Article

2023-04-09 Science & Technology

Never-before-seen photos take you inside the doomed USS Thresher - the world's first nuclear-powered submarine to be lost at sea in a devastating accident that claimed 129 lives

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Skidmark 2023-04-09 11:47|| || Front Page|| [10 views ] Top

#1 A bit more spacious than Das Boat.

Posted by Procopius2k 2023-04-09 13:56|| 2023-04-09 13:56|| Front Page Top

#2 Still, not for the claustraphobic

Posted by Frank G 2023-04-09 15:02|| 2023-04-09 15:02|| Front Page Top

#3 I remember this well.

A "minor difficulty" indeed.

Posted by Anomalous Sources 2023-04-09 16:07|| 2023-04-09 16:07|| Front Page Top

#4 I used to write little quality presentations for weekly construction meetings, one of them was on the Thresher, (below). Sorry about the verbosity.

The Soviets were hard pressed to keep up with the Americans, so schedule pressures drove their ballistic missile submarine program. Roger Mudd said, in the History Channel program, that there are 17 nuclear submarines at the bottom of the ocean. Thirteen are Soviet. That’s 76%.

At least two submarine losses were American – the Thresher, in 1963 and the Scorpion, five years later. I’m old enough to remember both. The Thresher was the first of the Navy’s new attack subs – the fastest and quietest yet produced. Like the K-19, it had a problem with consistent and uniform welds. Submarine pressure hulls are 3-1/2” inches thick, and the welding of such thick metal requires precise procedures and precision work. The Thresher experienced some problems with welds on her shakedown cruise, so she returned to port for some weld repairs.

Not enough repairs, apparently. On the next dive of the Thresher, the Captain reported “a minor difficulty” from a maximum-depth dive. The Captain said he was about to “emergency blow”, which would rocket the sub to the surface and carry her halfway out of the water in white foam. But then the Thresher was silent, and moments later, sonar crews heard the hull of the Thresher crush. All 129 sailors and military and civilian technicians aboard were lost.

The subsequent investigation suggests the sub had another weld defect show up at the maximum depth, but the Captain was confident he could surface with the emergency blow procedure. Later tests discovered, however, that at that pressure, a filter in the emergency blow piping instantly froze over, rendering the procedure useless. The sub’s “Plan B” failed, and she lost depth control, and was crushed.

While the U.S. Navy had better quality control in the nuclear submarine program than the Soviets, one unforeseen condition that could have been discovered in a thorough testing program was a significant factor in the loss of the Thresher. Her loss at sea is often considered a watershed event in the implementation of the Navy’s rigorous submarine safety program called SUBSAFE.

That’s why many people do not like being on the ‘cutting edge’ of technology, and why State Agencies are so reluctant to change. Cutting edge technology is fraught with hidden disasters unless you have conducted a thorough test program to evaluate all “practical” potential operational conditions where a failure – or string of failures - might lead to catastrophe. So the “moral of the story” is to have some respect for the conventional means and methods, and approved plans and specifications of the contract. Approach the “cutting edge” with caution and respect.

Posted by Bobby 2023-04-09 16:29|| 2023-04-09 16:29|| Front Page Top

#5 /\ Message for Pfizer and Moderna researchers.

Posted by Besoeker 2023-04-09 16:54|| 2023-04-09 16:54|| Front Page Top

#6 Yes, Besoeker —- there are rather high risks on the end of the bell curve, but that’s where important things, for better or worse, are found.

Posted by Glenmore 2023-04-09 17:34|| 2023-04-09 17:34|| Front Page Top

#7 The reason the Thresher sunk was because we were still using using WW2 construction and safety proceedures. At test depth we were going slow because WW2 subs were battery driven and went slow at deep depths. WW2 subs also had strainers on there ballast tank blow vents. The Thresher broke a valve during test depth test and headed up at ver slow speed. The strainers froze and stopped air flow into the ballast tanks when sub made it to about 300 feet. The sub stopped accenting because strainers froze, at about test depth blow started again and they made it to 600ft and then sunk. All subs were taken into dry dock to install “sub safe”, ie remove the strainers. And test procedures at test depth were changed.

Posted by Old Salty 2023-04-09 17:43|| 2023-04-09 17:43|| Front Page Top

#8 I heard about the 300ft and 600ft figure from a sonar guy that I subbed with who was on the surface ship monitoring the tests.

Posted by Old Salty 2023-04-09 17:53|| 2023-04-09 17:53|| Front Page Top

23:59 Clem Glealet1147
23:47 Skidmark
23:44 trailing wife
23:41 Skidmark
23:32 Richard Aubrey
23:24 Papa Cooky
23:21 Papa Cooky
22:47 DooDahMan
22:00 magpie
20:58 swksvolFF
20:43 swksvolFF
19:22 Bangkok Billy
19:02 trailing wife
18:52 M. Murcek
18:43 Airandee
18:41 Glenmore
18:35 Glenmore
18:23 Glenmore
18:18 Anomalous Sources
18:00 Super Hose
17:54 Super Hose
17:53 Old Salty
17:52 Anomalous Sources
17:48 Super Hose