Deepest submerged

#1
U109 Went to 900ft thinking that they were at 300ft the reading on the master guage. The chief engineer had neglected to drain the tube of the control room guage :roll: :roll:
 
#3
scouse said:
U109 Went to 900ft thinking that they were at 300ft the reading on the master guage. The chief engineer had neglected to drain the tube of the control room guage :roll: :roll:
The possibility of this is negated by post-diving checks, though nowadays, a dive is a nice slow controlled pre-planned evolution, we don't crash dive. (When I said 'nice slow controlled pre-planned evolution' I was obviously talking about best-case scenario.)
 
#4
In his book "Iron Coffins" H. Werner tells of a dive to 300 mtrs, which is apparently well beyond the max permissable depth. Sounds like a team ring twitch. There are tales of other U-Boots diving out of control and going to extreme depths, some may well have overdone and gone even deeper and are still down there.
 
#5
[quote="Joe_Crow] The possibility of this is negated by post-diving checks, though nowadays, a dive is a nice slow controlled pre-planned evolution, we don't crash dive. (When I said 'nice slow controlled pre-planned evolution' I was obviously talking about best-case scenario.)[/quote]


Mmmmm, certain C boat about 20 years ago............? :cry:
 

diesel

Lantern Swinger
#6
SONAR-BENDER said:
[quote="Joe_Crow] The possibility of this is negated by post-diving checks, though nowadays, a dive is a nice slow controlled pre-planned evolution, we don't crash dive. (When I said 'nice slow controlled pre-planned evolution' I was obviously talking about best-case scenario.)

Mmmmm, certain C boat about 20 years ago............? :cry:[/quote]


?????
 
#7
SONAR-BENDER said:
[quote="Joe_Crow] The possibility of this is negated by post-diving checks, though nowadays, a dive is a nice slow controlled pre-planned evolution, we don't crash dive. (When I said 'nice slow controlled pre-planned evolution' I was obviously talking about best-case scenario.)

Mmmmm, certain C boat about 20 years ago............? :cry:[/quote]

You have removed Scouse's original post which I quoted in mine. If you read it, you will see that I was referring specifically to the possibility of the Control Room depth gauge reading incorrectly due to operator error. It is also worthy of note that there is now more than one depth indication available to the ship controller/planesman/control room team.
 
#8
We hit a fresh water patch in the Med and went down rather quickly dropping to just below 750 ft from 150ft
Underwear change all round was the follow up pipe.
 
#9
Joe_Crow said:
SONAR-BENDER said:
[quote="Joe_Crow] The possibility of this is negated by post-diving checks, though nowadays, a dive is a nice slow controlled pre-planned evolution, we don't crash dive. (When I said 'nice slow controlled pre-planned evolution' I was obviously talking about best-case scenario.)

Mmmmm, certain C boat about 20 years ago............? :cry:
You have removed Scouse's original post which I quoted in mine. If you read it, you will see that I was referring specifically to the possibility of the Control Room depth gauge reading incorrectly due to operator error. It is also worthy of note that there is now more than one depth indication available to the ship controller/planesman/control room team.[/quote] For information, there where two more guages on U109, and thats how they realised the mistake.... in a more quiet moment from a 6 destroyer ring depth charge attack, some 16 hours later!!! from the guage behind the bow room pressure door, which was resting against the stud. On a brighter note the mistake by the chief engineer, saved the lives of the crew, as the depth charges would have been set, to explode at a much more shallow depth :wink: :wink:
 
#10
Dont know how deep we ended up but we went through 400 metres at 28 knots with a 57 degree bow down whilst torpedo evading in the mid 80`s. I ended up sat on top of the radar transmitting cab wedged in against the deckhead.
 
#11
Phillondepth said:
Dont know how deep we ended up but we went through 400 metres at 28 knots with a 57 degree bow down whilst torpedo evading in the mid 80`s. I ended up sat on top of the radar transmitting cab wedged in against the deckhead.
The general opinion in the mess this morning (average age 48, and all on boats at that time) is either you were on an Akula, or you are talking shite.
 
#12
Joe_Crow said:
Phillondepth said:
Dont know how deep we ended up but we went through 400 metres at 28 knots with a 57 degree bow down whilst torpedo evading in the mid 80`s. I ended up sat on top of the radar transmitting cab wedged in against the deckhead.
The general opinion in the mess this morning (average age 48, and all on boats at that time) is either you were on an Akula, or you are talking shite.
Shite methinks. If you go through 400 metres @28 kts with a big bow down you ain't gonna get back up - ask any SCOOW who understands his MLD.
 
#13
notafourknotfudgepacker said:
Joe_Crow said:
Phillondepth said:
Dont know how deep we ended up but we went through 400 metres at 28 knots with a 57 degree bow down whilst torpedo evading in the mid 80`s. I ended up sat on top of the radar transmitting cab wedged in against the deckhead.
The general opinion in the mess this morning (average age 48, and all on boats at that time) is either you were on an Akula, or you are talking shite.
Shite methinks. If you go through 400 metres @28 kts with a big bow down you ain't gonna get back up - ask any SCOOW who understands his MLD.

Agree, but I'm fairly sure that on an S Boat our DDSTP was around that figure and I'm sure I recall being down there once or twice watching the ladder and bulkhead on 3 deck bending. Maybe went down nice and slow though, not with a 57 degree bow down at 28 knots!! Used to do 900 fast and deep too!
 
#14
SONAR-BENDER said:
Agree, but I'm fairly sure that on an S Boat our DDSTP was around that figure and I'm sure I recall being down there once or twice watching the ladder and bulkhead on 3 deck bending. Maybe went down nice and slow though, not with a 57 degree bow down at 28 knots!! Used to do 900 fast and deep too!
You would seem to be confusing DDSTP with ThreeDeesPee.
 
#16
witsend said:
Joe_Crow said:
Phillondepth said:
Dont know how deep we ended up but we went through 400 metres at 28 knots with a 57 degree bow down whilst torpedo evading in the mid 80`s. I ended up sat on top of the radar transmitting cab wedged in against the deckhead.
The general opinion in the mess this morning (average age 48, and all on boats at that time) is either you were on an Akula, or you are talking shite.
Hmmmmmmm, 57 down (How long were you at that angle, any damage?) at 28 knots (Did you get a nose bleed?). Did you identify any new sea creatures at that depth through the windows?

I think this mess has spoken, "bullshit, Mr Han man".
Mr Han Man?

We think it has to be either

a. Terry Smith
or
b. Knobby Knowles
 

diesel

Lantern Swinger
#17
Funny enough, I remember it as DDSTP as well.

Anyway, anyone remember putting coins in the strongbacks before doing a controlled deep dive.

little things I know but.........memories :(
 
#19
Phillondepth said:
Dont know how deep we ended up but we went through 400 metres at 28 knots with a 57 degree bow down whilst torpedo evading in the mid 80`s. I ended up sat on top of the radar transmitting cab wedged in against the deckhead.
krappp!
 
#20
no not an akula and not talking shite either. we got out of this power dive by going full astern. It was a planned evolution but one i wouuld not like to do again. skipper at the time was t. e. and knew what this boat was capable of. although a few electrical thingys did trip the only breakage was the wardrobe percolator. on the planes was the po rea i think.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

New Posts