It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


uss scorpion and uss threasher

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 12 2005 @ 12:49 PM
Did the government cover up the loss of these two subs. Here is an explaination that could be true.

Or is this the false one .

Sank off New England coast while on sea trials following an overhaul. The exact cause is unknown. A Navy board of inquiry determined that the "most likely cause" was a failure in either a pipe, a pipe valve, or a hull weld, causing flooding somewhere near the engine room.

Scorpion sank at 1844 GMT on 22 May, 1968 while 400 miles southwest of the Azores Islands. Scorpion's wreckage was discovered in some 10,000 feet of water

According to an article entitled "California Floats On Ocean?" in the Fall 1985 edition of Search magazine, a high-ranking but unnamed Naval officer told of the discovery of a huge network of tunnels under portions of the west coast of the U.S. He said that U.S. nuclear submarines had explored some of these tunnels, which are accessible just off the continental shelf, and had followed them inland for several hundred miles.

Is there another explaination .

posted on Jun, 12 2005 @ 05:04 PM

as posted by Timoothy
...Or is this the false one....

Excuse me, but how exactly do you know that what you are reading is true or "false"? Care to explain that one?

Having worked on nuclear submarines for a few years [Newport News Shipbuilding and Portsmouth Naval Shipyard], as well as having been on some Tiger Team trips abroad to work on a couple of them, along with a couple aircraft carriers, the official US Navy report on their findings is concise and accurate.

As such, there are a number of other non-official reports making assertions and claims that have yet to hold up to any genuine and valid scrutiny.

The Thresher sunk because of faulty and improper welding techniques, among other faulty systems and work, used at the time of nuclear submarine construction. It was after this tragic event that the US Navy and Naval Repair Yards restructured their welding and construction techniques. There has been no such problem or occurance since.


[edit on 12-6-2005 by Seekerof]

posted on Jun, 12 2005 @ 05:15 PM
Btw, Timoothy, if applicable, I would highly suggest that you, or others, read the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy's 192 page book on the Loss of the USS Thresher: Hearings Before the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy Congress of the United States: Eighty-Eigth Congress, First and Second Sessions on the Loss of the USS Thresher: June 26, 27, July 28, 1963, and July 1, 1964 (34-920).

Very indepth, informative, and concise read.


[edit on 12-6-2005 by Seekerof]

posted on Jun, 13 2005 @ 09:56 AM

Originally posted by Seekerof

as posted by Timoothy
...Or is this the false one....

Excuse me, but how exactly do you know that what you are reading is true or "false"? Care to explain that one?

Having worked on nuclear submarines for a few years [Newport News Shipbuilding and Portsmouth Naval Shipyard], as well as having been on some Tiger Team trips abroad to work on a couple of them, along with a couple aircraft carriers, the official US Navy report on their findings is concise and accurate.

As such, there are a number of other non-official reports making assertions and claims that have yet to hold up to any genuine and valid scrutiny.

The Thresher sunk because of faulty and improper welding techniques, among other faulty systems and work, used at the time of nuclear submarine construction. It was after this tragic event that the US Navy and Naval Repair Yards restructured their welding and construction techniques. There has been no such problem or occurance since.


[edit on 12-6-2005 by Seekerof]

Lets be reasonable maybe a small percentage of all accidents are caused by faulty welds . I'm a certified welder and i know for a fact ALL WELDS ARE TESTED ,so dont be so gullable as to believe that this was the case here.Here's a small list of accidents .

seems like 75 percent of these accidents were OPERATOR ERROR

The following accidents occured during normal operations and did not involve enemy action:

Submarine Nationality Date Type of Accident
AE.1 Australian 14 September 1914 Unknown
E-20 British 09 January 1916 Explosion
E.4 & E.41 British 15 August 1916 Collision
Gustave Zede French 01 September 1916 Explosion
Dykkeren Danish 10 October 1916 Collsion
E.36 British 19 January 1917 Collision with E.43
K.13 British 29 January 1917 Foundered
A.10 British 17 March 1917 Flooded
C.16 British 16 April 1917 Collision
A-7 (SS-8) American 24 July 1917 Explosion & fire
K.1 British 18 November 1917 Collision
L-10 (SS-50) American 24 January 1918 Man Overboard
K.4, K.6, K.14, K.17 & K.22 British 31 January 1918 Collisions
E.34 British 20 July 1918 Unknown
C.12 British 18 October 1918 Allision
E-1 (SS-24) American 29 October 1918 Explosion & Fire
G.7 British 1 November 1918 Unknown

Nationality Date Type of Accident
G.11 British 22 November 1918 Grounding
O-12 (SS-73) American 27 March 1919 Diving Accident
H.41 British 18 October 1919 Allision
USS H-1 (SS-28) American 12 March 1920 Grounding
USS S-5 (SS-110) American 1 August 1920 Foundered
K.5 British 20 January 1921 Foundered
K.15 British 25 June 1921 Flooding
USS R-6 (SS-83) American 26 September 1921 Flooding
USS S-48 (SS-159) American 07 December 1921 Foundered
Fieldmarshal Graf Sheremetev Russian 1922 Flooding
H.42 British 23 March 1922 Collision
L.9 British 18 January 1923 Typhoon
USS S-38 (SS-143) American 17 July 1923 Flooding
USS S-37 (SS-142) American 10 October 1923 Explosion
USS O-5 (SS-66) American 29 October 1923 Collision
L.24 British 10 January 1924 Collision
USS S-48 (SS-159) American 29 January 1925 Grounding
USS S-51 (SS-162) American 23 September 1925 Collision
M.1 British 12 November 1925 Collision
S-49 (SS-160) American 20 April 1926 Battery Explosion & Fire
H.29 British 09 August 1926 Flooding
USS S-4 (SS-109) American 17 December 1927 Collision
H.47 & L.12 British 09 July 1929 Collision
Rabochiy Russian 22 May 1931 Collision
Poseidon British 09 June 1931 Collision
L-55 Russian 24 October 1931 Collision
M.2 British 26 January 1932 Unknown
S-34 (SS-139) American 11 January 1934 Signal Cartridge Explosion
B-3 (ex-Bolshevik) Russian 25 July 1935 Collision
U-18 Germany 20 November 1936 Collision
USS Squalus (SS-192) American 23 May 1939 Foundered
Thetis British 01 June 1939 Foundered
USS O-9 (SS-70) American 20 June 1941 Foundered

Submarine Nationality Date Type of Accident
U-57 German 3 September 1940 Collision with surface ship
U-580 German 11 November 1941 Collision with target vessel
U-583 German 15 November 1941 Collision with U-153
U-43 German 4 December 1941 Flooding pierside
U-612 German 6 August 1942 Collision with U-444
Bass (SS-164) American 17 August 1942 Fire
U-222 German 2 September 1942 Collision with U-626
X.3 British 4 November 1942 Flooding
U-272 German 12 November 1942 Collision with surface ship
U-254 German 8 December 1942 Collision with U-221
Vandal British 24 February 1943 Foundered
U-649 German 24 February 1943 Collision with U-232
U-5 German 19 March 1943 Foundered
U-957 German 20 March 1943 Diving Accident
U-439 and U-659 German 4 May 1943 Collision
Ulven Swedish 6 May 1943 Drifting Mine
Untamed British 30 May 1943 Foundered
R-12 (SS-89) American 12 June 1943 Foundered
U-34 German 5 August 1943 Collision with depot ship
U-670 German 21 August 1943 Collision with target ship
U-983 German 8 September 1943 Collision with U-988
X.9 British 16 September 1943 Broke loose from tow
U-346 German 20 September 1943 Diving Accident
U-718 German 18 November 1943 Collision with U-476
U-768 German 20 November 1943 Collision with U-745
U-284 German 12 December 1943 Scuttled after severe damage by high seas
X.22 British 07 February 1944 Collision
U-738 German 14 February 1944 Collision with surface ship
Tautog (SS-199) American 5 March 1944 Man Overboard
U-7 German 18 February 1944 Foundered
U-28 German 17 March 1944 Flooding pierside
U-1013 German 17 March 1944 Collision with U-286
U-2 German 8 April 1944 Collision with surface ship
U-1234 German 15 May 1944 Collision with tug
U-1015 German 19 May 1944 Collision with U-1014
S-28 (SS-133) American 4 June 1944 Foundered
Crevalle (SS-291) American 11 September 1944 Diving Accident
U-2331 German 10 October 1944 Unknown
U-957 German 19 October 1944 Collision with surface ship
U-673 German 24 October 1944 Collision with U-382
U-80 German 28 November 1944 Foundered
U-416 German 17 December 1944 Collision with surface ship
U-737 German 19 December 1944 Collision with surface ship
USS Sea Robin (SS-407) American 22 December 1944 Man Overboard
Torsk (SS-423) American 5 January 1945 Man Overboard
U-1053 German 15 February 1945 Foundered
U-2344 German 18 February 1945 Collision with U-2336
XE.11 British 06 March 1945 Collision
Lancetfish (SS-296) American 15 March 1945 Flooding Pierside
U-1206 German 14 April 1945 Grounding
Cod (SS-224) American 26 April 1945 Fire

Submarine Nationality Date Type of Accident
Orphee French 01 March 1946 Explosion
2326 French 05 December 1946 Foundered
USS Sea Robin (SS-407) American 22 October 1948 Man Overboard
Sceptre British 08 August 1949 Explosion
USS Cochino (SS-345) American 26 August 1949 Fire
Truculent British 13 January 1950 Collision
Affray British 16 June 1951 Foundered
Sibylle French 25 September 1952 Foundered
S-117 Russian 15 December 1952 Unknown
Sidon British 17 June 1955 Explosion
USS Pomodon (SS-486) American 21 February 1955 Explosion
Vengeance (M-200) Russian 21 November 1956 Collision
M-256 Russian 26 September 1957 Fire
USS Stickleback (SS-415) American 30 May 1958 Collision
USS Cutlass (SS-478) American 1 June 1958 Man Overboard
USS Sargo (SSN-583) American 14 June 1960 Fire
K-8 Russian 13 October 1960 Reactor Accident
S-80 Russian 27 January 1961 Foundered
K-19 Russian 4 July 1961 Reactor Coolant Leak
B-37 Russian 11 January 1962 Torpedo Explosion
USS Requin (SS-481) American 21 September 1962 Work Accident
USS Thresher (SSN-593) American 10 April 1963 Foundered
USS Grayback (SSG-574) American 27 August 1963 Fire
Picuda (SS-382) American 18 April 1967 Man Overboard
Leviathan Israeli 27 May 1967 Drowning
K-3 Russian 8 September 1967 Fire
INS Dakar (Z-77) Israeli 25 January 1968 Diving/Flooding
Minerve French 27 January 1968 Foundered
K-129 Russian 11 April 1968 Explosion
USS Scorpion (SSN-589) American 21 May 1968 Unknown
K-27 Russian 24 May 1968 Reactor Accident
USS Chopper (SS-342) American 11 February, 1969 Diving
USS Guitarro (SSN-665) American 15 May 1969 Flooded Pierside (during construction)
Eurydice French 04 March 1970 Foundered
K-8 Russian 11 April 1970 Fire
USS Tautog / K-108 American / Russian June 1970 Submerged Collision
Artemis British 01 July 1971 Flooding pierside
Galateé / Maria van Riebeeck French / South African 20 August 1970 Surface Collision
Alliance British 30 September 1971 Explosion
K-19 Russian 24 February 1972 Fire
USS Sturgeon (SSN-637) American 25 August 1972 Man Overboard
La Sirene French 11 October 1972 Flooding
USS Plunger (SSN-595) American 01 December 1973 Man

Submarine Nationality Date Type of Accident
USS Dace (SSN-607) American 20 August 1976 Man Overboard
K-47 Russian 26 September 1976 Fire
USS Ray (SSN-653) American 20 September, 1977 Underwater Grounding
USS Grayback (SS-574) American 14 January 1982 Diving Accident
K-122 Russian 21 August 1981 Reactor Accident
K-123 Russian 08 August 1982 Reactor Accident
K-429 Russian 24 June 1983 Flooding
K-131 Russian 18 June 1984 Fire
K-431 Russian December 1985 Reactor Accident
USS Nathaniel Greene (SSBN-636) American 13 March, 1986 Underwater Grounding
K-219 Russian 06 October 1986 Explosion
USS Ulysses S. Grant (SSBN-631) American 6 April 1987 Man Overboard
USS Bonefish (SS-582) American 24 April, 1988 Fire
BAP Pacocha (SS-48) Peruvian 26 August, 1988 Collision
USS Barbel (SS-580) American 1 May 1989 Flooding
Komsomolets (K-278) Russian 07 April 1989 Fire
USS Houston (SSN-713) American 14 June 1989 Snagging of Tug/Barge Tow Line
K-192 (ex. K-131) Russian 25 June 1989 Reactor Accident
USS Baton Rouge (SSN-689) / Barracuda American / Russian 11 February, 1992 Collision
Emeraude France 30 March 1994 Engineering Accident

Nationality Date Type of Accident
Tireless British 12 May 2000 Reactor Coolant Leak
Kursk Russian 12 August, 2000 Explosion
USS Greeneville (SSN-772) American 9 February, 2001 Collision
USS Dolphin (AGSS-555) American 21 May 2002 Flooding
HMS Trafalgar (S107) British 06 November 2002 Submerged Grounding
USS Oklahoma City (SSN-723) American 13 November 2002 Collision
No. 361 Chinese 2 May 2003 Unknown
HMCS Chicoutimi (SSK 879) Canadian 05 October 2004 Fire
K-223 Russian 14 November 2004 Explosion
USS San Francisco (SSN 711) American 08 January 2005 Grounding

posted on Jun, 13 2005 @ 10:52 AM

as posted by Timoothy
Lets be reasonable maybe a small percentage of all accidents are caused by faulty welds . I'm a certified welder and i know for a fact ALL WELDS ARE TESTED ,so dont be so gullable as to believe that this was the case here.Here's a small list of accidents

Yeah, so is my brother.
The big difference here is that your welding is on what?
Nuclear submarines?
You nuclear certified to do so?
You even welded on a vessel? A naval combat vessel?
You work at a naval shipyard or repair yard?
Familiar with HY-100, HY-150, etc?
Let me know before I totally tear apart your "lets be responsible" assertion, k?

Big difference between a typical welder and a nuclear certified welder.


[edit on 13-6-2005 by Seekerof]

posted on Jun, 13 2005 @ 02:36 PM
temper ....temper... I'm just trying to seek info on some conflicting reports ,
(welds ,operator error,locations of accidents and so on).Yes i am certified to weld on nuclear objects ,not limited to submarines,so lets stop with the
childish bantor. If you have any resonable info on the matter please post it.

have a great day

posted on Jun, 13 2005 @ 02:51 PM
Maybe it was this;

In late 1993, the Navy declassified most of the court's conclusions. Headed by retired Vice Adm. Bernard Austin, the Scorpion court concluded that the best evidence pointed to an errant Scorpion torpedo that circled around and exploded against the hull of the sub. The court's conclusion stemmed in part from records showing the Scorpion had a similar experience in 1967 with an unarmed training torpedo that suddenly started up and had to be jettisoned.

To many stories to believe any one of them.

posted on Jun, 23 2008 @ 11:45 PM
reply to post by timoothy

I would suggest that you read the book "All Hands Down", forget the author right now, but that book shows how it would have been almost impossible for your theory to work. The least of which is the fact that the Scorpion could've outrun any torpedo that they carried. If a torpedo had circled around to go after them all the captain had to do was order all ahead full and they would have outrun the torpedo easily. But please, read the book, it also shows that the theory that the Soviets may have sunk it is highly plausible.

posted on Jun, 24 2008 @ 12:13 AM
USS Thresher: The loss was NOT caused by the failed silver brazing, but the inability to blow her ballast tanks and surface. It was a terrible loss but many lessons were learned which have saved many more sailors since this tragic event.

USS Scorpion: Believe nothing you've been told or have read. That's all I'm gonna say about that.

posted on Jul, 6 2008 @ 06:54 PM
I believe that the scorpion was sunk by the soviets.

The soviets believed that the USS Swordfish had gotten a little too reckless following the K129 sub off of Hawaii. The subs collided all due to the US fault (according to the russians.) Russia thought that the US had crossed the line and was doubly angered over our presence in the med. The same month the Scorpion was sunk just after leaving the Med two other subs one from Israel and one from the UK I think were also mysteriously lost at sea in the same area.

The soviets wanted an eye for an eye for the sinking of K129 and went after the scorpion, plus who knows what the scorpion was doing spying on the soviets in the med, they wanted to send a message to the US to back off. The SOSUS recordings according to some show the Scorpion playing cat and mouse with a Soviet (probably Gulf II) sub. the two boats were doing sprint and drifts techniques, Crazy Ivans etc. At one point the soviets launched a torpedo at the scorpion. the scorpion evades the torpedo which makes several passes before finally hitting the scorpion which then sank.

Maybe the K129 was doing a crazy ivan to shake loose the swordfish when the sword fish slammed into the back just behind the con tower of K129 exploding the ballistic missiles located inside.

Personally I don't believe the stories of K129 going rouge and attempting to initiate a nuclear strike on hawaii.

I also don't know what to think of the Threasher's sinking. I believe it was probably an accident. But I also believe that most modern military subs can dive much deeper than they claim.

I wonder what technology they have perfected from the experiments with the NR1. there's got to be some NR2 equivelent out there, and the techs has had to have been adapted to the attack subs. At least for espionage and spying purposes.

posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 12:52 PM
Sound evidence showed that the Scorpion suddenly did a 180 and went to flank speed.

This was the instinctive action for any US Sub captain who just jettisoned a live running torpedo.

If you believe the sonar reports that is.

posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 01:24 PM
seeker of,

Aren't tiger teams the designation or name given to friendly forces acting as the enemy during a mock attack? like red cell. what were you referring to when you mentioned Tiger Teams. just curious.

Also you were a AF Paramedical? Kick ass. So is my sisters fiance. Those dudes are seriously respected in the SF circles.

Also any word on the damaged delta sub that sunk while under trans atlantic tow during the 80's. Rumor has it that a US team went in and blew the tow lines on the sub causing it to flood and sink. all hands made it safely to the tow ship and were OK. Some say the SEAL team responsible deployed from a sub shadowing the crippled Delta and then were ordered to scuttle her for some reason by the US. possible revenge for the scorpion and a good use of something like the NR1 to go in and collect intel on the wreck retrieve tech etc...

posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 01:31 PM
The problem with the theory that the Swordfish sank the K-129 was that Swordfish was nowhere near her when she went down, and didn't suffer the right kind of damage for a collision. Swordfish was near Japan at the time of the K-129 sinking.

There is a lot of verifiable evidence that something went wrong wtih a nuke on the K-129. There were two explsions, one of them massive, and a fireball that could be seen by satellites. Not to mention the fact that she was WAY out of her patrol box. She wasn't supposed to be anywhere near Hawaii at the time of her sinking.

posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 01:58 PM
Just because a sub is supposed to be patrolling a certain area or sector on paper doesn't mean thats it's orders. A sub could be anywhere.

I agree that the Swordfish's damage looks a bit different than a collision with the K129 would have made. But we can't say where the subs were supposed to be. Shadowing a soviet sub venturing too close to the US would be a job for a boat like the sword fish.

My question is what the hell was the K129 doing near hawaii. it wasn't a good boat for spying on anything. and I can't believe a rouge soviet captain would initiate a nuclear attack on pearl harbor but not anything on the main land. not a very decisive blow, just something that would get both countries anniallated.

Some say the soviets were trying to do a false flag attack and get us to go to war with china to get the chinese pressure off of the soviets kill two birds with one stone but that doesn't make much sense either.

What do you think the K129 was up to? Cause I have no clue.

[edit on 10-7-2008 by BASSPLYR]

posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 02:00 PM
The thing is though that Swordfish docked in JAPAN to repair her damage. Why in god's name would they risk sailing 2000 miles with damage, to hide the fact that she hit the K-129. She also docked within a couple of days of the sinking. Not enough time for her to have gone from near Hawaii to Japan.

posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 02:48 PM
very good point. perhaps the k129 sank due to faulty soviet tech. nothing new there.

But in your opinion. WTF was k129 doing near hawaii?

also whats your take on the scorpion sinking. I bet Orangetom would have good input on this topic. he knows a ton about subs.

posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 02:51 PM
They were attempting SOMETHING with the nuclear weapons. The PAL device went off first, then the fuel tank on one of the missiles. The irony here is that they only had the PAL devices, because the US gave them to them.

Scorpion is a tough one to call. She reacted like she was trying to avoid a torpedo that she launched that turned back on her. But there is other evidence that the Soviets took her down too.

posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 03:34 PM
If they tried to launch their nukes without soviet approval there were fail safes installed that would disable the weapon. the russians aren't that reckless that they would allow the nuked to be launched without the same fail safes we keep.

so if they tried to launch with out permission they would have destroyed the missile compartment for sure in my opinion. that could be the reason the missile blew up in the sub. But I still have a hard time believing that the soviets would put an unstable person in command of a nuclear weapons boomer. They have got to give these people regular psych exams like we do.

The scorpion was hit by a torpedo the question obviously is whos. I have a hard time believing that the torpedo would hot run. ( I know it's happened before) and if the torpedo does activate it's motor shouldn't it be stowed on the rack and not going anywhere any time soon. why would the explosives go off and why would they need to launch the torpedo at all. When the torpedo hot runs it activates the explosive somehow? I know very little about a hot run, but I'd think the designers would have done a better job than that.

wouldn't sosus detect the tube flooding for a torpedo launch, wouldn't hit hear the outer doors opening? Was that ever mentioned in the evidence of the scorpions sinking.

why keep it a secret that the4 sub fell victim to a hot running torp. Why joint secrecy with the soviets about what happened if it was all our fault.

WHy did the scorpion sink the same month two other subs were lost mysteriously in the med right near where the scorpion was lost. (scorpion lost near the azores, british and israeli subs in the med)

the soviets were very aggressive about the med, and even had extensive sosus and captor mines arrayed in the area. we had been playing catand mouse with them for a long time in the med. no wonder if something happened between the two boats.

posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 03:39 PM
From the evidence, the captain WASN'T unstable. There is evidence that a Spetznaz team was placed on board that took over and attempted to launch the missile. Just before she sailed a senior NCO and team of 11 or 12 sailors were placed onboard, besides the standard crew. That's the exact makeup of a Spetznaz team.

As for safety devices, they used the exact same PAL devices as the US has. The US gave them to them, to keep from being able to have exactly what appears to have happened to the K-129 happen successfully.

posted on Jul, 10 2008 @ 03:58 PM
good thinking on the US's part sharing the PAL ideas. A spetznatz team could control a sub. ( we all know that marcinkos team could) but why would they want to even launch nukes in the first place. was the team going rouge? I would think that SF team officers are more mentally stable than that. so he must have been ordered to hijack the sub. But again why. what would it accomplish that would be good for their mother russia.

the k129 is just an enigma to me. WHats your opinion on any connection walker could have had with the scorpion incident. We all know that the soviets could have been and probably were reading all of the scorpions communication
thanks to the pueblo incident. did they know that the scorpion had found something important enough to sink her.

although I can't imagine a gulf II taking out the scorpion. maybe with great intel it sat still waited in ambush and launched a ore modern and secret torpedo than they acknowledged they possessed at the time. I'm sure we have torpedos much more kick ass than the very lethal MK48. with the right intel a gulf II could have staged a great ambush and sunk her.

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in