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.)

Tuesday, November 01, 2005

USS Buffalo To Guam

In a widely expected move, it appears that USS Buffalo (SSN 715) will be moving to Guam next summer. As usual, the announcement was made by the gaining Congressperson (or delegate, in this case). This will bring the number of subs in Guam back to three -- all of them non-VLS, re-fuelled LAs (USS City of Corpus Christi and USS Houston are the other two).

Going deep...

Update 1000 02 Nov: Other articles on the move, including one that says that CSP can't confirm it, and that it will happen in Sep '06, are here, here, and here.

13 Comments:

Blogger ninme said...

I *love* their little badge/mascot/thingie. I assume they're actually named for the city in NY tho, right?

10/31/2005 11:16 PM

 
Anonymous EW3 said...

Named after Buffalo NY. Only place I've been that has gone from summer temps to winter snow in 1 day!
Wonder whay they are all non VLS subs there? Sub guys and their secrets ;)
But great to see 3 boats there.
I remember when there were Polaris boats there. Would like to see an SSGN stationed there.

10/31/2005 11:24 PM

 
Blogger Chap said...

Why non-VLS? Mainly the originals were post-refueling overhaul because it's easier to change homeports after that than any other time (less stress on families, money for the move is more likely to already have been considered, etc).


Note that the Beefalo is DSRV capable. This should be an interesting shift, since the idea of onloading and offloading DSRVs is pretty new in Guam (that's a heavy lift) and the SDVT is in Pearl.

11/01/2005 1:46 AM

 
Anonymous EW3 said...

Thanks chap. I'm from the non nuke side of the navy so that was never part of our life.

11/01/2005 9:54 AM

 
Blogger Chap said...

Glad to help. The same thing happens in a bigger overhaul for conventional surface ships; there's a pot of money to move a ship to or from the yard (say, Pascagoula to Bath and back) that gets budgeted in, and at the end of the ovehaul if we need that ship to move it's a wee bit easier to do it at the end of the overhaul than it is to find the money to move all those families and pay for the move out of hide.

"Wee bit" because the state losing the ship may be unhappy enough to raise a stink about it (like moving a carrier out of Florida, for instance).

11/01/2005 12:09 PM

 
Blogger submandave said...

Chap, did you mean to say "DDS" capable? Unless I misunderstand your SDVT reference, this makes more sense. Having this capability forward deployed, especially in light of what may or may not be called for in RP ops, just makes good sense.

In any event, if we need to do DSRV ops I'd imagine we'd use a commercial container crane facility. We did a DSRV compatability exercise with the JMSDF back in the early '90s and I believe we used MSC's facilities in Yokohama for on-load and off-load.

11/01/2005 4:10 PM

 
Blogger Chap said...

Crap. You're right. I'm completely hosed.

All SSNs have that NATO DSRV compatibility thing. Buffalo has been adapted for DDS ops.

Attention to detail test UNSAT. Thanks for the catch.

11/01/2005 10:38 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To ninme.... We (the commissioning crew) had a contest which included the city of Buffalo, NY. In the end, this patch was a merging of several designs from crewmen then serving. Notice the two different colored dolphins, 1 gold (officers), 1 silver (enlisted), acting together.

It is a cool patch!
SubJack

2/29/2008 6:13 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Did 4 years on the Buffy ('99 to '03). My last deployment with her mostly consisted of preparing for this move to Guam. We onloaded the DDS in Guam (a first, I think) and spent the majority of our deployment there, practicing DDS ops every week. We nicknamed it "GuamPac '01." After Pac, we went into refueling. I left just before they brought the buses back up.

4/11/2008 2:21 AM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

First of all, I rebuilt the whole shelter system in 2000. TOP down.I served on the Buffalo for 3 years after I left The Bates SSN 680. I don't except any comments on our operational status from back then. ITS JUST PLAIN WRONG and ILLEGAL. YOU SIGNED YOUR LIFE AWAY ON THAT NICE PIECE OF PAPER FOR 50 years.WE ALL SIGNED IT!!!!. IS it "COOL" that you are in the "KNOW".BECAUSE YOU WANT WAR STORYs,because you'd like to let alittle info out/ ALLUDE TO SOME DIFINITIVE KNOWLEDGE. CMON. I'd lock your ass in a torpedo tube and override the fking flood valve manuallY.REMEMBER TARD, THE BUFFALO IS STILL OPERATIONAL.YOU ENDANGER OUR SUBMARINE BRETHEREN.THIS MESSAGE IS FROM "BRAVO ONE"

5/09/2008 12:37 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The dude who commented before me (I know who he is) got kicked off "Buffy", and out of the Navy for doing drugs. Not surprising considering the comment. He didn't "rebuild" anything. In fact, a needle gun and paintbrush were the only thing we trusted him with. USS Buffalo has consistently been a top notch sub, both crew and vessel.

9/30/2008 9:23 PM

 
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I served aboard the Buffalo from 91-95. Had some good times, and some bad times.

Tom(SS)

11/22/2008 10:26 PM

 
Anonymous www.asturias-3d.com said...

It cannot succeed in actual fact, that is exactly what I think.

10/28/2011 12:03 PM

 

Post a Comment

<< Home