| Submit your comments on this article |
| Arabia |
| U.S. Submarine, Japanese Ship Collide |
| 2007-01-09 |
| TOKYO (AP) - A U.S. nuclear submarine and Japanese merchant ship collided in the Arabian Sea late Monday, but there were no injuries on either vessel, the U.S. Navy and Japanese officials said. There was no damage to the fast-attack USS Newport News or the ship that affected either vessel's ability to navigate, said a Navy official, who requested anonymity because the details of the incident had not yet been released. The official said the Navy was going to check for any other damage after daybreak Tuesday. The cause of the collision, which occurred late Monday night local time, is still under investigation, the Navy official said. The Japanese government received word of a crash from the U.S. side but was still investigating details, said Naoki Kumagai, deputy director of the U.S. security division at Japan's Foreign Ministry. Commander Kevin Aandahl of the U.S. 5th Fleet in Bahrain said he had no immediate details. "I can confirm that an incident took place between one of our submarines and a merchant ship," he said. Japanese oil company Showa Shell Sekiyu K.K. said the ship involved is the tanker Mogamigawa operated by Kawasaki Kisen Ltd., Kyodo said. It was traveling from the Persian Gulf to Singapore and was carrying a crew of eight Japanese and 16 Filipinos. |
| Posted by:Steve White |
| #25 They weren't in the straits, they were in the Arabian Gulf. A well traveled area, but they should have know that a tanker was close. Do you practice driving techniques in an open field, or a narrow alley? |
| Posted by: Pappy 2007-01-09 21:28 |
| #24 What was that sound? The sound of one submarine CO's career being flushed. |
| Posted by: FOTSGreg 2007-01-09 19:50 |
| #23 Thanks for posting those comments, Sherry. There's some more commentary at a submariners' blog here, including a pic of the tanker. |
| Posted by: Mike 2007-01-09 17:50 |
| #22 Couple of comments from submariners: I am surprised that it hadnÂ’t happen earlier. We have had boats in that area since late 79. Emergency Deep is a no shi**er when you are there. WhatÂ’s worse is when two contacts 120 degrees apart on the scope are in fact the same super tanker. High pucker factor. Hopefully no one was injured. and Friends - I was on one of the first group of nuke boats in there in the winter of '79, after the hostages were taken. Right up at the mouth of the straits. Trust me, it was duckin' and dodgin' tankers at PD for 80 days. Not surprised at this at all. And Emergency Deep was kinda chancy as well when you were spending a lot of time in water that was less than 500 ft. |
| Posted by: Sherry 2007-01-09 17:36 |
| #21 #10 Conjecture: sub was using tanker for a moving shield to obscure its presense, got too cute/too close my thoughts when i first read this... |
| Posted by: RD 2007-01-09 17:22 |
| #20 think comment #10 has it pegged; something caused the tanker to check up or the sub overtook faster that anticipated. either way, not good for the sub CO and not good for us since repairs are needed. unscheduled pitstops suck. |
| Posted by: USN, Ret. 2007-01-09 14:13 |
| #19 Chuck Darwin, if the sub was the closest at the time I don't think it's unreasonable. That's how the NAZI's got the Arc of the Covenant you know. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2007-01-09 14:03 |
| #18 Another thought, how strict are the Japanese when it comes to flagging tankers? Is it guaranteed that this is from a Japanese company, or could it be closer to Liberia and Panama where everyone can be flagged. I assume it's a Japanese company but it changes the picture if it's not. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2007-01-09 14:03 |
| #17 It was headed out of the gulf, C-Low. Destination: Singapore. |
| Posted by: mojo 2007-01-09 12:37 |
| #16 It could be a plant to put pressure on the Iranians, with deniability. |
| Posted by: Zarquon Pebbles in Blairistan 2007-01-09 11:59 |
| #15 My guess was that Japan being a friendly who could be trusted. The US Sub was using the Oil Tanker's prop wash to drown out himself so he could sneak into the gulf were I imagine a big fat tanker would be headed. This is a shame he hit becuase that will be one less sub in theater. Guesing that it took the sub out of action becuase I would imagine if it hadn't caused serous damage it would never have made news just another odd sound on a big ship in the middle of the ocean known only by the 20 or so crew on board. |
| Posted by: C-Low 2007-01-09 11:50 |
| #14 (2) What is the likelyhood the sub tried to stop the tanker at sea and the tanker refused to stop? Slim and none. And Slim, he's out of town. Seriously, subs are not generally used for the interdiction of surface vessels. Surface warships are used for that. Carry on. |
| Posted by: Chuck Darwin 2007-01-09 11:46 |
| #13 First thoughts. (1) How useful is a sub if they can't see a tanker and avoid it? Something else is going on. (2) What is the likelyhood the sub tried to stop the tanker at sea and the tanker refused to stop? Collision resulted. (3) If I was a bad guy I'd make false reports of ship collisions with US ships I knew to be in the area to embarrass the captains and cause some havoc amung the American Navy about wtf? |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2007-01-09 11:27 |
| #12 They weren't in the straits, they were in the Arabian Gulf. A well traveled area, but they should have know that a tanker was close. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2007-01-09 11:20 |
| #11 If a sub can't avoid that then what hope of finding the iranian mini subs? Try crossing a New York intersection with your eyes closed. Supertankers are dime a dozen in a heavily traveled area, especially in a constricted one as the Straits of Hormuz. Now, isolate out all the very similar sounds that are not only travelling straight line but also bouncing and echoing around from the shallows and the intense thermoclines in a hot and shallow body of water. Now also include the requirement of not letting others know you're there (known as trying to be stealthy), also called traversing SUBMERGED. It's easy for the tanker itself to have masked it's own prop sounds because those things are so huge. Add the possibility it had a load of oil, those ships can be down in the water over 50 feet of draft. I'm always amazed at the people who think it's so friggin' easy to look out the periscope. Well, maybe their "Seaview"-like forward windows were dirty or sumthin' |
| Posted by: AlmostAnonymous5839 2007-01-09 10:41 |
| #10 Conjecture: sub was using tanker for a moving shield to obscure its presense, got too cute/too close. |
| Posted by: Whiskey Mike 2007-01-09 10:34 |
| #9 True enough Pappy, this is all on the Commander, unless there are some very wierd circumstances. |
| Posted by: Cyber Sarge 2007-01-09 10:33 |
| #8 Another load of Iranian oil. Not necessarily. Kuwaiti and Saudi--and Iraqi!--oil gets shipped from terminals in the Gulf. |
| Posted by: Mike 2007-01-09 10:29 |
| #7 A supertanker is a) slow b) very noisy. c) frickin huge Exactly (VBEG) |
| Posted by: Pappy 2007-01-09 09:55 |
| #6 Interesting that the sub was ID'd, even unofficially, by an unnamed source. |
| Posted by: mrp 2007-01-09 09:28 |
| #5 What is it with Japanese ships/boats and nuke subs, anyway? Actually, it's just American subs whom have a long and well chronicled history of sinking Japanese tonnage. In war, and as it appears, in peace. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2007-01-09 09:21 |
| #4 Er how? A supertanker is a) slow b) very noisy. c) frickin huge If a sub can't avoid that then what hope of finding the iranian mini subs? |
| Posted by: Bright Pebbles in Blairistan 2007-01-09 09:18 |
| #3 Must have just scraped hulls. |
| Posted by: Sock Puppet of Doom 2007-01-09 07:12 |
| #2 Another load of Iranian oil. Too bad it didn't sink. Now they know there's a cluster of subs with nukes below the surface and 2 carrier attack groups above the water. No wonder the Ayatollah had a stroke. Tried to have a shit fit, but his cancer laden bowels prevented that and applied extra pressure on his pea brain and blew out all circuits. What a damn shame. |
| Posted by: SpecOp35 2007-01-09 01:21 |
| #1 What is it with Japanese ships/boats and nuke subs, anyway? Not good for the Captain, for sure. |
| Posted by: mojo 2007-01-09 00:30 |