Navy Submarine Base Under the Nevada Desert?

[QUOTE=]7. What is being passed off as the 'San Andreas Fault' are large, unsupported chambers that are in the process of collapsing.[/QUOTE]

What about the rest of the Ring of Fire? I suppose there must be similar features throughout the Pacific.

With our communications capabilities, it makes perfect sense to locate command type installations in remote places to get the increased security. Same goes for training.

[edit on 1-9-2007 by RCarter]

reply to post by Zaphod58


Zaphod, would you be so kind as to post some links to verify your story please?
also I've heard of saline lakes in Cali, Mono lake comes to mind
www.monolake.org...

There are very few links about the Scorpion being sunk by a Soviet sub or the K-19, but I suggest you read the book Red Star Rogue. It discusses in great detail the K-19 launch attempt and the recovery of it by the CIA.

As for the wreckages of both subs here are a few links for you:

www.history.navy.mil...
www.hampton.lib.nh.us...
www.navsource.org...
members.aol.com...
www.esryle.com...
www.ldeo.columbia.edu...

[edit on 9/1/2007 by Zaphod58]

Theres a book called, scorpion down, which states that it was really sunk by the soviets but it was covered up to avoid a international incident. If I remember correctly, highly plausable since it makes sense for cold war era. In fact I am one of those guys who believes the entire cold war was faught underground and under the ocean lol. Who knows how many subs we lost.

Apart from a 27 year old magazine clip and an anecdote about being turned away from a military establishment there isn't an awful lot to go on. You know ? It's such an enormous claim yet next to nothing has been provided so far to substantiate any of it.

Underground seas, channels from the coast to the desert which submarines can navigate ... it's a geological goldmine if true.

i wouldn't doubt for a second that there are massive caverns and tubes throughout the US. after getting to do an extensive cave system exploration in belize last year inland and on the water, i was blown away at how hollow central america is.

the "blue hole" off the coast of belize is a giant sink hole. within the blue hole there are GIANT stalactites that took hundreds of thousands of years to develop in an open air environment. so a water way under the earth's crust is totally doable to me. much less a giant pocket of air cave/tunnel system under the the sea.

[edit on 12-05-2006 by zooplancton]

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.

And I'm sure that you know much more than the author who did the research, and verified as many details as he could, including with an inside source in one of our own intel agencies, right? I forgot that you have so many sources that would have told you what a farce that book really is and how all those documents were faked to cause more fear among the population.

And no matter what you have to say about the sinking of the Scorpion, that is still the official cause of her sinking that is on record. Although I was wrong in that the official cause states that they launched the torpedo and it came back around on them and hit the hull.



[edit on 9/1/2007 by Zaphod58]

they launched the torpedo and it came back around on them and hit the hull.

hey...i think i saw that movie!

Because it happened in real life. Several times. In several cases they avoided the torpedo, but it's suspected that several WWII submarines were lost when the torpedo came back around on them and impacted the hull. But I guess since it happened in a movie it certainly couldn't happen in real life.

Originally posted by Zaphod58

And I'm sure that you know much more than the author who did the research, and verified as many details as he could, including with an inside source in one of our own intel agencies, right? I forgot that you have so many sources that would have told you what a farce that book really is and how all those documents were faked to cause more fear among the population.

Quite correct and thank you for your complete and total capitulation. It is very much appreciated.

You should know that an old intel saying is "secrets are to be kept". I don't know why I never could comply. Probably some sort of psychological rebellion because my Dad never bought me that yellow Corvette I wanted I high school.

If I had lost one or two brand new nuclear submarines in an underground ocean below California you can bet I would be spitting out stamped serial numbered parts as fast as I could make them. You can bet I would have salvage ships a continent away recovering those parts from the black depths where the SEALS were carefully loading them. Then I would have Admirals swearing to the serial numbered parts as they came up. You can bet I would have an air tight story to cover everything.

The Navy has a lot to hide, maybe too much. The problem is they can't hide it all and they can't hide it forever.

Secrets are never exposed all at once. It's always a little teenie tiny inconsequential slip that triggers the unraveling.

Thanks again for your capitulation.

Originally posted by Zaphod58

And no matter what you have to say about the sinking of the Scorpion, that is still the official cause of her sinking that is on record.

I would respectfully remind you that he official cause of the Pentagon fire on 911 is that a Boeing 757 crashed into it.

reply to post by johnlear


While this may stray a little but from the thread, I do remember back when I was studying the First Nations (in Canada) and the Amerindians in the USA that a number of the nations had stories of great underground rivers, some of which were traversable by vessel. And I think it was the Utes or Paiutes that had a story of a great underground lake.

I raise this because it is not the inclination of North Americans to consider wisdom from these peoples with a view toward understanding a present question or need such as this question.

John I thought you might consider taking a look at some of these geographical mining maps. I can't help but think that you could take a look at some of the mines that were shut down during the time in question.

A couple of years ago I heard or read something about there being several underwater caverns and tunnels that snake there way under California but I dont remember how deep they claimed they were or how far inland they went.

There was a story in there about one of our nuclear submarines getting lost in there as well, I dont recall the name of the sub but it was claimed that it was one that went missing back in the 60's or 70's but the public was told that it had sunk.

[edit on 9/1/2007 by Kr0n0s]

Wow! This is fascinating! Just out the door but will finish reading it later tonight!

I don't know about one in Nevada, but there is a repair pen for attack subs way way off the beaten track - in an Army facility.

Actually, there's more than one. I worked as a teenager at one place and found it by being nosy and curious.

There's another at an Army facility on the Mississippi River. I don't know about others. It can accommodate one attack sub, a missile sub won't fit. Once every couple of years they used to run a sub up the river to test out whether they can navigate it and dock, you see the stories in the local newspapers. But that's why. It's not to display their prowess or tour the country or whatever other crapola they attach to it in the news.

I don't know if the facility is still active, I used to have a buddy that asked why that was going on, sent me clips from the newspaper. It matched the stories locally where I worked - and I knew what the deal was there. So on a visit I stopped by and asked about it and they about had a cardiac, but it's the same setup.

I like reading these kinds of stories but i have looked at the Thresher incident and i am not convinced that such a dangerous exploration mission would be done with so much brass or civilians on board; whatever the sub was doing it was not supposed to be in any 'real' danger.

Personnel Other Than Ship's Company

Abrams, Fred P., Civilian Employee, Production Department, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
Allen, Philip H., LCDR, USN, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
Beal, Daniel W., Jr., Civilian Employee, Combat Systems Division, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
Biederman, Robert D., LT, USN, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
Billings, John H., LCDR, USN, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
Charron, Robert E., Civilian Employee, Design Division, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
Corcoran, Kenneth R., Contractor's Representative, Sperry Corp.
Critchley, Kenneth J., Civilian Employee, Production Department, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
Currier, Paul C., Civilian Employee, Production Department, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
Des Jardins, Richard R., Civilian Employee, Combat Systems Division, Portsmouth Naval
Dineen, George J., Civilian Employee, Production Department, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
Fisher, Richard K., Civilian Employee, Design Division, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
Guerette, Paul A., Civilian Employee, Design Division, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
Jaquay, Maurice F., Contractor's Representative, Raytheon Corp.
Keuster, Donald W., Naval Ordnance Laboratory
Krag, Robert L., LCDR, USN, Staff, Deputy Commander, Submarine Force, U.S. Atlantic Fleet.
Moreau, Henry C., Civilian Employee, Production Department, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
Palmer, Franklin J., Civilian Employee, Production Department, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.
Prescott, Robert D., Civilian Employee, Design Division, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard Shipyard.
Stadtmuller, Donald T., Contractor's Representative, Sperry Corp.
Whitten, Laurence E., Civilian Employee, Combat Systems Division, Portsmouth Naval Shipyard.

www.arlingtoncemetery.net...

Maybe there was a bunch of fake funerals for people who never existed but i don't normally take my conspiratorial plots that far.

The link also makes it clear that there was never a conclusive official statement as to what caused the sinking...

On April 9, 1963, after the completion of this work, Thresher, now commanded by LCDR John Wesley Harvey, began post-overhaul trials. Accompanied by the submarine rescue ship USS Skylark (ASR-20), she sailed to an area some 350 km (220 miles) east of Cape Cod, Massachusetts, and on the morning of April 10 started deep-diving tests. As these proceeded, garbled communications were received over the underwater telephone by Skylark, indicating that after initial problems Thresher had tilted and the crew were attempting to regain control. A few words were understandable, including the famous final phrase "... minor difficulties, have positive up-angle, attempting to blow." [1] [2] [3] When the garbled communications --- which were followed by the ominous sound of pressurized air escaping --- eventually ceased, surface observers gradually realized that the Thresher had sunk. All 129 officers, crewmen and military and civilian technicians aboard her were lost.

en.wikipedia.org...(SSN-593)

As some might be aware i have a entirely different theory on how and why the Thresher sank but whatever the case may be i'm not sure that we have any evidence that the Thresher could or were modified to dive to the depths that such undeground exploration would have required; in fact i am not sure we have ships of that size that could do so at this time...

I have not checked your links Zaphod but i wonder why no one has gone back to the Thresher's wreck in 40 years time.

The mission began as a routine deep-dive test, but the crew of the USS Skylark knew something was wrong. Their test submarine had barely reached her assigned test depth when static-filled underwater telephone transmissions from far below told them things were going wrong, very wrong.

On April 10, 1963, the nuclear submarine USS Thresher (SSN-593) and submarine rescue ship USS Skylark (ASR-20) journeyed to the cold waters 200 miles east of Massachusetts for deep-diving testing. Only fifteen minutes after reaching her test depth, Thresher notified Skylark that she was "experiencing difficulties." Within moments, Skylark's crew heard a noise "like air rushing into a tank" and then there was silence. Frantic efforts to reestablish contact with the sub failed. Thresher was down with all hands, which included a crew of 112 and 17 civilian technicians on board to observe the testing. A hastily arranged search group found only bits of debris and a pair of gloves. After four months of searching, the bathyscaph Trieste located broken parts of the sub in over 8,000 feet of water. The photos taken by Trieste in August of 1963 are all that is known of Thresher's fatal accident.

www.history.navy.mil...

This obviously does not disprove much if anything about the OP's claims but it's what i have and feel confident talking about.

Stellar

[edit on 1-9-2007 by StellarX]

Actually the official cause was that they had several minor problems that all added up and hit them about the same time. The biggest problem they had was that a pipe ruptured allowing the boat to flood. That's why they couldn't surface, they were taking on water faster than they could go up. They also lost power, and I BELIEVE they lost propulsion. They couldn't say 100% certainly that was the cause, but based on the evidence recovered the and garbled messages received that was the court of inquiries findings.

Their findings, published in 1964, indicated that the probable cause of the sinking was a salt-water system failure in the engine room (while at maximum depth) which shorted electrical circuits causing loss of propulsion. The main ballast was blown but could not compensate for the loss of buoyancy and the vessel continued sinking. Shortly thereafter she exceeded her collapse depth and plunged to the bottom.

www.ldeo.columbia.edu...

The Rhyme Of The Ancient Submariner

It's "sexy" to think submarines can simply disappear without a trace and speak of the subject in whispered tones, but in reality, it just doesn't work like that.

Like any U.S. Navy ship, submarines aren't just an isolated hunk of metal with a few expendable sailors on board.

Operating, maintaining and supporting a single submarine requires the direct and indirect involvement of thousands of people. And those thousands of people know tens of thousands of other people, and have families and friends, so as it happens, keeping secrets about submarines is not as easy as it might seem from a distance.

If any U.S. nuclear submarines have truly "disappeared", it's only because they never "appeared" in the first place.

Also, it seems unlikely that the Navy would want to unnecessarily jeopardize nuclear submarines for gratuitous underground operations when smaller, more maneuverable research vessels would be more suited for such work.

But people can believe what they want to believe.

Desert Seas

Meanwhile, the Naval Undersea Warfare Center detachment at Hawthorne, NV, is an example of how extensive the resources for effective support of submarines must be, because that's NUWC's primary mission.

I doubt the detachment is there because of underground caverns, since from a practical standpoint the main NUWC facilities in Newport, VA or Keyport, WA would simply be more practical for work involving water - though I suppose anything is possible.

Rather, it is more likely that collocating the detachment with the Army ordnance depot there is a matter of convenience for land-based research involving explosives and hazardous materials, for which that location would be ideally suited.

Also, not everything NUWC does is "sexy". Among other things, my understanding is that the Hawthorne facility includes a battery reclamation facility (both conventional and nuclear submarines tend to have huge battery arrays), for recycling materials from lead-acid cells.

Exciting stuff, I'm sure.

What NUWC Does

That and other kinds of specialized industrial support are part of the NUWC mission:

We provide test and evaluation; in-service engineering, maintenance, and repair; Fleet readiness, and industrial-base support for undersea warfare systems, countermeasures, and sonar systems. We execute other responsibilities as assigned by the Commander, Naval Undersea Warfare Center.

Of course that last sentence opens up all sorts of possibilities, and I'm quite certain that NUWC does some pretty amazing things, but a surprisingly vast majority of supporting submarine operations involves rather mundane tasks like storing and handling materials.

I'm not privy to what goes on at NUWC Hawthorne, but I find it likely that the facility has much more to do with research and testing of underwater ordnance than servicing underground caverns.

Now as for the notion of extensive underground caverns beneath Nevada itself, that's a whole 'nother kettle of fish, and there are many tantalizing possibilities there.