Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by DocMoreau

I guess I was not clear in what I said. So would that make the base about 9500 feet under Hawthorne? (5280+4300)

No, I said most underground bases are about a mile down. Hawthorne is 4300 feet above sea level and sea level is where they operate the submarines. So the base below Hawthorne, if there was a base would be at sea level.

and a Mile under Monterey Bay?

No, Monterey Bay is a sea level, just like 4300 feet below Hawthorne. I would assume that he entrance to the sea under the California, Nevada plate or crust wold be many hundreds of feet below Monterey Bay.

Or do you think the underground tubes change elevations?

I think you are confusing the underground tube system with the Pacific Ocean that underlies California and Nevada The underground tube system (actually there are several different ones) are at different levels and have nothing to do with subs getting from Monterey Bay to below Hawthrone Nevada.

If that is the case, I bet its tricky manuvering with no windows!

Its very likely that you have no knowledge of how submarines are navigated.

It wouldn't surprise me if there was some sort of upward oriented water filled shaft that they were able to identify and thats why they chose the base's location.

It would surprise me and also surprise the laws of physics.

Still, its all very Z.O.W.I.E. to me...

Of that I am sure.

Thanks for the post Derek.

Well, in the start of your post, you stated that the lake is getting smaller and smaller. Keeping in mind that these passages are big enough to fit a nuclear sub, it would be big enoug to pass saltwater and even water enoug for the lake it self. And the ocean is rising, so i guess the lake would have rised and not fade ...

John,
At the risk of sounding stupid, when you say the loss might be due to "hostile action", are you suggesting that an underwater craft from another nation engaged one of our subs in combat under California or Nevada, and won the contest? Would you elaberate please, and if this is a dumb question then I apologise.
Thanks.

Originally posted by johnlear
Two U.S. Navy submarines sank mysteriously in the 1960's. The first, the Thresher allegedly sank of April 10, 1963 and the second, the Scorpion allegedly sank May 23, 1968.

In my opinion one or both were lost in the sea under California and Nevada either due to disorientation or hostile action.

In either case the Navy would have fabricated an elaborate cover story to prevent anyone from ever finding out what really happened.

The fabrication would include recovery efforts, serial numbered parts, eye witnesses, you know, the usual coverup bs.

Originally posted by johnlear
Originally posted by Zaphod58

Yes and no. Read the post I put up about the loss of the two. There's some evidence that it was sunk by a Soviet sub in response to the loss of the K-19, which was lost in the failed attempt to launch a nuclear attack on Pearl Harbor. But there's nothing conclusive that has been found to date, and the official cause was that one of her own torpedoes activated, and she did a 180 degree turn in an attempt to deactivate it (thus causing the gyro to think that it was turning back towards the sub), and something happened to cause her to break up and sink.

With all due respect Zaphod that concoction of a story is as bad as a Boeing 757 crashing into the Pentagon. But thanks for the effort, I know that it is appreciated.