Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Judge Orders Navy to Release USS Thresher Disaster Documents

news.usni.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–35 of 35 posts

Re: Judge Orders Navy to Release USS Thresher Disaster Documents

#31

Post by thaumasiotes »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #28
jacquesm wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conspiracy nuts? You'd almost think they were purposefully replaced. If it was designed that way than that's incompetence on a level that I'm not comfortable with, you'd imagine someone would have looked at that and said 'that's stupid'.

The report is pretty interesting. The ship was not designed that way. The nuts were installed as part of routine maintenance: > By mid October, the Iwo Jima had been operating in the Persian Gulf for approximately two months and had developed some leaks and other repair needs in the ship's 600 psi steam propulsion plant. > The ship was granted permission to dock in Manama, Bahrain (a country on a group of islands in…

I meant to say "an inspection that might have caught the problem", not "an inspection that might have caused the problem".

Re: Judge Orders Navy to Release USS Thresher Disaster Documents

#32

Post by rwmurrayVT »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #28
jacquesm wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Conspiracy nuts? You'd almost think they were purposefully replaced. If it was designed that way than that's incompetence on a level that I'm not comfortable with, you'd imagine someone would have looked at that and said 'that's stupid'.

The report is pretty interesting. The ship was not designed that way. The nuts were installed as part of routine maintenance: > By mid October, the Iwo Jima had been operating in the Persian Gulf for approximately two months and had developed some leaks and other repair needs in the ship's 600 psi steam propulsion plant. > The ship was granted permission to dock in Manama, Bahrain (a country on a group of islands in…

Even today there is a big push by the government for "checkpoints" to be reduced. The government pushed repair and overhaul contracts to FFP. The overhaul periods are going over schedule and they are trying to get ships out of the yards "on-time".

I see it every day. I do critical alignment work that involves very tight tolerances on the order of single digit arcseconds and single thousandths of an inch. Do you think when MARMC or SWRMC comes out to check the work item that they're verifying the alignment? That takes specialized equipment and knowledge.

If they reduce 25% of the checkpoints, but alert the shipyard of which checkpoints they are discarding don't you think that could cause some perverse incentives? They'd be better off sending out a list of checkpoints and then performing 50% of them without telling the shipyard.

Also of course the Navy doesn't repair all of it's own ships :) US Navy, including MSC, and the CG have the majority of their repair work done at General Dynamics, BAE Systems, Colanna's, and a whole slew of smaller shipyards around the country.

Re: Judge Orders Navy to Release USS Thresher Disaster Documents

#33

Post by dctoedt »

kryogen1c wrote: post #3

For what its worth, I used to hold a clearance in the US nuclear navy and the story on wikipedia is what I was always told. Im not sure there is anything of value in the documents to be released, but im sure curious to find out.

Forty years ago I was chief-engineer qualified in the nuclear navy (surface fleet - USS Enterprise); the Wikipedia account is what I remember our being told about the Thresher's loss. (I don't remember that we were told much, possibly because we were "skimmers," or as the sub sailors say, "targets.")

Re: Judge Orders Navy to Release USS Thresher Disaster Documents

#34

Post by thaumasiotes »

rwmurrayVT wrote: post #32
thaumasiotes wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The report is pretty interesting. The ship was not designed that way. The nuts were installed as part of routine maintenance: > By mid October, the Iwo Jima had been operating in the Persian Gulf for approximately two months and had developed some leaks and other repair needs in the ship's 600 psi steam propulsion plant. > The ship was granted permission to dock in Manama, Bahrain (a country on a group of islands in…

Even today there is a big push by the government for "checkpoints" to be reduced. The government pushed repair and overhaul contracts to FFP. The overhaul periods are going over schedule and they are trying to get ships out of the yards "on-time". I see it every day. I do critical alignment work that involves very tight tolerances on the order of single digit arcseconds and single thousandths of an inch. Do you think…

> Also of course the Navy doesn't repair all of it's own ships :)

I can think of two systems with obvious benefits:

1. The Navy repairs its own ships. The big benefits here are that you don't have to let anyone else access -- or see -- the ships, and you can perform repairs in the field to the extent that's possible. (For replacing nuts, it's certainly possible.) This requires two types of training: knowledge of the ship's specifications, and skill in performing repairs.

2. The manufacturer repairs the ships. This makes it a lot more difficult to receive repair, but it has similar secrecy benefits, and the manufacturer is well positioned to know how to repair the ship and what is or isn't important. You don't need to train anybody in anything as long as you have perfect, total confidence in the manufacturer.

The Navy here picked the option of having the ship repaired in random foreign shipyards where nobody knew the specs. That's a compromise that advantages ease of getting repairs -- but you lose out on the idea that the person performing repairs knows what constitutes good working order and what doesn't. I struggle to see the advantages; you get more ease of repair and more reliability by doing it yourself.

Re: Judge Orders Navy to Release USS Thresher Disaster Documents

#35

Post by rwmurrayVT »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #34
rwmurrayVT wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even today there is a big push by the government for "checkpoints" to be reduced. The government pushed repair and overhaul contracts to FFP. The overhaul periods are going over schedule and they are trying to get ships out of the yards "on-time". I see it every day. I do critical alignment work that involves very tight tolerances on the order of single digit arcseconds and single thousandths of an inch. Do you think…

> Also of course the Navy doesn't repair all of it's own ships :) I can think of two systems with obvious benefits: 1. The Navy repairs its own ships. The big benefits here are that you don't have to let anyone else access -- or see -- the ships, and you can perform repairs in the field to the extent that's possible. (For replacing nuts, it's certainly possible.) This requires two types of training: knowledge of the…

The Navy does do minor repairs at sea and pier-side at Naval Stations. The majority of the work pier side is a continuation of an availability that overran time. It's very common these days unfortunately..

When the ship comes into a commercial yard for availability it is stripped down of confidential equipment. All of the radar/sonar/fire control/damage control equipment comes off. The work done in the yard is primarily mechanical. Deck inserts, foundation repair, lube oil system, oily waste, etc. I will install the foundation for a SPQ-9b antenna, but I will never see the antenna. At the end of the availability the combat systems engineers from MARMC/SWRMC will come out, install the equipment, record all "installed" alignment information, and program the systems.

The major new shipbuilders are rarely in the business of ship repair. They're too busy building new ships. General Dynamics is probably one of the few in the new build and repair business. When the ships come into a commercial shipyard the work items are all specced out by the planning yard. That's typically Huntington Ingalls in Mississippi or Bath Ironworks.

The days of foreign shipyards is all but over as far as I know. They brought the USS Cole all the way back to the USA on the Blue Marlin. In fact, she went to Pascagoula, but I don't know if it was to Huntington Ingalls or VT Halter. I'd imagine HI.

Post reply on HN