# U.S. sub, Japanese merchant ship collide



## Keltic Star (Jan 21, 2006)

From Associated Press, Jan 8, 2007

DUBAI, United Arab Emirates - A U.S. nuclear-powered submarine and Japanese merchant ship collided near the busy shipping lanes of the Straits of Hormuz, the U.S. Navy and Japanese government said Tuesday. No one was seriously injured.

Damage to the fast-attack USS Newport News submarine and the tanker was light and there was no resulting spill of oil or leakage of nuclear fuel, officials from U.S. Navy, Japanese and Emirates government said.

Both ships remained able to navigate, said a Navy official in Japan who requested anonymity because the details of the incident had not yet been released. Japan’s Kyodo News agency first reported the collision.

The bow of the nuclear-powered Newport News hit the stern of the oil tanker Mogamigawa as the vessels were passing just outside the Straits Monday night, causing minor damage to the Japanese vessel, Japan’s Foreign Ministry said. The Japanese government said it was informed of the crash by the Navy and the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo.


_How many professional seamen failed to keep a proper lookout this time?_


----------



## LEEJ (Mar 25, 2006)

There seems to be something wrong with American submarines.They often crash into things.


----------



## Peter B (Nov 12, 2006)

Well, the US navy has a history of expecting anybody and anything to give way to them - including rocks and lighthouses [=P]


----------



## LEEJ (Mar 25, 2006)

My point exactly. Lets not forget the sub that surfaced under a Japanese ship off Hawaii a couple of years ago.


----------



## Bearsie (Nov 11, 2006)

LEEJ said:


> My point exactly. Lets not forget the sub that surfaced under a Japanese ship off Hawaii a couple of years ago.


At least US Navy subs don't sink in Norwegian and Swedish waters like their Russian counterparts, where they have no business being in the first place [=P] 
But I suppose like all "fool proof" human endeavours if you do enough of it
there will be fools and accidents (Jester)
I remember when the captain of the "Marika" a 750 tdw coaster claimed the right of way against a 60 000 ton tanker.
We are coming from starboard he said... ( he forgot to mention that we came out of a side river, more a creek...)
and we broad sided the tanker at full speed!!! this was on a sunny day.
There was great consternation on the bridge of the tanker, they even offered to rescue us lol,
we needed a new bow and all the fitting that go with it !!!
Just to show that it doesnt take the navy to run over stuff ROFL


----------



## John Briggs (Feb 12, 2006)

Lloyds List Daily Commercial News

Nuclear submarine `suckered' by superfast K Line tanker 

The K Line very large crude carrier Mogamigawa is continuing her voyage from the United Arab Emirates to Singapore after temporary repairs.

A divers' inspection of the 300,000 dwt ship which showed one of the ballast tanks was holed in a collision with the US Navy nuclear powered submarine USS Newport News near the Strait of Hormuz on Monday (January 7).

The US Navy has meanwhile begun to shed some light on what may have caused the collision, Lloyd's List reported in London. 

The navy's preliminary findings suggest that when the Mogamigawa passed overhead at a high speed she created a “sucking effect” that made the submarine rise.

“As the ship passed over it ended up sucking the submarine into it,” Lt Cmdr Chris Loundermon, a spokesman for Submarine Force in Norfolk, told reporters.

“It is a principle called the venturi effect. This was a very, very large ship moving at higher speed.”

Cmdr Kevin Aandahl, spokesman for US naval forces in Bahrain, said he could not discuss details such as the speed or depth of the submarine. He did, however, emphasise that Newport News was not surfacing at the time.

K Line said an initial inspection showed two holes, each about 10 cm by 35 cm, in ballast tank 5 on the port side about 70 metres in front on the stern. There were also a 40 cm deep, 1 metre by 5 metre dent and some scratches.

K Line spokesman Masato Yamaguchi said in Tokyo that emergency repairs were made to prevent further ingress of sea water into the ballast tank.

The holes were plugged “with something like epoxy” while she was at Khor Fakkan, in the UAE.

The inspection showed the edges of all the propeller blades were missing about 8 cm from the tip.

The tanker was maintaining normal speed to Singapore despite some damage to her propeller, he said.

The vessel, which was on time charter to Showa Shell Sekiyu, had loaded about 280,000 tonnes of crude oil and was heading towards the Gulf of Oman bound for Singapore when the collision occurred. There was no oil spill and no injuries on the tanker or the submarine.

Japanese chief cabinet secretary Yasuhisa Shiozaki said the Japanese government had been told that the 7,011-tonne submarine suffered damage to her bow but her nuclear reactor, hull and mast were unaffected.


----------



## Peter B (Nov 12, 2006)

*Makes sense, but....*

Being a hobby submariner myself, the "venturi effect" explanation makes perfect sense to me. But the question remains; why did the sub not get out of the tankers path, or prepare countermeasures against the "lift", such as taking in more trim ballast?


----------



## BlythSpirit (Dec 17, 2006)

Surely the traffic separation lanes at the Straits of Hormuz would indicate that this area is pretty busy with bloody large tankers!! Doesn't leave a lot of space underneath the hulls for nuclear subs to be cavorting around!!


----------



## Frank P (Mar 13, 2005)

Surely the American Navy know that there is alot of VLCC's moving around in that area, would they not have instructed the Submarine Captains to avoid them, so that the "venturi effect" would not happen. 

I suspect that the Navy is not comming clean here, maybe they were trying something sneaky like hiding beneath the tanker and something went wrong and the Submarine hit the ship.

One things for sure with all the electronics onboard the Sub, they can not say that they did not see the tanker.

Cheers Frank


----------



## OLD STRAWBERRY (Jan 20, 2006)

The Sub Skipper would have won the congretional Medal of Honour back in WW2.


----------



## non descript (Nov 18, 2005)

Peter B said:


> Being a hobby submariner myself, the "venturi effect" explanation makes perfect sense to me. But the question remains; why did the sub not get out of the tankers path, or prepare countermeasures against the "lift", such as taking in more trim ballast?



Peter, you make a very interesting point, thank you. In the meantime I am intrigued as to what is a _*hobby submariner*_ ? - Please do not be offended by my ignorance, it's just that the concept is foreign to me and I would be delighted to know more.

Kind regards
Mark


----------



## Keltic Star (Jan 21, 2006)

Bearsie said:


> At least US Navy subs don't sink in Norwegian and Swedish waters like their Russian counterparts,
> ............................
> where they have no business being in the first place [=P] ROFL


Depends on which side of the 49th. Parallel you are looking from. LOL


----------



## LEEJ (Mar 25, 2006)

Assuming the sub captain is aware of the venturi effect as a submariner (but you never know) I would guess that they were excercising with the tanker and made an error in judgement. The alternative I would suggest is that they messed up.See previous remarks.


----------



## Peter B (Nov 12, 2006)

*Hobby Submariner*



Tonga said:


> Peter, you make a very interesting point, thank you. In the meantime I am intrigued as to what is a _*hobby submariner*_ ? - Please do not be offended by my ignorance, it's just that the concept is foreign to me and I would be delighted to know more.
> 
> Kind regards
> Mark


In my case, a hobby submariner is someone who participates in the design, building and operation of small, manned submersibles. All just for the fun of it!
The little group of enthusiasts that I am a member of currently operates the 6 tonne sub Kraka, first launched in may 2005. We are currently building a larger sub, so far named UC3. More information on my website: http://www.bluesky-services.dk/submarine/pages/index_uk.html


----------



## non descript (Nov 18, 2005)

Peter,

Thank you and very well done - my congratulations on the *Kraka*

(Thumb) 
Kind regards
Mark


----------



## non descript (Nov 18, 2005)

*commanding officer relieved of duty*

From today's Tradewinds Paper:

The commanding officer of a US Navy submarine that collided with a K Line VLCC earlier this month has been relieved of duty. 
The US Navy said Commander Matthew A Weingart was relieved of his post due to a “lack of confidence in his ability to command”. 
The USS Newport News collided with K Line’s 300,000-dwt Mogamigawa (built 2001) on 8 January 2007 just south of the Straits of Hormuz. 
K Line’s Japanese-flagged VLCC is due to enter drydock at one of SembCorp Marine’s repair facilities in Singapore this week. 
The Mogamigawa sustained a small hole measuring 10 cm by 35 cm, plus a 40 cm-deep dent, on the bottom of ballast tank No 5. 
The Los Angeles-class fast attack submarine is currently undergoing temporary repairs alongside at a facility in Bahrain. 
Plans call for it to return to the US once temporary repairs are complete at which time permanent repairs will be conducted 
The US Navy says legal and safety mishap investigations are still in progress, but initial reports blamed the incident on a phenomenon known as the ‘Venturi effect’.


----------



## PeterG (Aug 26, 2005)

If he says that Newport News wasn't surfacing at the time, then it probably was! You'd don't say something like that unless you're hiding something.


----------

