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.)

Friday, January 25, 2013

What's New This Week?

In submarine news from this week:

1) Secretary Mabus announced that, as part of the review of the role of women in service, the first women who will serve on Virginia-class SSNs have been identified:
I am pleased the Navy has completed an initiative I announced several months ago to open up one of the few areas not currently available to women, that of service on Virginia Class submarines (SSNs). Three years ago we announced a policy change allowing women to serve in guided-missile attack (SSGNs) and ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) and this is a planned continuation of that effort. Newly commissioned female officers have been selected for assignment to Virginia Class submarines upon successful completion of the Naval Nuclear Powered training pipeline. We expect these officers, along with female Supply Corps Officers, to report to their submarines in FY15. We also plan to include female enlisted Sailors in this process. The Navy has a long history of inclusion and integration and I am proud we have achieved another important milestone during my tenure as Secretary.
Left unsaid is where exactly on the boat they'll be berthing.

2) The DoD announced that Rear Admiral Hilarides, former PEO Submarines, will be getting a bump to VADM to go along with his new assignment as head of NAVSEA.

I note that he had the rare-but-effective "Flag LT/Detailer" Daily Double for his post-JO/post-DH shore tours. I always wondered how exactly one got lucky like that. (Actually, I don't wonder at all; it's fairly obvious.)

3) My old boat Topeka was forced to participate in a PR stunt to make it look like they're happy to be in the yards. Sucks to be them.


Anonymous BadFish said...

I bet there are a lot of 688 guys getting out soon that are BEYOND happy they are on 688's!

1/25/2013 9:44 AM

Blogger itswells said...

I've heard they've got a "work around"for occupying the WR head and such. There are actually 4 ea. 3, uh person WRSRs on VCS, so I guess as long as they do it in multiples of 3's.

1/25/2013 9:48 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Left unsaid is where exactly on the boat they'll be berthing." -BH

Actually, much more has been left unsaid in the case of women officers on SSNs. Exactly what redundant duty will the two women (minimum?) serve onboard a Virginia class so that in the event the medecal evac of one of them is suddenly required, the mission will not be significantly impaired? Was this not also the assignment scenario for the SS_Ns to which women officers have been assigned?

See, the nitty gritty of the Mabus announcement seems to have been conveniently omitted. Oh well, it has nothing to do with the real game being played with U.S. subs.

1/25/2013 11:46 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

What "redundant duties" do male 1120s serve now? What reason (and show your work) do we have to believe the expectations will/should be different for the females?

1/25/2013 11:55 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Originally the two 1120 women going to the T-Hulls were scheduled to be +2 over the normal complement.

That all became very mysterious and not talked about so don’t know how that ended up.

The second wave of gals gets the cool rides. Sucks to be #1.

1/25/2013 12:01 PM

Blogger Vigilis said...

"What 'redundant duties' do male 1120s serve now? What reason (and show your work) do we have to believe the expectations will/should be different for the females? - Anonymous 11:55 AM

Your Answer(s):

"Women have higher rates of migraines, anemia, asthma, gallbladder disease, and urinary tract infections."

"Women use healthcare at a rate 1.5 to 2.5 times higher than men. It can be expected that as the number of women increase on a submarine, the demand for an IDCs time will also increase."

"Women have a higher rate of orthopedic injury than men but this difference can be mitigated to some extent by improved physical fitness. The implication for the medical support onboard the submarine is more difficult to predict. Manpower losses for orthopedic injuries depend more on individuals and their exposures to risk."

"...the increased tendency to seek treatment, the increased incidence of PTSD, the increased rate of suicide attempts and the type of disorders women suffer from suggest that the medical department will be spending more time in the evaluation and treatment of mental health issues ..."

"Navy wide, pregnancy losses are significant. Statistics for women on submarines may be similar to the findings on the small combat vessels. The effect of a strongly motivated, more mature, volunteer population of
females will probably reduce this type of loss."

"The process of transferring an ill or injured patient to a higher level of medical care is also more difficult from the submarine. Submarine MEDEVACS at sea are dangerous for the patient and crew. They also require the submarine to surface, risking detection."

Above excerpts from report #1219 26 NOVEMBER 2001 by Naval Submarine Medical Research Laboratory.

1/25/2013 12:25 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Women use healthcare at a rate 1.5 to 2.5 times higher than men. It can be expected that as the number of women increase on a submarine, the demand for an IDCs time will also increase."

Yeah, because Doc's so busy already.

"Women have higher rates of migraines, anemia, asthma, gallbladder disease, and urinary tract infections."

How much higher? Which populations are being compared? If only there were a way to screen the general population to reduce the risk of medical issues in the desired subset. We could call it a "medical screening" or something.

1/25/2013 12:43 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

In case any of you have the intellectual curiosity to read it, here's a link to the medical study:

As expected, that stupid fucking vaginus cherry picked what she wanted.

1/25/2013 12:57 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Can't wait to see the female IDCs checking aboard. Seeing Doc in a different eye shadow will become a bit more interesting.

"Hmmm, Can you please turn your head and cough for me Sailor?"

1/25/2013 1:06 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Vig's quotes from the report were 100% spot on accurate. If he "cherry picked" as the anonymous, hairy female troglodyte suggested, why not quote ACCURATELY what you consider contradictory? Too lazy?


1/25/2013 1:37 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

As a former Virginia class sailor myself, I would say that female enlisted would probably be berthed in one of the 12 man berthings in FCUL. All enclosed including a head. But from a completely logical standpoint, if they want to serve on SSNs they have to give up pretty much all privacy just like the men have to. It's just a body, jeez. Like most of the men AND women haven't seen a member of the opposite sex in their skivies. Get over yourselves.

The biggest problem I see them needing to overcome is the pregnancy issue. How many of us have heard the issue skimmers have when they deploy? Large numbers of women conveniently getting pregnant. I don't know how much truth there is to the matter, but I know a number of guys who would have done the same if they could. We are supposed to be top of our game when we deploy. If we lose a number of women due to deployment pregnancies, who will fill the hole? Sure, TAD guys from other boats, but then you start losing morale because of a higher personnel usage with certain people always getting a free pass. Could they honestly force women into something like signing a paper that says "no getting knocked up during your sea time?" I'm sure that would go over well. You can't have mixed crew and then send all of the guys on deployment while some of the women stay behind to have babies. I don't want to sound sexist because I am all for equal opportunity, but some serious issues need to be addressed.

Tl;dr the women basically need to become one of the guys for this to work out. I knew some who would, coming up through the nuke pipeline, but probably not enough to do what the Navy wants to do.

1/25/2013 2:36 PM

Blogger Unknown said...

I'm just thinking there will be a WHOLE new meaning to "hot racking."
Oh lighten up for crying out loud. :-)

1/25/2013 4:12 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Another CO canned. HAHAHAHAHA
You ogangers think you're so smart.

1/25/2013 4:27 PM

Blogger Mike Mulligan said...

"Cmdr. Mark Cooper has taken charge of the Pasadena, which journeyed from Pearl Harbor to Maine in 2011 for an 18-month overhaul at the Portsmouth Naval Shipyard, where its sonar, fire control and sensors are being upgraded."

What was it, one too many vacuum fires as the nearly destroyed USS Miami on May 23, 2012 in the same ship yard.

1/25/2013 4:50 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Can tampons go into the sanitary tank?

1/25/2013 4:52 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes but they have a hard time leaving.

1/25/2013 4:55 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I still have the polaroid somewhere of then-CDR Hilarides pinning on my dolphins. Best CO I've ever served under, the Navy couldn't have made a better choice on this one.

1/25/2013 5:21 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ok with so many COs getting canned, doesn't that reflect on those who selected them to command in the first place?

Revamp the pipeline. Leave us nukes back aft and have a different track for the front to the boat. Won't happen but it would be major part of the soluton.

Most of us nukes are technocrats and the vast majority of engineers do not make good "managers". Fact, and applies in civvyland too.

1/25/2013 6:17 PM

Blogger wtfdnucsailor said...

Sometimes it is easier to get "fired" in the shipyard (at least in the old days). If a CO did not respond to the NR monitors comments he was generally not given more than one chance before the ax descended (This was under Rickover). The other "loss of confidence" issue was too much fraternization with the troops at ship's parties, etc. I have no idea why the PASADENA CO was relieved but those are two possibilities.

1/25/2013 7:58 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...


“If we lose a number of women due to deployment pregnancies, who will fill the hole?”

Wasn’t that just taken care of?

1/25/2013 8:15 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

anonymous 0617,

tuck your good idea fairy away for now. a 'coner only' co wouldn't have saved the pasadena co, especially since the skillset required to be successful as an eng is the most vital toward managing a ship's workload in overhaul.

pasadena pulled into pnsy in 2011 for an 18 month overhaul. it's 2013, so yea...they're a bit behind. someone has to take the fall. co retains ultimate responsibility. moving along, nothing to see here.

1/25/2013 9:55 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

There's nothing funnier than hearing a female engineering duty officer make a 1MC from the box, fock it up severely, and not ONE person corrects her or a 1MC correction made.
On one of the left coast GNs, it's a normal thing. You can't correct them.

1/25/2013 10:02 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, look on the bright side, 10:02. At least with your balls gone you can... wear tight pants, or something.

1/26/2013 6:20 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's your fucking job to correct them.

-Former Sub Officer who made wrong 1MCs all the time.

1/26/2013 8:46 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

I've meet a couple of "Flag LT first time, Detailer after DH" types; both were exactly what you would expect.

1/26/2013 10:21 AM

Blogger nukehayes said...

Having served on the Texas, I can tell you that there is a 3 man berthing just outside of the goat locker in FCLL. The problem remains that there is no dedicated head for this berthing. Also, logistically, Doc is gonna have a hell of a time finding enough space for all the extra female stuff.

1/26/2013 10:54 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"-Former Sub Officer who made wrong 1MCs all the time."

We won't believe you were a male Sub Officer, much less that you are not a female unless you identify the Sub, your CO and the years you were assigned. Fair enough, probable impostor?


1/26/2013 12:29 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ahh, Hilarides, the original Buttshark....


1/26/2013 12:53 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Whatever. The military has now officially become nothing but a leftist, PC, wet dream, social experiment. As a result, I will recommend my kids not pursue ever serving in the military and I will make the same recommendation to anyone seeking my opinion.

1/26/2013 10:02 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"It's your fucking job to correct them."
At anon 08:46. I'm retired. I asked the question in the goat locker and I got shrugs. FUCK YOU.
A retired Senior Chief. I'll let them deal with THEIR Navy now and the shyt they allow.
So go buy a blowme sammitch and STFU.

1/27/2013 1:10 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Settle down Danny

1/27/2013 7:35 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...


Point taken, Chief. (That was fucking beautiful).

I'd say that clears up the credentials issue, gentlemen.


From: KnotonMYwatch!

1/27/2013 8:26 AM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Looks like whether or not the female 1120’s are plus complement is still a big secret.

Anyone know?

1/27/2013 12:15 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Point taken, Chief. (That was fucking beautiful).

I'd say that clears up the credentials issue, gentlemen."

Yea, as a retired senior chief he certainly has the credentials to know all about sitting in CPO quarters gossiping like wash-women, not living up to any standards, and being a general waste of space. From his uncouth response, I bet he was one of the fat ones who emerged from his rack once in a blue moon to shit on the first E-4 he saw for his haircut, even if it's within regs, just because he can do that sorta thing and he can go high-five his other fat chief buddies about it later.

Take notes, guys, that's REAL Navy Leadership!

1/27/2013 5:44 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

^^^You are really lost! Allow me to assist. This blog is for qualified submariners. It is painfully obvious from your posts that you are...not.

So why don't you do yourself (and us) a favor and stop embarassing yourself this way.

Try doing something positive - for yourself and others - and see if that doesn't work better for you than what you think you're doing here.

Do not allow the past to steal from your future. Learn from whatever it was, let it go (let it GO...) and step out afresh.

That's the best you'll get from me, the rest is up to you.

Your call.


1/27/2013 11:11 PM

Anonymous Anonymous said...

The reasons behind CDR Molina's firing are not nearly as salacious as many of the readers here want to argue about. CDR Molina was fired because he was responsibile for the poor performance and readiness of his team. It is as true at sea as it is in the shipyard. The poor performance of the PASADENA project is directly attributable to the shipyard and the ship's CO. As continued poor performance was noted over the last year multiple personnel from the PNSY project team were provided direction and feedback in how to improve and when they did not, they were removed from their positions. The same is the case for the CO. Repeated advice from the CSG2 SYR office along with direction in how to prepare the team to be ready for upcoming events was ignored. Problems that the CO encountered in preparing his team were often undiscovered until it was too late to be ready to support key milestones. Critical divisions were grossly undermanned, unqualified, and untrained--not because BUPERS didn't send them, but because the CO agreed to transfer many who arrived with the ship at the onset of the EOH early and the CO/ENG/EDMC made no provisions to figure out how they would be ready for key events when the time came. CDR Molina knew he was responsible to prepare his team. He also knew that he was accountable for their performance. Anyone who has worn the pin knows that they do so with the absolute responsibility for the performance of their team (good and bad). That's why it is unlikely that you will hear from him on this blog. He was in charge and his boss became convinced that under his leadership, the substandard performance was not getting better--it was getting worse. You can't lay the blame on NRR, PNSY, or the SYR--only CDR Molina can be responsible for his team's performance. Best of luck to CDR Cooper. I hope the crew of PASADENA quickly loses their "victim mentality". As soon as they can own their performance they will be able to flesh out why they are falling below standards and put corrections in place to get better. No one who has been there will argue that life doesn't suck in the shipyard and the solution isn't to pass that suck on to someone else. It is our assignment to get the ship back in the best possible condition and in the shortest time. CDR Cooper knows that the weight has now shifted to him--to take charge, assess what's wrong, and build a team that can perform as required and bring that ship of the line back to bear.

Why we are likely on the path to our third CO firing (all from SSNs) in the first month of 2013; it is a similar sad story and all about team performance.....

1/29/2013 2:52 AM

Anonymous radioactive said...

"What was it, one too many vacuum fires as the nearly destroyed USS Miami on May 23, 2012 in the same ship yard."

Apparently you haven't heard that the Miami fire was arson by a yard bird who wanted to have the day off to stop his girlfriend from cheating on him. The guy confessed.

As far as females on subs... I wouldn't encourage my daughters to pursue the job. We had a female shipyard tech rider on Alpha trials and they had to close off three racks to give her her privacy, so six crew members had to hot rack so she could have her "equal opportunity"

Getting prego to skip deployment is a very well established problem. I know for a fact that the Simon Lake was severely short handed on multiple occasions, as female enlisted would get knocked up so they could go home. I personally know guys who had their sucky tender tours extended to cover for them.

2/15/2013 2:17 PM


Post a Comment

<< Home