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.


British and French Nuclear Submarines collide

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 07:53 PM


Looks like a one in a million accident. I don't think the Captains should get reprimanded if they were following proper procedures and didn't detect the other boat.

Vanguard class and Le Triomphant class SSBNs. Damage was probably minimal if they were at patrol speed. (I'd think typically 5 knots or less)

posted on Feb, 15 2009 @ 07:54 PM
That's going to do wonders for Anglo-French relations!

posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 05:43 AM
On the BBC as well where they are reporting heavy damage

It is understood HMS Vanguard and Le Triomphant were badly damaged in the crash in heavy seas earlier this month.

How did these thing's manage to collide though given modern sonar and other sensors?

posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 08:19 AM
Since they were both SSBNs there mission would to be to stay hidden and not be detected so would be avoiding using active sonar which would give there position away. So would be limited to listening for another vessel which doesn't want to be heard.

You could say they were performing there mission perfectly

posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 09:17 AM
If someone doesn't come up with conspiracy angle to this i would be MOST dissapointed.
I wont say anything about odds but the Oceans are pretty large and SSBN's are pretty scarce commodities!

So who's going to take the first stab at a theory? Resumption of the hundred years war anyone?


posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 09:41 AM
reply to post by StellarX

Maybe the English try and provoke a war with France to re-arm its forces and finaly setteling the score!

Or the ghost off Jean de Arc steered the sub without knowledge off the French capitain into the English one

No seriously, how can you collide against each other when the sea is soo vast and so deep?

Collisions between US and Russian subs are understandable, because they want to get as close as possible to each others training/war games. But i cant see any logical explanation for this freaky accident

posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 09:59 AM
Okay, I'm going to bring up the media blackout curiousity. When did this happen? Weeks ago? We are just now hearing about it. If you don't believe the elite control the media just look at the recent stories and the unbelievable time it took for it to be released to the public:

Satillite crash; buffalo plane crash; and now this. I'm sure the list is much longer then this.

Can't wait to see the resident experts post their theories about how this accident was possible. There's been a lot of talk about debunkers on this site as of late but I think some of these people just actually know what the heck their talking about from a scientific standpoint.

posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 11:08 AM
Vanguards back at Faslane in need of some panel beating and a respray. There goes their no claims bonus.No news of the French boat. The BBC had an expert on who said that their were a few locations in the North Atlantic particularly favoured by submariners for for their depth and other 'characteristics'. It seems that the Russians, French, US and RN subs tend to favour patrolling these areas, which he thought made the collision less of surprise! All of which seems bloody stupid to me. I thought the point of these things was to disappear in the vast expanse of the Oceans, not play dodgems in a duck pond. Another point he made was that "sonar countermeasures" may have made it difficult for the Subs to detect each other

posted on Feb, 16 2009 @ 12:08 PM
Good point and very well presented Fang. Have a Star on me!

On the other hand as one Scum reader pointed out, "Perhaps the Frenchies were trying to surrender".

After all, if several Argies surrender whilst a Para is having a crap...........

posted on Feb, 17 2009 @ 08:25 PM
It is my view that both Navy's tried to keep this hush hush. Not unusual and been done before many times.

I also think that some politician/politicians leaked it to the media and then parasitically fed off the story for political gain. Translate that public fear mongering for political mileage. This line of thought comes through clearly by the fear mongering and who is quoted in the news articles. It comes across as sensationalism, tabloid journalism and fear mongering, preying on public insecurities. It gives many sensationalist politicians a platform off which to grandstand. For they know very well that the Navy can only give out limited informations without compromising certain military details.

When one reads the comments to the article quoted by Schaden in the UK Independent..the fear programming and insecurities quite clearly stand out. Also standing out is the lack of knowledge about nuclear power and its operations in general.


top topics


log in