USS Thresher (SSN-593) sank fifty years ago.
To say that there were significant changes to the construction, maintenance and operation of nuclear-powered submarines in the years following the accident would be like calling a plasma torch "warm".
All well before my time and it wasn't my community. But it was one of the reasons why the supply priorities were what they were.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Dear Miss Fit:
With regard to the "significant changes to the construction, maintenance and operation of nuclear-powered submarines" to which you allude (aka 'SUBSAFE') I find it notable that in the half-century of operations up to the loss of the 593 boat the Navy lost 16 subs to non-combat casualties. Thats one about every three years.
In the half century since, only one hull loss occurred - the 589 in '68. And that boat was not yet SUBSAFE-certified (she was scheduled for overhaul during which the mods would have been done).
I am usually put off by "at least they didn't perish in vain"-style rationalizations of tragedies, but in the case of Thresher there's a lot of truth to it. The line from that loss to the benefits of SUBSAFE is short, straight and bright.
Best regards,
Frank
PS: Recall when San Francisco ran into a 'misplaced' seamount at transit speed a while ago? She brought all but one of her sailors safely home. I don't think a pre-SUBSAFE boat would have survived that event.
Post a Comment