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

Life Aboard a Nuclear Submarine

vanityfair.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 61 posts

Re: Life Aboard a Nuclear Submarine

#31

Post by hef19898 »

ggm wrote: post #22

There's a very old post which was on USENET and then on Reddit, which was a wry look at life on a sub, and an even funnier post of how to re-create the experience at home. Mostly it consisted of getting your SO to lock you in a cupboard under the stairs, run a vacuum cleaner outside the cupboard 24/7 and periodically throw a bucket of shit over you, while you were wrapped in a black plastic bag (CBW)

Modern subs, especially the missile ones, are way more comfortable than subs back the day. What I was told by someone who served on German navy subs in the 2000s so is, that the depiction of sub life shown in the movie "Das Boot" (I recommend the 7 (?) hour long mini series) is actually not too far of the mark. Better sanitation, but other than that, it is pretty much the same experience. They did have great food so!

Re: Life Aboard a Nuclear Submarine

#32

Post by gherkinnn »

zabzonk wrote: post #12
dataflow wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Doesn't this project weakness? Is there any reason to believe China or Russia have had doubts about US capabilities that this would now... resolve?

given two consecutive failures of uk launched tridents, i think a lot of people have doubts, and that is very dangerous.

Some loose thoughts on Trident

- Yes, Minister was a prescient show

- Trident is the UK's only nuclear deterrent.

- While the UK fired them, they are taken from a common US-UK pool of interchangeable missiles.

- NATO governments are on the open side. Failures are likely to be made public.

- It is, of course, embarrassing

Re: Life Aboard a Nuclear Submarine

#33

Post by KineticLensman »

ggm wrote: post #22

There's a very old post which was on USENET and then on Reddit, which was a wry look at life on a sub, and an even funnier post of how to re-create the experience at home. Mostly it consisted of getting your SO to lock you in a cupboard under the stairs, run a vacuum cleaner outside the cupboard 24/7 and periodically throw a bucket of shit over you, while you were wrapped in a black plastic bag (CBW)

That reminds me of how you can simulate sailing by standing in a cold shower tearing up £10 notes

Re: Life Aboard a Nuclear Submarine

#34

Post by papa-whisky »

saagarjha wrote: post #29
orthecreedence wrote: post #19

I just don't get it. Why do we even need nuclear submarines? Solar is much cheaper and has been deployed massively already.

Solar on a submarine?

It's a joke. Every time there's a thread on HN about nuclear power someone inevitably comments something like the above about solar.

Re: Life Aboard a Nuclear Submarine

#35

Post by theultdev »

skavi wrote: post #26
theultdev wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is the author's misguided speculation interesting? If that was supposed to be the interesting part the title wouldn't be: > Life Aboard a Nuclear Submarine Just report what you saw, not what you feel. Reporters used to know to not be the subject. They were invited on and that wasn't good enough. They had to make up some plot in their head why they were invited on to confirm their bias and influence others.

You’d rather they be a transparent conduit for state propaganda? Better to remind readers that the military sees value in this article existing.

No I'd rather just read about god damn life on the god damn submarine as the title suggests.

A quick conversation with my brother about what it was like was more informative than this trash.

Re: Life Aboard a Nuclear Submarine

#36

Post by lukan »

livueta wrote: post #15
dguest wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Either 1. They don't want to post the launch codes to the internet, or 2. The code is just 000000 (hey it's not the worst I've ever seen)

Well... https://sgs.princeton.edu/00000000 https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/12/launch-code-for-... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permissive_action_link > According to nuclear safety expert Bruce G. Blair, the US Air Force's Strategic Air Command worried that in times of need the codes for the Minuteman ICBM force would not be available, so it decided to set the codes to 00000000 in all missile launch contro…

It is probably a miracle, that no nukes were used by accidents or random madmen yet. But those sort of incidents really don't make me feel save, by all that destruction potential guarded by 00000000. I don't really trust, that today it somehow became really save. Even if they changed it, it probably is still attached in a pinup note next to it.

Re: Life Aboard a Nuclear Submarine

#37

Post by arethuza »

gherkinnn wrote: post #32
zabzonk wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

given two consecutive failures of uk launched tridents, i think a lot of people have doubts, and that is very dangerous.

Some loose thoughts on Trident - Yes, Minister was a prescient show - Trident is the UK's only nuclear deterrent. - While the UK fired them, they are taken from a common US-UK pool of interchangeable missiles. - NATO governments are on the open side. Failures are likely to be made public. - It is, of course, embarrassing

The UK Tridents currently are on patrol with 8 missiles (they can carry more). What we don't want is someone thinking that out of the 8 a few won't work and maybe the missile defences around their capital city could surely shoot down the remainder?

Re: Life Aboard a Nuclear Submarine

#39

Post by paganel »

Interesting that in times of major geo-political worldwide distress the US "glamour" media is quite quick to turn back to being propaganda vehicles, reminds me of how Life magazine was used back in the '40s and '50s.

Re: Life Aboard a Nuclear Submarine

#40

Post by arethuza »

lukan wrote: post #36
livueta wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well... https://sgs.princeton.edu/00000000 https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/12/launch-code-for-... https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permissive_action_link > According to nuclear safety expert Bruce G. Blair, the US Air Force's Strategic Air Command worried that in times of need the codes for the Minuteman ICBM force would not be available, so it decided to set the codes to 00000000 in all missile launch contro…

It is probably a miracle, that no nukes were used by accidents or random madmen yet. But those sort of incidents really don't make me feel save, by all that destruction potential guarded by 00000000. I don't really trust, that today it somehow became really save. Even if they changed it, it probably is still attached in a pinup note next to it.

Well at least they have codes - the UK nuclear weapons are ultimately controlled by a set of hand-written letters.
Post reply on HN