World Naval Ships Forums  
VIEW ALL OF OUR CURRENT SPECIAL OFFERS HERE!

Go Back   World Naval Ships Forums > Naval History > All Other Naval Ships
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

All Other Naval Ships Topics relating to a specific ship or ships from any country not mentioned above

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #26  
Old 23-11-2017, 18:05
harry.gibbon's Avatar
harry.gibbon harry.gibbon is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Merseyside
Posts: 7,778
Default Re: Argentine Submarine San Juan

'Explosion' detected near route of missing Argentinian submarine, navy confirms


Uki Goñi and agencies
Thursday 23 November 2017 14.47 GMT
Last modified on Thursday 23 November 2017 15.50 GMT


Sound described as ‘abnormal, singular, short, violent’ heard on day that contact was lost with ARA San Juan and its 44 crew

An abnormal sound detected in the South Atlantic Ocean hours after an Argentinian navy submarine sent its last signal last week was “consistent with an explosion”, a navy spokesman has said.

Capt Enrique Balbi described the blast as “abnormal, singular, short, violent” and “non-nuclear”. It was detected at 10.31am on 15 November along the route that the ARA San Juan had been following when it last made radio contact three hours earlier.
...............

The explosion was picked up by US sensors and by international agencies responsible for the detection of nuclear explosions around the world, Balbi said. Two Nasa planes were continuing to fly over the area in search of the submarine.

The explosion was detected in an area where Argentina’s continental shelf drops off abruptly from a depth of 200 metres to anything up to 5,000 metres, naval expert Horacio Tobías told the TN news network.

This means that the ARA San Juan would be difficult to find if it sank beyond the continental shelf. The existence of other sunken ships in that area of the sea floor could also increase the difficulty of identifying remains of the submarine.
...........

Relatives of the crew gathered at the Mar del Plata navy base reacted with anger when officers informed them of the latest report.

“They didn’t say they’re dead, but that’s what seems logical,” said Itatí Leguizamón, the wife of Germán Suárez, a sonar operator. “We don’t believe they didn’t know from before. They’re perverse bastards who’ve had us here for a week.”
...........

Defending the delay, navy chiefs said military protocol advised a 48-hour waiting period before beginning search efforts for submarines lost at sea.

Also being called into question is the wisdom of having deployed a 34-year-old submarine to make the 10-day journey from the Argentinian port of Ushuaia, the southernmost city in the world, to the naval base in Mar del Plata.

-----------------------------------------

Above excerpts taken from an article in The Guardian on-line (where the full article can be read).


Little h

Note; I have bolded two short passages of the original text.
__________________

GFXU - HMS Falmouth in Falmouth Bay

Last edited by harry.gibbon : 23-11-2017 at 18:16.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 23-11-2017, 20:33
sparky42 sparky42 is offline
Chief Petty Officer
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 51
Default Re: Argentine Submarine San Juan

Can't imagine what the families have been going through this week and now to learn this...
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 27-11-2017, 11:57
Marius_B's Avatar
Marius_B Marius_B is offline
Sub-Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: East Midlands, England.
Posts: 162
Default Re: Argentine Submarine San Juan

Two sets of fake news:-

First fake:-
UKDJ with their headline: "Russian government owned news agency claims a British mine caused the sinking of the ARA San Juan". However, the news agency is not claiming it, the news agency Sputnik is quoting the theoretical opinion of a Russian captain.

Second fake:-
The original Sputnik article, in Spanish, says:-
"The legacy of the Malvinas: the theory of a Russian captain on the ARA San Juan. In 1982, British submarines could have placed maritime mines near the Argentine coasts. The mine could remain in the bottom for 35 years, and once a storm disconnected it from the rope, it could have hit the San Juan, theorized Dandikin".

This is how fake news is created, stirring up all manner and means of nonsense.
__________________
My picture portfolio on *flickr*
https://www.flickr.com/photos/tallyh...57677979466786
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 29-11-2017, 03:03
BlackBat242's Avatar
BlackBat242 BlackBat242 is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 2,131
Default Re: Argentine Submarine San Juan

I can't find a direct source, but this was posted on multiple discussion boards:

Quote:
The following report is making it's way among the Submarine groups and blogs as of today. Bruce Rule is a real Sonar analyst, and is in fact a well known expert in the world of sonar analysis.

I cannot vouch for the authenticity of this report at this time. However, nothing in the report appears to be erroneous. Everything in it rings true, if this analysis has in fact been performed. I give it the benefit of the doubt, until proven false.

Quote:
ANALYSIS OF ACOUSTIC DETECTION OF THE
LOSS OF THE ARGENTINE SUBMARINE SAN JUAN
By Bruce Rule
An analytical review of all information released by the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization on the acoustic signal associated with the loss of the Argentina Submarine ARA SAN JUAN confirms the following:
That acoustic signal originated near 46-10S, 59-42W at 1358Z (GMT) on 15 November 2017. It was produced by the collapse (implosion) of the ARA SAN JUAN pressure-hull at a depth of 1275-feet. Sea pressure at the collapse depth was 570 PSI. The frequency of the collapse event signal (bubble-pulse) was about 4.4 Hz.
The energy released by the collapse was equal to the explosion of 12,500 pounds of TNT at the depth of 1275-feet. That energy was produced by the nearly instantaneous conversion of potential energy (sea-pressure) to kinetic energy, the motion of the intruding water-ram which entered the SAN JUAN pressure-hull at a speed of about 1800 mph.
The entire pressure-hull was completely destroyed (fragmented/compacted) in about 40 milliseconds (0.040s or 1/25th of a second), the duration of the compression phase of the collapse event which is half the minimum time required for cognitive recognition of an event.
Although the crew may have known collapse was imminent, they never knew it was occurring. They did not drown or experience pain. Death was instantaneous.
The SAN JUAN wreckage sank vertically at an estimated speed between 10 and 13 knots. Bottom impact would not have produced an acoustic event detectable at long range.
The open question is: why was no corrective action - such as blowing ballast - taken by the SAN JUAN crew before the submarine sank to collapse depth? According to Argentine Navy spokesman Gabriel Galeazzi, the Commanding Officer of the SAN JUAN reported a "failure" in the submarine's "battery system," The time of that report was 0730 on 15 November, assumed to have been GMT. Subsequently, the problem was reported to have been "fixed." The SAN JUAN intended to submerged and continued its transit north. The SAN JUAN pressure-hull collapsed at 1358 GMT on 15 November.
In the case of the loss of the US nuclear submarine SCORPION (SSN 589), hydrogen out-gassed by the main battery exploded at 18:20:44 GMT on 22 May 1968 incapacitating/killing the crew with an atmospheric over-pressure in the battery well estimated to have been 7-10 times the fatal value. The pressure-hull was not breached. This assessment was based on analysis of acoustic detections of the event and damage observed in pieces of the fragmented battery recovered from the wreckage at a depth of 11,100 feet by the US submersible TRIESTE, e.g., microscopic, spectrographic and x-ray diffraction analyses. (There was no flooding of the pressure-hull before the battery exploded.)
SCORPION lost power and sank slowly over nearly 22 minutes to collapse at a depth of 1530-feet at 18:42:34 GMT on 22 May 1968.
There is the possibility that a similar sequence of events occurred aboard the SAN JUAN. If the wreck is located and efforts are made to recover components, emphasis should be placed on the battery system.
The author of this assessment was the lead acoustic analyst at the US Office of Naval Intelligence for 42 years, analyzed acoustic detectors of the loss of the USS THRESHER (SSN 593) on 10 April 1963 and testified before that Court of Inquiry. The author expresses his appreciation to those who supported this assessment with research and calculations.
Initial reports from the Argentine Navy indicate that they had a problem with their snorkel which allowed water to enter the hull and shorted out the forward battery. What transpired after that to cause the sub to sink is only speculation at this time. As the author of this report indicates, it's not beyond the realm of possibility that the forward battery exploded. A similarly accident occurred on the USS Bonefish (SS-582) in April of 1988. She was able to surface, and the captain ordered the ship evacuated. Incidentally, the CO, CDR Mike Wilson was my Executive Officer at Trident Training Facility Kings Bay following this incident.

And here is an article about the reported leak & battery fire:
Crew in missing Argentinian submarine reported fire & leak in final message
Quote:
The Argentina submarine that vanished 12 days ago sent a final, desperate message reporting a short-circuiting battery and fire onboard, the Argentine Navy said Monday.

Enrique Balbi, a spokesman for the Argentine Navy, told reporters that in it the ARA San Juan's last message, the vessel’s captain said water had entered through the snorkel when the sub was charging batteries.

He said the water entered through the ventilation system to a battery connection tray in the prow and “caused a short-circuit and the beginning of a fire, or smoke without flame.”

Balbi said the captain later communicated via satellite phone that the problem had been contained.

“They had to electrically isolate the battery and continue sailing underwater to Mar del Plata using another battery circuit,” he added.

The San Juan, a German-built diesel-electric TR-1700 class submarine, was last heard from Nov. 15.

Hopes for survivors have been largely crushed by reports of an explosion detected near the time and place the sub went missing.

Since then, there have been no signs of the sub or debris despite an intensive multinational search. Experts have said the 44 sailors aboard had only enough oxygen to last up to 10 days if the sub remained intact but submerged.

The navy said last week that, before the submarine went missing, the captain reported an electrical problem in a battery compartment and the vessel was ordered to return to its base in the coastal city of Mar del Plata, about 250 miles southeast of Buenos Aires.

The vessel was commissioned in 1985 and was most recently refitted in 2014.
{more at link)
The sea state in the area at the time of the sinking was 6-8 - which would definitely cause any submariner to want to take his boat below if he thought it was at all dive-worthy.
__________________
Only a fool fights in a burning house. __ Jon A., Sgt USMC '81-'89; CV-61 USS Ranger '85-'87
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 29-11-2017, 05:29
mike d's Avatar
mike d mike d is offline
Sub-Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Miramichi N.B. Canada
Posts: 146
Default Re: Argentine Submarine San Juan

BlackBat242....thank you for sharing this most excellent and expert analysis. That is an example of the reason I come to this forum. I can't imagine what those poor souls went through.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 29-11-2017, 08:17
Marius_B's Avatar
Marius_B Marius_B is offline
Sub-Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: East Midlands, England.
Posts: 162
Default Re: Argentine Submarine San Juan

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackBat242 View Post
The sea state in the area at the time of the sinking was 6-8 - which would definitely cause any submariner to want to take his boat below if he thought it was at all dive-worthy.
That being said, it begs the question why was the submarine 'snorkelling' with a heavy sea-state? Could it be that the submarine batteries was badly in need of re-charging and that notwithstanding the sea-state the captain had to choose between two bad choices:-

- either recharge regardless the sea-state
- or suffer some battery power problem / defect (with resulting unknown consequences) whilst submerged

He initially chose the first and was forced into the second once water entered the submarine.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 29-11-2017, 18:07
Gwyrosydd's Avatar
Gwyrosydd Gwyrosydd is offline
Commodore
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Garrison Creek, Fort York, Upper Canada
Posts: 914
Default Re: Argentine Submarine San Juan

Quote:
Originally Posted by BlackBat242 View Post
I can't find a direct source, but this was posted on multiple discussion
This seems a VERY dubious analysis: there is an awful lot of information be stated as fact here when, at best, it is supposition based on VERY scanty evidence. All the evidence that has been reported so far are two signals from the submarine (has exact text and reported location of these signals been divulged?) and reports of some accoutic signals from underwater listening arrays. Yes, the waveform of such signals could in principle yeild considerable information from modeling of events that could have caused it; have these traces been made publicly available? Have the models been described and other possible causes ruled out?

Sorry, but we have to be very cautious about distribution of questionable material being presented as established fact without adequate description of the methods used to reach these conclusions.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 29-11-2017, 20:06
emason's Avatar
emason emason is offline
Vice-Admiral
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: North Yorkshire
Posts: 1,890
Default Re: Argentine Submarine San Juan

The one thing that has puzzled me from the outset is - why, at the first sign of trouble, didn't she surface then run on diesels?

My somewhat limited understanding is that if a bank of batteries went u/s the others could be switched to compensate for the loss.
__________________
Regards, Bill

"To be ignorant of what occurred before you were born is to remain always a child. For what is the worth of human life unless it is woven into the life of our ancestors by the records of history?" - Cicero.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 29-11-2017, 20:22
Scatari Scatari is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Gatineau, Quebec, Canada
Posts: 4,554
Default Re: Argentine Submarine San Juan

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gwyrosydd View Post
This seems a VERY dubious analysis: there is an awful lot of information be stated as fact here when, at best, it is supposition based on VERY scanty evidence. All the evidence that has been reported so far are two signals from the submarine (has exact text and reported location of these signals been divulged?) and reports of some accoutic signals from underwater listening arrays. Yes, the waveform of such signals could in principle yeild considerable information from modeling of events that could have caused it; have these traces been made publicly available? Have the models been described and other possible causes ruled out?

Sorry, but we have to be very cautious about distribution of questionable material being presented as established fact without adequate description of the methods used to reach these conclusions.
Couldn't agree more - Mr Rule's article is purely speculation and should be treated as such until some factual evidence is available.
__________________
Tim
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 30-11-2017, 04:46
mike d's Avatar
mike d mike d is offline
Sub-Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Miramichi N.B. Canada
Posts: 146
Default Re: Argentine Submarine San Juan

Mr. Rule's thoughts may well be speculation....but it seems at least to be educated speculation....and to make much more sense than what I have been reading in the media!
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 30-11-2017, 12:36
XYZ XYZ is offline
Chief Petty Officer
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 50
Default Re: Argentine Submarine San Juan

Quote:
Originally Posted by emason View Post
The one thing that has puzzled me from the outset is - why, at the first sign of trouble, didn't she surface then run on diesels?

My somewhat limited understanding is that if a bank of batteries went u/s the others could be switched to compensate for the loss.
The suggestion is that she wish to operate submerged due to very poor sea conditions at the time.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 30-11-2017, 16:19
Scatari Scatari is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Gatineau, Quebec, Canada
Posts: 4,554
Default Re: Argentine Submarine San Juan

Quote:
Originally Posted by XYZ View Post
The suggestion is that she wish to operate submerged due to very poor sea conditions at the time.
Which makes perfect sense.

Given the reported weather conditions at the time, it would be normal for a submarine, particularly a small one such as this, to proceed dived. It is a lot more comfortable to operate at 300 feet than to be bounced around on the surface!

Sadly it appears that we must resign ourselves to the fact that she is gone - and her ship's company has joined the ranks of the thousands of other submariners who will forever remain "on patrol."
__________________
Tim
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 02-12-2017, 09:27
Rupert Rupert is offline
Rear-Admiral
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,456
Default Re: Argentine Submarine San Juan

The report of bad weather at least explains why she submerged after the initial failure- something I had wondered about.

Sadly, irrespective of the direct cause, some sort of serious accident was almost inevitable given the lack of sea time the boats and crews have had.

I see that the Argentinians have called off the search

May the crew RIP
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 02-12-2017, 22:01
Scatari Scatari is offline
Admiral
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Gatineau, Quebec, Canada
Posts: 4,554
Default Re: Argentine Submarine San Juan

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rupert View Post
The report of bad weather at least explains why she submerged after the initial failure- something I had wondered about.

Sadly, irrespective of the direct cause, some sort of serious accident was almost inevitable given the lack of sea time the boats and crews have had.

I see that the Argentinians have called off the search

May the crew RIP
Absolutely - as I mentioned in my post #3 above "... given the general state of (dis)repair of the Argentine fleet and the lack of seatime for training, perhaps this accident was inevitable. (As an example, in 2012 the Argentine Navy Submarine Force averaged a mere 6 hours of dived time per boat - not enough to maintain any sort of safety regimen, let alone operational efficiency.)

While the 6 hours quoted is a dated figure, there do not seem to be any indications that things have improved since then. Certainly the abundance of barnacles shown in this much-circulated photo does not illustrate a high standard of maintenance.

Lack of seatime, lack of training, poor maintenance - any one of these factors is dangerous in a submarine - the combination of all of them may have been catastrophic in this case.

God bless her ship's company and their families.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg ARA-San-Juan-886849.jpg (68.1 KB, 23 views)
__________________
Tim
Reply With Quote
Reply



Ship Search by Name : Advanced Search
Random Timeline Entry : 2nd January 1938 : HMS Gleaner : Cdr. R.M. Southern in Command

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
BAC Cantabria & BPE Juan Carlos I jmkinki Spanish Navy Ships and Crews 4 17-11-2015 23:07
Spanish Cruiser Don Juan de Austria Photos victoriannavyfan Spanish Navy Ships and Crews 6 14-02-2013 16:43
Anglo-Argentine Volunteers (Royal Navy & Royal Marines) J_Maffeo Service Records / Naval Relatives and Friends 7 23-04-2011 21:36
The training ship Juan Sebastian Elcano sailed for her 81th training cruise Asdrúbal el Bello Spanish Navy Ships and Crews 13 07-02-2010 08:53
LHD Juan Carlos I under construction Tirso All Other Naval Ships 4 24-02-2008 20:30


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:30.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.