10 ms·

Yeah, I'd like to know what the officers could/should have done differently... And why wasn't the Navigator dismissed? If it was an unknown seamount, surely t

by berkut 5y ago

Yeah, I'd like to know what the officers could/should have done differently... And why wasn't the Navigator dismissed? If it was an unknown seamount, surely the only way they could have known about it to avoid it would be using active sonar, which would almost certainly be a no-no in the area of sea they were in (active sonar from other vessels can be heard passively quite a bit further than the range the active sonar's being emitted for as it only has to go one way, not there and back like it does with the response from active sonar), along with the fact they'd want to stay hidden. Maybe it was something else they hit which was more embarrising? (don't know what though)

losvedir 5y ago
Probably about knowing what you don't know, and acting accordingly. Like, I'm guessing that if you don't have a part of the sea mapped, and you can't use active radar, then you probably shouldn't be going through there.
- einnhverr 5y ago
  And if you really have to be stealthy there with this submarine, send another crew with mapping capabilities using a decoy mission in which you don't have to hide that you are passing by.
QuarterReptile 5y ago
>Yeah, I'd like to know what the officers could/should have done differently... To copy the same excerpt as a comment below: [...] sound judgement, prudent decision-making and adherence to required procedures in navigation planning, watch team execution and risk management could have prevented the incident [...] >And why wasn't the Navigator dismissed? That is probably still in the works. There's more due process involved in firing someone further down the chain of command. >If it was an unknown seamount, surely the only way they could have known about it to avoid it would be using active sonar While this is true, you don't need to know where the seamounts are to avoid hitting them. When driving on a highway, I can go very fast because there are not people walking around because the environment is pedestrian-hostile to the point of extinction. Driving through a dense urban core, I have to be much slower because there are people everywhere and I might be in a city where crossing mid-block is normal.
- ethbr0 5y ago
  My original point was along the lines of people not realizing there's a "bicyclist walking across the interstate at 3am" analog here. No obvious indicators that happened, and we'll probably never know, but it is a possibility. So "nothing that should happen to an experienced crew" is a pretty strong statement to make given the domain and known facts.
  - QuarterReptile 5y ago
    >My original point was along the lines of people not realizing there's a "bicyclist walking across the interstate at 3am" analog here. The thing is, this was almost certainly not that case. If you have bad sounding data (which is a thing that the planners know), then you are not on an interstate.

by berkut 5y ago

losvedir 5y ago

Probably about knowing what you don't know, and acting accordingly. Like, I'm guessing that if you don't have a part of the sea mapped, and you can't use active radar, then you probably shouldn't be going through there.

einnhverr 5y ago
And if you really have to be stealthy there with this submarine, send another crew with mapping capabilities using a decoy mission in which you don't have to hide that you are passing by.

QuarterReptile 5y ago

>Yeah, I'd like to know what the officers could/should have done differently... To copy the same excerpt as a comment below: [...] sound judgement, prudent decision-making and adherence to required procedures in navigation planning, watch team execution and risk management could have prevented the incident [...] >And why wasn't the Navigator dismissed? That is probably still in the works. There's more due process involved in firing someone further down the chain of command. >If it was an unknown seamount, surely the only way they could have known about it to avoid it would be using active sonar While this is true, you don't need to know where the seamounts are to avoid hitting them. When driving on a highway, I can go very fast because there are not people walking around because the environment is pedestrian-hostile to the point of extinction. Driving through a dense urban core, I have to be much slower because there are people everywhere and I might be in a city where crossing mid-block is normal.

ethbr0 5y ago
My original point was along the lines of people not realizing there's a "bicyclist walking across the interstate at 3am" analog here. No obvious indicators that happened, and we'll probably never know, but it is a possibility. So "nothing that should happen to an experienced crew" is a pretty strong statement to make given the domain and known facts.
- QuarterReptile 5y ago
  >My original point was along the lines of people not realizing there's a "bicyclist walking across the interstate at 3am" analog here. The thing is, this was almost certainly not that case. If you have bad sounding data (which is a thing that the planners know), then you are not on an interstate.