Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Politics for Pros- moderated -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: LindyBill who wrote (94966)	1/13/2005 2:37:10 AM
From: Bill Ulrich	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 793888

Fasincating; very interesting points in the article. Thanks the follow-up. "It appears that the sub was traveling on a course it was ordered to follow, at a depth of 500 feet and a speed of about 56 kilometers an hour. .... The captain usually losses his command after accidents like this, although in this case, that might not happen. If the captain was following all procedures correctly, and there was no way the seamount could be detected, the incident might not destroy his career. There are many uncharted underwater features, especially 500 feet underwater. The technology does not yet exist to economically chart all of the ocean bottoms to that, and greater, depth. Most waters are charted sufficiently to protect surface ships. But there are only about two hundred subs that normally operate at the depth this accident took place. ... Moreover, in wartime, you avoid using sonar as a navigation aid, as it gives away your position. Actually, traveling at high speed gives away your position, ..."