Sunday, June 29, 2008

Closing Warfighting Gaps: Reconnaissance

Last Friday's Submarine Mystery Question: Why has the performance of certain reef fish fins drawn attention from the US Office of Naval Research?

Answer: UAVs like the Seaglider (see photo) have no propeller. Instead, these robotic vessels rely on aft-mounted wings to move forward. Once reaching the dive limit, its bladder reinflates, and Seaglider creeps upward, again propelled by its water wings.

As we said, the ONR has a Future Naval Capabilities Program that works to provide technologies to close warfighting gaps. Hmmm! Wondering what some of those gaps may be? Here are some hints from November, including monitoring electonic emissions, collecting video photography, determining mine location and conducting sea floor data collection. Satellite uplinked, of course.

Result: The time between survey and strike has been compressed from weeks to hours and sonar detectability is next to nil. Are you listening Mr. Ahmadinejad and el Presidente Hugo?



Thursday, June 26, 2008

Prediction Updates: Bingo!

1st Prediction... (June 3, 2005) - Vigilis, A Bit of a Different Look at Strategic Threats, 2005

SSNs put blimps out of business like Germany's new diesels and the war on terror's budget is putting SSNs out of business (not completely, but in quantity)...slowly but surely. Modernized blimps would probably do a fine job denying access to homeland littorals at costs the Pentagon could digest cheaply.
Three years and three weeks later ... Now, June 24, 2008 -

MIAMI (Reuters) - The Navy is leasing a Skyship 600, about the size of a Boeing 747, for the six-week test mission between Florida's southern coast and Cuba, Coast Guard Lt. Matthew Moorlag said on Tuesday.


With an effective range exceeding 15,000 feet, and altitudes to 12,500 feet, Stinger missiles may easily target the 57 MPH blimp's dual Porsche 930 engine exhaust before heat decoys could be released from the Skyship's 1,500 to 3,000 foot operating altitude.

Crew size is minimal (3), but terrorist heat-seeking Stingers would work well at the nominally low altitudes before decoys could be launched. Perhaps a good reason contractors will pilot the blimp while Navy and Coast Guard technicians on the ground will monitor threat data and direct chase vessels as needed. Or, has a more effective Stinger neutralizer been deployed?


Zarqawi's death was under strange circumstances: he had been found alive in the remains of his hideout, but everyone else was dead. Gadahn's death will be similarly strange. Just wait about 255 days +/- 90. - January, 2008.

Update June 25, 2008 - With YouTube Video (WARNING: vulgar language)

Now, Gadahn may plan to surrender directly to a future president Obama in a deal to spare his life. His attorneys may already have made overtures to U.S. agents (lawyer-client confidentiality bars our press from telling us, even if they knew). Gadahn would face a different threat, however, if Al-Qaeda #2 Ayman al-Zawahiri learned of Gadahn's intended surrender. My prediction still holds, Gadahn now has only 85 days +/- 90 to live. Video..

American Al Qaeda ...



Wednesday, June 25, 2008

Submarine Mal-Journalism

Sydney, June 18 (IANS) - Tiny reef fish inspire submarine designers - Their prowess has now drawn the attention of the US Navy, whose submarine designers are studying what makes these fish so fast. ...
'Reef fish just 10 cm long can cruise all day at an average speed of 3.6 km per hour, which is the equivalent of a typical person swimming at more than 60 km per hour', said Chris Fulton of the Australian National University who led a study of the reef fish.

The wing-like fins of tiny reef fish allow them to cruise at the human equivalent of 60 km per hour and also negotiate strong currents with ease.
Was the reporter qualified to report this story? That certainly could be debatable.
But, let's wear our qualified submariner hats for this week's Mystery Question:
Why has the performance of certain reef fish fins drawn attention from the US Office of Naval Research?
Hints: The ONR has a Future Naval Capabilities Program that works to provide technologies to close warfighting gaps) and, small reef fish may be seen in this video:

Reef fish video ...
Answer Monday



Monday, June 23, 2008

Submariner? You Be The Judge

Last week we posed this Mystery Question:
What submariner made the quoted declaration, and in which branch of the armed services did he enter the military?

Less than 24 hours later, esteemed reader SonarMan nailed it...
That would be oceanographer Robert Ballard of Titanic finding fame. He first entered the Army as an intel specialist, and then later transferred to the Navy as an oceanographer. Point of contention: Ballard was never a true Submarine Sailor. Though he worked on submersibles, he never earned the Submarine Warfare Dolphins insignia. You can't be a Submarine Sailor if you haven't earned your Dolphins.

While SonarMan's correct answer exhibits significant astuteness, his prize is whatever psychic satisfaction he obtains from being the first with it.

In all fairness, Dr. Ballard is a highly accomplished civilian submariner. Moreover, he is eminently qualified on operation of submersibles that have set diving records. The fact that most of Ballard's research submersibles were deep-diving rather than combative units of the greatest submarine force on Earth may be administrivia. In today's world Naval strategy calls for increasingly non-combative missions, as Galrahn often reminds us:

There is a mission statement in bold and italics on page 4 of 21st Century Seapower, (PDF) it reads: 'We believe that preventing wars is as important as winning wars.'

For hints on answering next Friday's mystery question, readers will want to re-read carefully last Friday's posting.

Submarines are always silent and strange.



Thursday, June 19, 2008

Submarine Mystery Question of the Week

Last October, M.E. reacted to a high-profile incident dating to August 29-30th ( so serious it required President Bush and Defense Secretary Robert Gates to be quickly informed.) You can refresh your memory here.

The Brits think a similar incident could not happen on their subs: US nuclear error 'impossible in UK'. Well, the US silent service is equally safe. But the Air Force has some bigger problems.

Fast forward to today, June 19 2008: US N-weapons parts missing, Pentagon says

According to previously undisclosed details obtained by the FT, the investigation also concluded that the air force could not account for many sensitive components previously included in its nuclear inventory. One official said the number of missing components was more than 1,000.

A senior military officer said the military leadership, including Adm Mike Mullen, the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, was “deeply troubled” by the findings of the report made by Admiral Kirkland Donald, the officer who led the investigation. There was no suggestion the missing components wound up in countries that should not have received them.

Earlier this month, Defense Secretary Robert Gates fired two top Air Force officials who were blamed for mis-shipment of four fuses used to trigger nuclear warheads to Taiwan in August 2006 as helicopter batteries, but were probably linked to the latest report revelations, as well.

It raises a serious question about where else these unaccounted for warhead related parts may have gone, said Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association in Washington. I would not be surprised if the recent Taiwan incident is not the only one.

The Taiwan screw-up had gone undetected until March 2007, when nose cone assemblies containing the nuclear fuses were recovered. At that time, the United States had notified China of the blunder and give assurances that its arms sales policies to Taiwan had not changed.

The U.S. Air Force had originally formed within the Army, not separating as a unique service until 1947. Is it time for the Army to reclaim proper management of the Air Force's nuclear weapons systems? Taxpayers could probably save quite a bundle on such a recombination. Think of all the redundant AF staff jobs that could be trimmed, elimination of the problematic Air Force Academy, and outrageous posturing such as requiring qualified pilots to fly pilotless, remotely controlled drones. [It has been no secret that senior Air Force officials balk at turning UAVs over to the Army, insisting instead that they be operated by trained pilots].

The most recognized name in modern submarines seems to disagree with the Air force position on drones, when he says this:

I would not let an adult drive my robot. You do not have enough gaming experience, but I will let a kid with no license take over control of my vehicle system.

Mystery Question: What submariner made the statement above, and in which branch of the armed services did he enter the military?
Submarines are always silent and strange.



Wednesday, June 18, 2008

More on Fleet Expansion

May 28, 2008 - 'Why No One Believes the Navy' -
'It's an open secret in Washington that the Navy's ship-building plans are -- oh, how to put this delicately? -- complete and utter bullshit. The 30-year, 313-ship project relies on, among other things, doubling the country's maritime construction budget, to $25 billion per year -- which most observers believe is about as likely as the tooth fairy taking command of one of the ships.'
Perhaps Congress has never heard about advertising revenue. Advertising could happen, but for crippling and marginalizing the fleet, not expanding it. Advertising logos would not be like the commercial examples shown in the photos. Rather, we can envision something symbolic of a socialist agenda such as Global Warming before the fleet rusts away in the expected heat and corrosive oceans. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Which country will advertise first? Australia, Canada or the US? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This may happen first -
When and if Obama brings all the troops home, he obviously intends to keep them employed in the military (socialists maximize government employees). If they are not military lawyers defending our enemies, for what purpose would our courageous veterans be retained - idle standby for overseas U.N. peacekeeping programs? Domestic hurricane relief or fire fighting? No wonder Obama wants to raise our taxes. -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Some suggest that if we are going to be sending people all over the world, let's stop sending our congress or pacified troops. Send voters who complain loudly about how badly they have it in the US. One-way, of course. Return transportation would be available upon signed request accompanied by a one-paragraph, citizenship essay.



Tuesday, June 17, 2008

What If ...?

Some cutting-edge research (my concept illustration below) has been tested recently by a team contracted at an advanced submarine projects lab. The concept seems to hold promise for submarine defense against non-nuclear torpedoes, even the 200-knot Russian Shkval ( шквал = squall ). See FAS also for more on the VA-111 Shkval underwater rocket.

The project is naturally shrouded in ultra secrecy. No one has talked about it on record. It has come to my attention by very casual inadvertance. Almost nothing related is yet to be found on the web. For the time being, let's call it a 'what if':

As NASA knows, chemistry has an increasingly significant role in high-risk undertakings. Obviously, that has also been the case for submarines since day one.

Inbound torpedo locked onto your sub despite deploying those decoys and other countermeasures? Why not throw up a neutral buoyancy, high mass barrier between the sub and the attacking, underwater rocket? Imagine a thick, concrete wall. Isn't that rocket going to penetrate it? No way. At best it gets severely rattled and deflected off course with an ugly new and un-hydrodynamic configuration. Hopefully, it just explodes safely in your background.

By now you must have many questions. Most are still unanswered, but here is what can be shared:

1. Material: lightweight, hydraulic super-polymer concrete

2. Set-up time: Less than 25 seconds (accelerated by discrete vibrations from a co-ejected sonar emitter).

3. Storage volume and weight: negligible when dry-stored in outboard flukes (shaped appendages as found on either half of a whale's triangular tail).

New idea? Almost as old as submarines. Consult naval history and see (1991) US Patent 5069109 - Torpedo countermeasures, for example. Updated concept uses advanced concrete versus nets. More on those 345 MPH torpedoes here.
Submarines are always silent and strange.



Monday, June 16, 2008

Answer to Submarine Mystery Question

Last Friday's Mystery Question of the Week asked readers to identify N.E.S.E.P.'s purpose with an example of at least one relevant, shore duty location.

Obviously, the 4 respondents were familiar with N.E.S.E.P. and added interesting color in their comments.

Answer: NESEP was a four-year university-level training program, after which, the student went on to Officer Candidate School and an assignment in the fleet. NESEP was phased-out with 1982 graduates. Relevant duty stations; (As commenter H.S. Normal tells us, The time spent in college counted towards retirement!!) Hosting universities were relevant duty stations. Another duty station was Vanderbilt U.

Want More? Here is a brief sampling of the many individual participants and institutions you could google:

Ex-enlisted officers: Are they better? (last article item on page)

NESEP: Navy Enlisted Scientific Education Program ( reunion info) note the O-5, one David G. Riley.

Robert M. Jones Cavalla Crew Interview

Anonymous Retired CPO(SS) correctly identified the NESEP officer shown here as Captain Dave Duma. Well, the boat in the atypical photo to Duma's left was the Scamp (SSN-588), the one also shown above. Subsequent to XO on the SSN 650, Duma completed PCO Training reporting to USS Scamp (SSN 588) in June 1985.

Submarines are always silent and strange.



Friday, June 13, 2008

Submarine Mystery Question of the Week

Seems many folks have heard of fictitious Nesep.

Unless you have some Turkish heritage, it is doubtful you understand their word nesep. Likewise, without UK residence it is doubtful you have heard of the North East Social Enterprise Partnership (NESEP).

Those who served in navy subs between 1964 - 1982, were also no doubt directly aware of Navy N.E.S.E.P. , which by the way, was not at all limited to subs. Until very recently, some of you may even have been acquainted with a N.E.S.E.P. product.

Mystery Question:

Identify N.E.S.E.P.'s purpose with an example of at least one relevant, shore duty location.

Answer on Monday. Submarines are always silent and strange.



Tuesday, June 10, 2008

Two Submarine Connections Looking and Sounding Great, But ...

A popular notion states that perception is reality. If this equation were true, camouflage would suffice for just about everything. Hollywood alone could muster our stragic deterrence and defense capabilities. In the real world, substance will always trump perception in the end.

In the worlds of entertainment, proaganda, and public relations, however, perception is reality as long as the perception may last.

Two examples (you decide from which of those three worlds they come):

10 June 2008: Quick, Commodore, Qualify!

The prince, who is on a two-month attachment with the Royal Navy and is Commodore in Chief of Submarines will visit the Royal Navy Submarine Museum in Gosport, Hampshire, where he will officially open the memorial. The area of remembrance lists the names of the 5,300 submariners who have died while in service between 1904 and the present day. Sub-Lieutenant Wales, who is currently on a two-month attachment with the Navy, will also get a chance to see the Royal Navy's first ever submarine, the Holland 1, as well as tour a Second World War submarine, HMS Alliance. [Ed. Obviously a ceremonial posting for a memorial - ugh, the irony of contrasts.]

Next , you may remember an attractive lawyer who said,

What do a nuclear submarine off the coast of Venezuela and a bunch of NGOs have in common? Why, US intervention in Venezuela, of course!!

At the time, Vigilis responded to her (see 3rd comment). Now, she is at it again:

The Fourth Fleet of the Navy has already been activated, something not seen since World War II, and will be patrolling and coordinating military activity in the Latin American region.


The US Government is waging war on Venezuela - not your typical, traditional war, but a modern, asymmetric - 4th Generation War -against President Chávez and the Bolivarian Revolution. ... 26 October: A US nuclear submarine arrives in Curazao to presumably engage in espionage

This time, only comments from her alleged team members are accepted, however. Otherwise, I would ask why she glosses over disturbing facts. Her actual words: Groups like Human Rights Watch, Inter-American Press Association, Reporters without Borders accuse Venezuela of violating human rights and freedom of expression. The CIA Factbook actually tells us:

current situation: Venezuela is a source, transit, and destination country for women and children trafficked for the purposes of sexual exploitation and forced labor; women and children from Colombia, China, Peru, Ecuador, and the Dominican Republic are trafficked to and through Venezuela and subjected to commercial sexual exploitation or forced labor; Venezuelans are trafficked internally and to Western Europe, particularly Spain and the Netherlands, and to countries in the Caribbean region for commercial sexual exploitation; Venezuela is a transit country for illegal migrants from other countries in the region and for Asian nationals, some of whom are believed to be
trafficking victims

Watch her April 20, 2008 address at Howard University Washington, D.C.:

Of the propaganda and PR world, slick lawyer work, if you can get it...



Monday, June 09, 2008

Submarine Mystery - Answer: Perhaps

Last week's Mystery Question was: Has blowing sanitaries overboard ever resulted in loss of a submarine?

Answer: Perhaps, but since submarines are always silent and strange, we may never know with certainty...

The method for blowing sanitaries overboard is difficult to operate, and the German Type VIIC boat U-1206 was lost with casualties because of a mistake with the toilet.

Another version (source) ...

U-1206 was commissioned on 16 March 1944. Under the command of Kptlt. Karl-Adolf Schlitt during July 1944, she was assigned to patrol the East Coast of Scotland and the Moray Firth.
During attempted mechanical repairs, the bow section began flooding. Ballast tanks were blown and loaded torpedoes launched for added buoyancy. The submarine surfaced, but her diesel engines failed. Because the boat could not be saved, secret equipment was destroyed and she was scuttled as her crew abandoned shipi in rafts. The fourth raft was washed ashore south of Boddam where three crew were drowned.

Still another version (source) ... Sunk by a toilet?

In many sources it is stated the U-120 was 'sunk by a toilet' (probably a very bad way to go! :). However this story should be attributed, with changes, to the U-1206 which was one of the late war boats fitted with the new deep water high-pressure toilets (enabling the boat to use its toilet at greater depth than before)...

[U-1206] FATE: Sank on 14 April, 1945 in the North Sea near Peterhead, Scotland, in position 57.21N, 01.39W, in a diving accident. 4 dead and 46 survivors. ... the boat was safely cruising at 200 feet when the commander, Schlitt, decided to use the toilet without the help of a trained specialist (the system was complicated). Something went wrong and when the specialist arrived he misunderstood something and opened the wrong valve with the end results that large amount of seawater got into the boat. The seawater reached the batteries directly under the toilet causing chlorine gas to form and the boat had to be surfaced immediately right under the enemy. When the boat reached the surface they managed to blow clean air into the boat but at the same time an aircraft bombed the boat causing extensive damages leaving the boat unable to dive. Seeing the hopeless situation Schlitt had no choice but to destroy his secret material and abandon ship to safe his crew. (Brennecke, J. (2001). Jager and Gejagte)

Which version contains not only the most precise details, but also suggests an impetus for coverup?

Because some of you may be disappointed over the unresolved nature of the affirmative answer, here is the latest consolation to comfort us: THE TRUTH FROM IRAQ.



Thursday, June 05, 2008

Submarine Mystery Question of the Week and Quote

The quotation:

The principal cause of objectionable odors has been due to the design of heads and sanitary tanks, which does not feature a water trap or other seal to prevent 'pervasion of the ship with an aroma resembling in no way the attar of roses.' ... The tank must now be vented ... inboard when submerged. An activated charcoal air filter is in the inboard vent line, which removes much of the odor when the venting is done slowly and when the filter unit is replaced often. source : PART 2, SUBMARINE MEDICINE PRACTICE, CHAPTER 18, SUBMARINE HABITABILITY AND CLOTHING, section 18.3.9. Odors [emphasis added]

My guess is every submariner has breathed the indescribably foul sanitary tank vapors when submerged venting was performed with necessary dispatch. How well did the recently replaced (no budgetary concerns) activated charcoal filters work? Gasp!

Even our resident protein scroungers (two bulky MMs who sometimes stood at the garbage can where we emptied our plates after a particularly good meal and grabbed uneaten portions to consume on the spot) could not pretend to be appetized by the wonderful odor of vomit. We all have our favorite humor, but we realize submarine operation is deadly serious.

Mystery Question:
Has blowing sanitaries overboard ever resulted in loss of a submarine?

Answer on Monday. Submarines are always silent and strange.



Tuesday, June 03, 2008

Observing Lax Role Models in High and Low Places

UPDATE (June 6, 2008): The officer seen in the video (linked below) who administered the dressing down to crew has been identified as Executive Officer Lieutenant Commander John Aitken, saying: 'Getting your ******* napper down... while watching a ******* DVD and swigging lager isn't accepting responsibility for your shipmates.' - Confirming source - Crashed nuclear submarine sailor found asleep with lager

A spokeswoman said of the vessel's future: 'The extent of damage from the grounding is still being investigated and it would be wrong to speculate at this stage about what will happen to the submarine once she is back in the UK' source

UPDATE: American translation of XO's terminology QM's caboosh - UK slang an aggregate; usu. in the phrase the whole caboosh: all, everything, everyone

Recently, we have learned of an incredible example of laxity. Early subs had no water closets. Why? Starting with what Molten Eagle describes as a 'manned ballast tank' (c -2008) called the Hunley, early subs had severely limited navigational capabilities. Sailors could not be aboard them at sea for a whole day. 'Swim calls' and 'relief ' receptacles provided toiletry conveniences, if nature called. In the early 1900's, interior 'water closets' were not yet standard in most homes. ---------------------------------------------------
This changed about the times submarines transitioned from transported cargo on larger ships to open water vessels. As early as 1913, U.S. sub plans included water closets, my research indicates. ---------------------------
Submariners, the adventurous forerunners of manned space programs, well realize the value of back-ups and redundancy. Alas, every ounce on the ISS is calculated for priority of need. Although the International Space Station’s lone toilet has broken twice in 7 years, spare pumps are not in abundance. As in submarines, discipline and resourcefulness must be. ----------------------------
The space station's liquid-waste collection system involves fans to overcome the lack of gravity.
With infinite, weightless vacuum available for suction, engineers have relied on fan motors with moving parts. Go figure. -------------------------------------------------------------------------
The crew -- two Russians and one American -- has used the toilet on the Soyuz return capsule, but it has a limited capacity. They now are using a back-up bag-like collection system that can be connected to the broken toilet, according to NASA public affairs officials. ---------------------

'It's not really an emergency, they have many options available if they need,' Cloutier said.'

There is another toilet ready to fly in the fall, in order to have two toilets on board for when they'll have the expanded crew of six' at the ISS, Cloutier, also said. -----------------------------
In the meantime, NASA is reporting that the crew is 'bypassing the troublesome hardware' with a 'special receptacle' attached to the toilet. Other reports speak of manual pump overrides by the astronauts. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here's a real change of pace. Holy #4@% , Batman, no wonder there's a discipline problem on HMS Superb! Have you watched this secreted video of a real a$$-chewing? The speaker is identified as the XO. If that is true, it kind of explains the other problems, including the one he is ranting about (quite rightly, I may add, but not in respectful language my XO's mustered for such occasions). ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Your attention is particularly directed to two phrases:
[0.30] 'Getting your f***ing napper down in the QM's caboosh [American translation needed] while watching a f***ing DVD and swigging lager isn't accepting responsibility for your shipmates. ' -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1.07] '... someone will take a pi$$ in [inaudible]. -------------------------------------------------
Now, does this exemplify a proper attitude for the senior service branch that helped set the stage for ISS astronauts? Listen to the whole 5:40 minutes rant, and judge for yourself.



Sunday, June 01, 2008

Submarine Mystery - Answer: Not ice

Last week's Mystery Question was:
What explanation is given for the USS Nautilus's sail damage?
Curiously, Wikipedia's article on the USS Nautilus (SSN-571) does not even mention the Essex collision, at least as of this writing). It gives this milestone about 6 months prior, however:
On 2 May 1966, Nautilus returned to her home-port to resume operations with the Atlantic Fleet, and at some point that spring, logged her 300,000th mile (555,600 km) underway. For the next year and a quarter she conducted special operations for ComSubLant and then in August 1967, returned to Portsmouth, for another year's stay, following which she conductedexercises off the southeastern seaboard. She returned to New London in December 1968.
Notice the book cover above. Undersea Encounters is 200 pages of description, analysis and photos published by the Submarine Research Center, Bangor, Washington. The book, which examines the causes of over thirty collisions and groundings, may be purchased directly from SRC,, or at most submarine museums for those interested in (Book Descriptions):
American submarine accidents and mishaps from 1903 to 2005 are described in vivid detail from records and memories of crew members who endured the trauma of colliding with an unknown object. Fishing net ensnarements provide true and exciting humor for the reader at the expense of the unwitting fisherman dragged through the water by monsters from the deep. Find out why such accidents happen when least expected. Examine the causes and learn how courts have looked upon our submarines as unfriendly vessels operating in a hostile environment.
United States Navy submarines have a history of colliding with a variety of obstacles including surface ships, fishing nets and cables, other submarines, rocks, reefs and sea mounts. It cannot be denied that submarines can be dangerous in peacetime as well as war. Mistakes are sometimes made by submariners, but often the tactical nature of a peace time exercise demands aggressive action with commensurate risk. The result can be a collision at sea and nothing can spoil a submariner's day worse than a collision at sea.
Some of you may prefer to chance unofficial research in an attempt to save the $19.95 (try a good library). On the web at Pictures of Damage to the USS Nautilus from the Essex Collision are six, very interesting color photos of the damaged Nautilus at dock. The photos, one of which is described as 'Bill Putt standing where the bridge used to be', are also credited to Bill Putt. There is definitely something cartoonish about the web site hosting Putt's photos. Some of you probably noticed already (hint: notice the web address in your browser). It has nothing to do with this one, either. ..........................................................................................................
ANSWER to WEEKLY MYSTERY (short explanation given for the USS Nautilus's sail damage):
November 11, 1966 - 350 miles east of Morehead City, NC - USS NAUTILUS collides with the USS ESSEX (CV 9) while running submerged during underway replenishment exercises. Both ships return to port unassisted. The submarine receives extensive damage to its sail area and goes to New London, CT. The ESSEX sustains an open hull cut in the bow area and proceeds to Norfolk, Va. source
Longer explanations cite numerous course changes by multiple ships as contributory: During fleet exercises, USS Nautilus closed Essex (CVS-9) to conduct a simulated attack but rapid course changes by multiple ships resulted in a collision with the carrier, heavily damaging the submarines sail. ..........................................................................................................................................
For submarine crew member's account and photos of our brothers don't miss this History of the Owl page. Quotation:

It was on the 1966 Bermuda trip that we got involved in a life changing event for most of us. During a 'war game', the Nautilus was run over by
the aircraft carrier USS Essex....

Did all this occur in the Bermuda Triangle? Submarines are always silent and strange.