After an extensive underwater search utilizing the bathyscaph Trieste, oceanographic ship Mizar, and other ships, Thresher's shattered remains were located on the sea floor, some 8400 feet below the surface. Deep sea photography, recovered artifacts and an evaluation of her design and operations permitted a Court of Inquiry to determine that she had probably sunk due to a piping failure, subsequent loss of power and inability to blow ballast tanks rapidly enough to avoid sinking. Over the next several years, a massive program was undertaken to correct design and construction problems on the Navy's existing nuclear submarines, and on those under construction and in planning. Following completion of this "SubSafe" effort, the Navy has suffered no further losses of the kind that so tragically ended Thresher's brief service career.
After the sub sank, the Navy investigated and determined that the most probable cause of the accident was a leak in its engine room because of corrosions in its pipes. This, in turn, could have caused electrical problems on the sub.
After the accident, the Navy established additional safety procedures, including the SUBSAFE program, which requires each submarine to pass a series of safety tests.
www.arlingtoncemetery.net...
I don't understand why they had to "correct design and construction problems on the Navy's existing nuclear submarines" if there was something wrong with the new submarines? What evidence was there that this flaw was to be found in other submarines when this was a new class?
Does it not make more sense to presume that all ships had to be checked and reconfigured to deal with a new type of threat to them?
This links again seems to indicate that they were never really sure what sank the submarine but presumed that it had to be flooding of some sort that disrupted the electric system that directly led to the sub losing the ability to control whatever flooding/ballast there might have been.
Thanks for the many sources so far.
Stellar





