Keeping the blogosphere posted on the goings on of the world of submarines since late 2004... and mocking and belittling general foolishness wherever it may be found. Idaho's first and foremost submarine blog. (If you don't like something on this blog, please E-mail me; don't call me at home.)

Monday, May 23, 2005

NY Post Editorial: Closing Subase Bad..

This editorial from the New York Post (linked from Yahoo News because they don't have the registration requirement) looks like the paper got ahold of the Connecticut anti-BRAC team's talking points and put them out. (This seems to make writing stories easier; no critical thinking is required by the author.) Here's probably the weakest argument they've been making:

"It has the best ready access to deep water and the critical polar ice cap route to the Pacific Ocean, giving it unrivaled "surge capacity" — the ability to quickly move personnel, vehicles and weapons around the globe."

OK, I'll admit that Groton is slightly closer to the Arctic than Norfolk is; maybe 200-300 miles (remember, we're talking great circle routes here) in a 10,000 mile trip to the Yellow Sea. I love the part about "best ready access to deep water"... everyone who's done those damn 9 hour surface transits out of Groton, dodging all the lobster pots, and then running into the fishing fleet at the 100 fathom curve -- or the 18 hour transits in heavy weather -- will tell you that they shouldn't be using that as a selling point. Anyway, if we're concerned about how quickly our boats can get to Taiwan or Korea, why don't we just station them on the West Coast? Methinks the "Sub Base Strike Force" will have to come up with some better arguments to convince the BRAC commission to take Groton off the list...

Staying at PD...

3 Comments:

Blogger PigBoatSailor said...

Oh geez - Yeah, if they want to safe Groton, they chose some, ah, 'interesting' points to emphasize. "Best ready access to deep water"? Ok, yeah, King's Bay blows. Norfolk sucks, especially that damn long channel transit. Groton sucks slightly less. That is there pitch point? "We suck, but not as badly as they do?" Hope they are not getting paid too much. "We are slightly closer to the Pac, but not nearly as close as Guam?" Wow, great approach...

5/23/2005 8:41 AM

 
Anonymous MMC(SS) D said...

I love the comment about less contact between those in the Northeast and the military. During my time in Groton I wondered if the locals really cared about all that contact to begin with. It seems to me the only thing they really cared about was how to remove as much money from our pockets as fast as possible. I left Groton with the distinct impression that the locals despised us. My next duty station was Kings Bay, the impression I got there was totally different. Pigboatsailor is right, the arguments for keeping Groton are poor and they need to come up with something better. Calling EB the dean of world submarine building has got to be a joke.

5/23/2005 5:56 PM

 
Anonymous Ernie said...

EB the Dean of world submarine building?
There I was working at SUBASE fixing the old 688's (kinda funny calling a 688 old). The Newport News design had TD-1 thru 4 welded to the hull. The EB design was a bolted valve to the hull. EB design was the best to work on. When I was at EB, they would build a full size mock-up to insure you could work on what they put in the Sub. Now it is all computerized, go into a room and she how you could get a pump out on a big screen. I don't think Newport ever did that or think about how hard it was to work on one of their Subs. If you had ever been on a Trident Submarine you would of seen the finest Nuclear Powered Submarine. I have had been on many a maneuvering watch, but I don't remember them being that long out of Groton. Charleston SC. was the worst.
They have to have a good argument of why they should keep it there. Maybe putting everything in one area is not that good of an Idea, remember 12/07/42.

5/24/2005 4:17 PM

 

Post a Comment

<< Home