canal boat
Having read post #7 it now becomes clear. Sail-by-wire and the problems you can meet if you don't think ahead. Now I don't know how to drive a nuclear sub and this in no way is an attempt to vindicate said Cdr, however, I do know a little about software and canal boats!
I can imagine boat designer chappie telling the RN:
“Do not worry, this sail by wire is failsafe you cannot run aground, it will not let you. The computer uses your present position and looks up the relevant chart and if you are heading for land will prevent you from hitting it.” Marvellous thinks head Admiral no more expensive repairs and courts martial.
Picture said boat, drifting in waters close to land, Captain supremely confident of his sailing ability. Getting close to the shingle bank,
“No 1, make my heading North and revolutions for 2kts”, (Ok I watch too much TV)
“Aye Aye cap'n”
“Bosun – (or whoever inputs commands these days) make my heading 360 speed 2kts”
“She canna take it sir” - oops got carried away there, try again.
“Sir the helm is not responding”
“Dont be silly she must, it says so on the instruction manual”
“She wont turn sir”
And before you know it the wind pushes this slab of very expensive metal and acoustic tiles gently onto the shingle bank. Why?
Well just like ac and “It will not stall sir”, the sail-by-wire software will consider several conditions before it actions the commands. One of them might well be how close it is to the land and depth of water under the keel. A boat turns around the centre point, well a canal boat does and the wind pushes it a treat. If the software detects that to turn on a particular heading the stern would breach the safety rules with respect to depth under the keel it will not let you turn, and I suspect you turn before you increase speed. So the boat will not manoeuvre and drifts on to the shingle bank, the computer having no influence on the wind.
OK, conjecture on my part, but its the sort of thing that will happen until your old salty sea dog understands the ways of modern software control. Remember the Air France pilot who put his aircraft into landing mode, flies down the runway at 30ft, pushes the throttles forward to overshoot and nothing happens, it does of course, but not in the order he is expecting and not in time for the 40ft trees at the end of the runway to arrest his flight. You have to learn to fly and sail-by-wire, you cannot just jump in an operate as you did before.
And that your honour, is the case for the defence!! Despite what I said in the beginning.
I can imagine boat designer chappie telling the RN:
“Do not worry, this sail by wire is failsafe you cannot run aground, it will not let you. The computer uses your present position and looks up the relevant chart and if you are heading for land will prevent you from hitting it.” Marvellous thinks head Admiral no more expensive repairs and courts martial.
Picture said boat, drifting in waters close to land, Captain supremely confident of his sailing ability. Getting close to the shingle bank,
“No 1, make my heading North and revolutions for 2kts”, (Ok I watch too much TV)
“Aye Aye cap'n”
“Bosun – (or whoever inputs commands these days) make my heading 360 speed 2kts”
“She canna take it sir” - oops got carried away there, try again.
“Sir the helm is not responding”
“Dont be silly she must, it says so on the instruction manual”
“She wont turn sir”
And before you know it the wind pushes this slab of very expensive metal and acoustic tiles gently onto the shingle bank. Why?
Well just like ac and “It will not stall sir”, the sail-by-wire software will consider several conditions before it actions the commands. One of them might well be how close it is to the land and depth of water under the keel. A boat turns around the centre point, well a canal boat does and the wind pushes it a treat. If the software detects that to turn on a particular heading the stern would breach the safety rules with respect to depth under the keel it will not let you turn, and I suspect you turn before you increase speed. So the boat will not manoeuvre and drifts on to the shingle bank, the computer having no influence on the wind.
OK, conjecture on my part, but its the sort of thing that will happen until your old salty sea dog understands the ways of modern software control. Remember the Air France pilot who put his aircraft into landing mode, flies down the runway at 30ft, pushes the throttles forward to overshoot and nothing happens, it does of course, but not in the order he is expecting and not in time for the 40ft trees at the end of the runway to arrest his flight. You have to learn to fly and sail-by-wire, you cannot just jump in an operate as you did before.
And that your honour, is the case for the defence!! Despite what I said in the beginning.
