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, June 29, 2010

An Oldie But A Goodie

A while back, I posted about a humorous MRC floating around the 'net that purported to be the instructions for taking a crap on a submarine, using approved PMS techniques. The original link is gone, but luckily the good folks at Goatlocker saved a copy. Excerpts:
1. Preliminary
a. Inform Work Center Supervisor of personnel’s desire to remove himself from an able status. Ensure permission is granted.
b. Ensure person performing D-1R is not on watch, maneuvering watch is not set, and decontamination station is not set (as denoted by copious amounts of yellow material).
c. Verify that Sanitaries are not pressurized as noted by signs hung stating, “WARNING! BLOWING SANITARIES.” If pressure exerted on lower abdominal region is too great, consider performing R-5 (Emergency Bowel Movement Using Plastic Bag)
WARNING: Entering stall before verifying stall is empty may be hazardous to continuation of life.
2. Verify stall empty
a. Knock three times on stall door and ask potential occupants of their presence.
b. If stall is occupied, move to next stall and repeat step 2.a.
c. If all three stalls are occupied, wait until an occupant has removed himself from the stall, and then continue to Step 3. Remove reading material and review while waiting.
NOTE: Stall #2 has shown signs of becoming clogged during performance of D-1R. If emergency, perform PM using stall #2. Otherwise, continue to wait until either stall #1 or #3 are clear.
d. If greater than 5 minutes have passed and all three stalls remain to be occupied,
reperform Step 2 in its entirety to verify occupants are awake. Use colorful language such as “Hey. You. Pinch it off. I need to drop a deuce.”
3. Entering stall
a. Open door to stall by moving handle either clockwise or counterclockwise from the centerline position.
b. Inspect stall for presence of toilet paper. If none, do not continue with maintenance action. Inform WCS.
WARNING: Do not substitute any other material such as kim-wipes, socks, and magazine pages for toilet paper. Your anus will thank you.
c. Open door 90 degrees until door rests flush with wall.
NOTE: Maintain positive control of head door. Releasing door will potentially cause a “noise transient” denoted by a loud banging noise. If “noise transient” is heard, back out of MR, inform the Chief of the Watch (COW), and proceed to Step 1.
d. Position yourself between toilet and door.
e. Move door 90 degrees back to original position and ensure Primary Locking Device(PLD) mates with Frame Locking Mechanism (FLM).
f. Slide Secondary Locking Device (SLD) until it mates with the FLM. The stall is now secure from unauthorized entry.
WARNING: Opening bowl flush valve while sanitaries are pressurized will cause loss of cleanliness, friends, and respect.
g. Open toilet drain valve. Verify that water exits the bowl with no “burping.” If burping exists, or water does not drain at all, inform A-Division LPO and proceed to Step 2.
WARNING: Performing bowel movement while having a waterless bowl will lead to “stinkbowling” the occupants of the FCML Head, and will cause your reputation to diminish.
h. Open toilet fill valve until proper level in the bowl is seen. Experience has shown that 3 – 4 inches above the bowl bottom is required.
4. Disrobe
a. Using Inventory Sheet (Table 2), take inventory of all items in port and starboard, forward and aft pockets (including breast pockets), belt, and all items attached to belt.
b. While maintaining positive control of belt buckle, unclasp belt buckle. If belt does not maintain it’s position while unclasped, remove all tools, articles, and TLD from belt, remove belt, replace all items removed back onto belt, clasp belt buckle and hang belt from a convenient location.
NOTE: Visually note that TLD is present throughout this step. If TLD is not present, exit stall and inform LELT/Corpsman.
This, more than almost anything else, helps me explain to others what submarine life is really like -- that guys will take their rare off-duty time to write up a humorous PMS card to their own and their shipmate's enjoyment. Submarining is truly a unique profession.

Off topic, here's an opinion piece in the New York Times by a "former nuclear submarine officer" that advocates using explosives to stop the oil leak in the Gulf. Here's an excerpt:
But control of the well itself should fall to the Navy — it alone has the resources to stop the flow. For starters, the Office of Naval Research controls numerous vehicles like Alvin, the famed submersible used to locate the Titanic. Had such submersibles been deployed earlier, we could have gotten real-time information about the wellhead, instead of waiting for BP to release critical details.
The Navy also commands explosives experts who have vast knowledge of underwater demolitions. And it has some of the world’s finest underwater engineers at Naval Reactors, the secretive program that is responsible for designing nuclear reactors for nuclear submarines.
The last excerpted sentence is where I stopped reading. Sure, there are really good engineers at NR, but I wouldn't by any stretch call them "underwater engineers" -- they're engineers who work on a system that happens to operate underwater. Since the readers here probably know as much about the Navy's capabilities for operating at such extreme depths as any other forum (the Navy's capabilities are "virtually none" for those who were wondering) I figure I'd give you guys a shot at ripping the article apart -- or agreeing with it, if you feel like it.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

President Clinton noted recently that the only viable solution if the relief wells fail is to explode the well.

BP apparently wants to capitalize on the well instead of simply just stopping the leak. If the only mission was to stop the leak then why not blow it and be done with it?

Money, money, money...

6/29/2010 7:07 AM

Anonymous BTDT said...

"...that guys will take their rare off-duty time to write up a humorous PMS card to their own and their shipmate's enjoyment."

Oh, how soon you forget! Stuff like this is best made up while on-watch. To think otherwise is complete ingnorance or bliss.

Lesson to new submariners:

Never, ever waste time off-watch when it can be done on-watch and never, never, never wait up for drills!

6/29/2010 7:36 AM

Anonymous PortTackStart said...

Well, they want to make a profit, sure, but what if we blow up the well and the leak doesn't stop? Now we're in an even worse situation since instead of a pipe with oil coming out of it, it will be an exploded pipe with oil coming out of it.

Former President Clinton has proven he knows his way around women, but why should I care about what he has to say about an underwater oil well? In fact, I'd probably trust an anonymous opinion on this site more than his on the issue because I know he has a political agenda, while there's a chance Mr. Anonymous does not.

Any time someone well known ("celebrity activist") spouts an opinion on any subject, first thing that should be asked is: 'what makes your opinion on this matter better than mine?' If the only answer is that he's a famous musician, or she played a role in a movie once that sort of dealt with this issue, or he used to be president, or she is a comedian, or he has billions of dollars...I pretty much ignore them. Show me some work (preferred) or educational (better than nothing) experience in the subject and I'll give that opinion some weight.

Someone should ask the LT (ret) that wrote those articles we laughed at a while ago what he thinks we should do. I'm sure he'd have a good solution, too.

6/29/2010 7:46 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Lesson to new submariners:

Never, ever waste time off-watch when it can be done on-watch and never, never, never wait up for drills!

New Submariners? Waste off-watch time? Three words: get qualified, nub!

6/29/2010 7:48 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

The LT was a JO on Hartford. He's NOT an "Iraq War Veteran".

He IS a douche bag.

6/29/2010 7:51 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I was speaking to Bill the other day about this. His viable solution was one of blow it up as well. HaHa Good ol Bill. He called me up to go eat some BBQ with Norm. The good General has had some time since Iraq1. Anyway, quack quack.

6/29/2010 7:52 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...


You have a valid point but Clinton does have drilling experience...

So who has more credibility, a BS artist using a teleprompter or someone who has actually tapped a bunch of holes?

6/29/2010 7:52 AM

Anonymous Ross Kline said...

..."the secretive program that is responsible for designing nuclear reactors for nuclear submarines"

While I agree the design details of the nuclear reactors are classified, that hardly makes Naval Reactors "secretive"..

6/29/2010 8:07 AM

Anonymous Jed Christiansen said...

I actually served with Chris Brownfield, who wrote the article.

Yes, he was a LT on the Hartford, which wouldn't make him an "Iraq War Veteran" in my mind. But during his shore tour teaching at Sub School he *was* detailed for a year to Iraq, working in/around Baghdad. So for that I would certainly call him an Iraq War Veteran.

That said, I think the idea of blowing up the well is a little nuts.

6/29/2010 10:38 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I "served" with Brownfield at SubSchool: he was a waste of carbon.

6/29/2010 2:34 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...


6/29/2010 5:45 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

True, that - carbon is a necessary component of alcohol, after all.

6/29/2010 7:46 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Re: the oil well, <a href=">This</a> [] is a pretty interesting similar question. Later in the thread, a guy who works on oil platforms explains why you can't just throw some more ROVs down there at the drop of a hat.

6/29/2010 8:20 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry. Link didn't work. It's worth it to cut/paste, though, if only for the soup can analogy.

6/29/2010 8:22 PM

Blogger Ken in Yoko said...

It's interesting that you happen to post the "Take a Dump Bill" today. The former sailors in my office were discussing the women on submarines thing yesterday and the conversation turned to stowage considerations. I understand that some lockers will have to be retasked for female hygiene products, but how the hell is the COB going to find enough storage for all the extra shit paper that women require! I've got three of the evil creatures at home and they go through TP at an astonishing rate. Maybe it'll be like it was with Sea Store Cigs. They guys with vision will bring extra and sell it to the folks in need! I'm sure the Turd Ranchers will have fun with the extra chunk pump work!

6/29/2010 9:34 PM

Anonymous LT L said...

Came for more Brownfield bashing; left disappointed.


6/30/2010 9:38 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Norfolk Naval Shipyard Commander relieved of command.

6/30/2010 10:55 AM

Anonymous NHSparky said...

Meh--no worse than some of the real MRC's. And I'd love to know where a submarine JO is suddenly an "expert" on underwater demo. Then again, you know how expert breaks down: "ex"--formerly, used to be. "spert"--a drip under pressure.

6/30/2010 12:36 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Sorry Lt. L, I got nothing for you, can I this up for this for some SUBPAC bashing? :)

6/30/2010 7:21 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Apparently the Soviet Union met with a good amount of success using explosives to crush wells. Of course, they were using nuclear explosives...

6/30/2010 7:30 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Check out Brownfield's major at Annapolis. Clearly an expert in engineering, deep ocean salvage and oil field management.

Douche bag.

For the New York Times: -1 for poorly vetting contributors.

7/01/2010 7:27 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

My verification word for submission was "coner"! LMAO.

7/01/2010 7:28 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Went to power school with Brown-town. not exactly the sharpest tool in the shed. But thank God the english department at USNA prepared him to write so clearly and with such fine grammer.

7/01/2010 9:52 AM

Anonymous Trojan Duck said...

I'll Muito Obrigado you to use correct spelling.

It's "grammar"...moron.

And everything in the New York Times is good and perfect. We say so.

~"Mad Jack"

7/01/2010 10:08 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Trojan Duck,

You sure does know ya Englich perty good.

Is grammy yer favite subjeck?

I think dem governmint skools is doing one phine gob at learning kidz to seifer and make wurds with Krayons.

The democraps r the best at teeching us lil peeple factz and such.

I bet any ole democrap in the hause could seifer reel gut.

I am glad my higur learnun is frum govurnment institootons.

They is so smaart, the booger joints has dem nubmers on meels so you just point, say a nubmers and it flies out att u.

7/02/2010 8:27 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Back on topic:

that former- JO who wrote the NYT piece? Clearly a douche bag.

7/28/2010 2:13 PM


Post a Comment

<< Home