Markus Becker Posted September 27 Posted September 27 Reporting from the WSJ (paywalled) that the brand new Type 041 Zhou nuclear attack submarine had a big boo-boo while pierside this spring and sank. https://www.wsj.com/world/china/chinas-newest-nuclear-submarine-sank-setting-back-its-military-modernization-785b4d37
TrustMe Posted September 27 Posted September 27 Just now, Markus Becker said: Reporting from the WSJ (paywalled) that the brand new Type 041 Zhou nuclear attack submarine had a big boo-boo while pierside this spring and sank. https://www.wsj.com/world/china/chinas-newest-nuclear-submarine-sank-setting-back-its-military-modernization-785b4d37 I can't read the article but let's hope the nuclear reactor wasn't live when it sank
Markus Becker Posted September 27 Author Posted September 27 If so we would have had a thread the same day.
RETAC21 Posted September 27 Posted September 27 Goes into the probably fake section: https://edition.cnn.com/2024/09/26/politics/chinese-nuclear-powered-submarine-sank/index.html
shep854 Posted September 28 Posted September 28 Given how the US Navy had a carrier (LPH) burn at pierside, we probably shouldn't gloat too much...
Markus Becker Posted September 28 Author Posted September 28 (edited) Maintenance is dangerous! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Normandie https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Düsseldorf_Airport_fire https://www.railwayforum.net/showthread.php?t=20 Not to mention Norte Dame. Edited September 28 by Markus Becker
shep854 Posted September 28 Posted September 28 3 hours ago, Markus Becker said: Maintenance is dangerous! https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SS_Normandie https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Düsseldorf_Airport_fire https://www.railwayforum.net/showthread.php?t=20 Not to mention Norte Dame. Indeed.
RETAC21 Posted September 28 Posted September 28 5 hours ago, shep854 said: Given how the US Navy had a carrier (LPH) burn at pierside, we probably shouldn't gloat too much... USS Guitarro
shep854 Posted September 29 Posted September 29 21 hours ago, RETAC21 said: USS Guitarro 'Mare Island Mud Puppy' From Wiki: "In an attempt to correct what they thought was an out of trim condition, the non-nuclear construction team in the forward part of the boat purposefully defeated safety measures preventing accidentally filling ballast tanks while the sub was under construction. During construction, steel plates are welded over the ballast tanks flood ports to prevent water from getting into the tanks and putting the submarine in an unsafe condition. The construction crew put a fire hose down the tank's vent pipe and forced it past the check valve."
Josh Posted October 2 Posted October 2 I think the Spanish and maybe Indians had this happen as well? And lots of Soviet accidents. Submarines are a tricky tech; a ship that inherently wants to sink.
Corinthian Posted October 2 Posted October 2 Well, it is a submarine. It's supposed to sink.... The new PLAN submarine was just super duper eager to go about its work for the People's Republic, it sank with typical eager-beaverness. 😆
Stuart Galbraith Posted October 2 Posted October 2 (edited) You are a bad boy Tomas. We had a similar accident here in the UK in the 1970's, when a diesel electric had its trim disturbed by refueling, and they hadnt offloaded the correct amount of ballast to account for it. Result, boat sinks, and some Royal Navy cadets get to experience life in the fast lane by getting expedient training on escape gear. Though as it was about 15 feet underwater, they all made it. I cant think how they would have upset the ballast there though, unless they were doing something like bombing up and didnt have anyone on hand to set the trim. Edited October 2 by Stuart Galbraith
RETAC21 Posted October 2 Posted October 2 15 hours ago, Josh said: I think the Spanish and maybe Indians had this happen as well? And lots of Soviet accidents. Submarines are a tricky tech; a ship that inherently wants to sink. Nope, us never lost a sub this way, the Indians lost a Kilo to a fire.
Josh Posted October 2 Posted October 2 1 minute ago, RETAC21 said: Nope, us never lost a sub this way, the Indians lost a Kilo to a fire. My mistake.
Renegade334 Posted October 2 Posted October 2 (edited) Maybe you're mistaking it with Argentina's loss of the ARA San Juan in 2017? Edited October 2 by Renegade334
DB Posted October 4 Posted October 4 Interesting if confirmed. https://www.twz.com/sea/chinese-submarine-that-sunk-had-exotic-hybrid-nuclear-powerplant-report
sunday Posted October 4 Posted October 4 1 hour ago, DB said: Interesting if confirmed. https://www.twz.com/sea/chinese-submarine-that-sunk-had-exotic-hybrid-nuclear-powerplant-report Nuclear reactors could be made very small, like the SUPO prototypes. Wonder what kind of reactor is in that submarine. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aqueous_homogeneous_reactor
nemo Posted October 6 Posted October 6 The only Chinese shipyard that build NUCLEAR subs is Huludao -- which is by the sea. Wuhan only build CONVENTIONAL subs. Whoever wrote the article does not know enough to verify the information.
KV7 Posted October 6 Posted October 6 4 hours ago, nemo said: The only Chinese shipyard that build NUCLEAR subs is Huludao -- which is by the sea. Wuhan only build CONVENTIONAL subs. Whoever wrote the article does not know enough to verify the information. Yes. The whole story seems to be over eager runaway of some speculation.
Josh Posted October 8 Posted October 8 On 10/6/2024 at 2:14 AM, nemo said: The only Chinese shipyard that build NUCLEAR subs is Huludao -- which is by the sea. Wuhan only build CONVENTIONAL subs. Whoever wrote the article does not know enough to verify the information. The rumor is that this was some kind of experimental unit with a hull plug that contained a very small nuclear reactor essentially as an AIP alternative for power generation. I do not know how valid that assumption is; I would think a more probable explanation was a VLS. Not sure where the nuclear rumors come from; certainly this is not an SSN in the traditional sense.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now