Absolute rubbish - while it is impossible to know what exactly did sink the Scorpion, there is a very credible theory and it doesn't involve the Russians. Among the torpedoes on board the boat was at least one that had a highly dodgy mechanism for activating the electric motor once it is ejected from the tube. If subject to vibrations the mechanism could activate leading to a hot running torpedo, that is the torpedo motor is running while still in the tube or on a rack in the torpedo room. A hot running torpedo not in the water can lead to an overheated battery which is located next to the warhead. The photographs of the Scorpion show the bow area still relatively intact but the hatches leading to the torpedo rook missing. This suggests an explosion has blown out the hatches allowing water to flood that area. The damage and flooding has caused the boat to go out of control and sink to her destruction. Because the torpedo room was flooded it did not suffer the pressure collapse that affected the rest of the boat. The USN knew of the dodgy torpedoes and had scheduled their replacement once the Scorpion was back in the States. The torpedoes had not gone through the proper testing prior to operational acceptance due to a need to rapidly expand the number of submarines in the fleet. It would appear that the USN is still not going to admit liability for this tragedy.
Offley makes big bucks pushing his theory, but Bruce Rule's evidence-based theory make much more sense. According to Rule and conclusions reached by those investigating the loss of the scorpion, two hydrogen explosions in the battery well immobilized or killed the crew and the sub slipped below crush depth. This theory is based on acoustic evidence as well as charred battery plates found during the 1968 survey and during the survey in the eighties.
The horrible thing was the Navy knew about the battery problem and issued an alert to all subs ...the Scorpion was sailing back to Norfolk to get the new batteries.
I was in the shipyards with the Scorpion .. I was on a destroyer the USS Stormes DD-780. I was a sonarman and I was asked to go over and help the Scorpion with there active sonar .. it was close to ours as they rarely if ever went active with their sonar so it didn't have to be great technology. All I had to do was some minor calibrations. This was 1967 .. the crew didn't say much but I got the general impression that the boat was in the yards because of some hull damage. They kidded that it was because they were playing games with the Russians.
It was not sunk by the Russians. The most likely causes. The submarine was running deep. Too close to crush depth. When it had a critical failure. It could have been struck an undersea pressure wave. Caused by an undersea earthquake. Or maybe it had a small internal fire sufficient to drop the vessel to crush depth. Back in those days. The Navy had different protocols for what was considered safe operational depth. These older submarines were still pushing the limits of submarine technologies. It wasn’t sunk by an enemy attack. There were multiple submarine of similar class that sank at sea. Under similar circumstances that point to crush depth being reached by mistake. Which can happen in a heavy storm with pressure waves changing beneath the surface. Either from earthquake or hurricane. If you’re operating too close to crush depth and something happens to rapidly change the situation. When your not ready for it. Like an onboard fire, equipment failure or changes in pressure due to currents. The odds are very likely those old submarine would sink. Which is why the navy changed operational procedures after they lost multiple submarines in a short period of time. Raising the depth of what was considered safe for regular operations.
I just heard Thresher and many other subs used to go at very slow speeds, just to err on the side of caution whenever close to test depth. Still that was not enough to save USS Thresher.
I think that she was in such terrible disrepair that she could not blow her emergency ballast and she was leaking so bad around the propeller shaft that she had a minor incident that turned into a tragedy. I was a STS3 and I have heard the sonar recordings of the implosions. Several of her crew refused to go on that patrol because of the condition of the boat.
This is absolutely ridiculous. A 2/C Radioman's theory is the basis? lol I had three friends on Scorpion, participated in the search for her, including having COMSUBLANT himself on board when search started. *s/ Retired 24 Year US Navy Submariner - USNA Class of 1965 - Former Enlisted Man*
I doubt the crew of the Scorpion couldn't hear a Soviet Sub. At that time the Soviets had mostly Diesel-Electrics and the Scorpion and other subs like it were much quiter boats
To:Peter Lovett ; I agree with you totally sir ... I read his book a few years ago : A other book about the same time & subject stated something Totally dif ; a ki-24 ( a guess at the chopper designation ) ,off a soviet D D , dropped a homing torpedo,ordered by an admiral as a revenge ACT ! ( ,the SCORPION WRECKAGE SEEMED TO REFLECT NO SUCH THING )
The naval enlisted men and officers of that time are now 72-85 and the accuracy of the comments of enlisted men who served earlier on Scorpion or on similar subs are faded and often were never particularly accurate. There is no doubt the loss of Scorpion in deep international waters after a deployment in which had been intensely harraased by Soviet nuclear Echo and November subs was a serious matter. There is much evidence that the USN knew of the subs loss on 22 May 1968 and chose to launch the main search , 5 days later to obscure and defuse the dangerous issue. Not only was tension with the Soviets and NK too high, revealing how frequently and how the USN communicated with its SSNs and SSBNs posed enormous threats to US security, the USN and the declared policy of nuclear deterrence. That issue of the nature, frequency, and vulnerability of communications with nuclear subs (N.Polmar in his recent books on Thresher , 2004, 2017 Lyon paperback - says nuclear subs normally communicated daily with USN bases but had to rise near the surface with the attenae raised above the surface in 1968) and the 1969 Report of Navy board of Inquiry and E.Offley recent Military Quarterly and Navy Times 2019, Scorpions last secret are fascinating on that communication issue.
It was nosing around some alien underwater base and got clobbered...torpedoes are no use against these aliens. Underwater besides torpedoes what more weapons does a sub have.
@@krashd Bingo. But I think USN does not really know. Sometimes that's the way it goes. A tragedy though one way or the other. But jaco5187 should explore the definition of "prove".
EVENTUALLY TRUTH WILL SURFACE , YOU CANNOT STOP THE TRUTH BECAUSE ONLY THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE 🇺🇸🇺🇸 HONOR THE DEAD AS HEROES , AS PATRIOTS , AS DOING THEIR DUTY AS OTHERS COWARDLY FAILED TO DO THEIRS ,, AS CHESTY PULLER ONCE SAID , WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR , YOU CANT LIVE FOREVER ❗️ FLIGHT 92 , LET'S ROLL ❗️ SOUND THE SHIP' S WHISTLE OF DANGER , SIX BLASTS ❗️❗️❗️ GQ , GQ , THIS IS NO DRILL , BATTLE STATIONS , MAN YOUR BATTLE STATIONS ❗️❗️ BE PREPARE ❗️ THIS IS FOR REAL ❗️
Absolute rubbish - while it is impossible to know what exactly did sink the Scorpion, there is a very credible theory and it doesn't involve the Russians. Among the torpedoes on board the boat was at least one that had a highly dodgy mechanism for activating the electric motor once it is ejected from the tube. If subject to vibrations the mechanism could activate leading to a hot running torpedo, that is the torpedo motor is running while still in the tube or on a rack in the torpedo room. A hot running torpedo not in the water can lead to an overheated battery which is located next to the warhead.
The photographs of the Scorpion show the bow area still relatively intact but the hatches leading to the torpedo rook missing. This suggests an explosion has blown out the hatches allowing water to flood that area. The damage and flooding has caused the boat to go out of control and sink to her destruction. Because the torpedo room was flooded it did not suffer the pressure collapse that affected the rest of the boat.
The USN knew of the dodgy torpedoes and had scheduled their replacement once the Scorpion was back in the States. The torpedoes had not gone through the proper testing prior to operational acceptance due to a need to rapidly expand the number of submarines in the fleet. It would appear that the USN is still not going to admit liability for this tragedy.
Offley makes big bucks pushing his theory, but Bruce Rule's evidence-based theory make much more sense. According to Rule and conclusions reached by those investigating the loss of the scorpion, two hydrogen explosions in the battery well immobilized or killed the crew and the sub slipped below crush depth. This theory is based on acoustic evidence as well as charred battery plates found during the 1968 survey and during the survey in the eighties.
The horrible thing was the Navy knew about the battery problem and issued an alert to all subs ...the Scorpion was sailing back to Norfolk to get the new batteries.
Ive also heard theories about fault MK-17 torpedoes imploding
Yeah I remember this when I was a kid, everyone was saddened by the loss.
I was in the shipyards with the Scorpion .. I was on a destroyer the USS Stormes DD-780. I was a sonarman and I was asked to go over and help the Scorpion with there active sonar .. it was close to ours as they rarely if ever went active with their sonar so it didn't have to be great technology. All I had to do was some minor calibrations. This was 1967 .. the crew didn't say much but I got the general impression that the boat was in the yards because of some hull damage. They kidded that it was because they were playing games with the Russians.
It caused a ripple effect that would be spoken about for many years…
It was not sunk by the Russians. The most likely causes. The submarine was running deep. Too close to crush depth. When it had a critical failure. It could have been struck an undersea pressure wave. Caused by an undersea earthquake. Or maybe it had a small internal fire sufficient to drop the vessel to crush depth.
Back in those days. The Navy had different protocols for what was considered safe operational depth. These older submarines were still pushing the limits of submarine technologies.
It wasn’t sunk by an enemy attack. There were multiple submarine of similar class that sank at sea. Under similar circumstances that point to crush depth being reached by mistake.
Which can happen in a heavy storm with pressure waves changing beneath the surface. Either from earthquake or hurricane. If you’re operating too close to crush depth and something happens to rapidly change the situation. When your not ready for it. Like an onboard fire, equipment failure or changes in pressure due to currents. The odds are very likely those old submarine would sink.
Which is why the navy changed operational procedures after they lost multiple submarines in a short period of time. Raising the depth of what was considered safe for regular operations.
I just heard Thresher and many other subs used to go at very slow speeds, just to err on the side of caution whenever close to test depth. Still that was not enough to save USS Thresher.
I think that she was in such terrible disrepair that she could not blow her emergency ballast and she was leaking so bad around the propeller shaft that she had a minor incident that turned into a tragedy. I was a STS3 and I have heard the sonar recordings of the implosions. Several of her crew refused to go on that patrol because of the condition of the boat.
This is absolutely ridiculous. A 2/C Radioman's theory is the basis? lol
I had three friends on Scorpion, participated in the search for her, including having COMSUBLANT himself on board when search started.
*s/ Retired 24 Year US Navy Submariner - USNA Class of 1965 - Former Enlisted Man*
I guess you just had to be there to know.
I just found out about this
I doubt the crew of the Scorpion couldn't hear a Soviet Sub. At that time the Soviets had mostly Diesel-Electrics and the Scorpion and other subs like it were much quiter boats
It was 2 soviet war ship off the canary island and a nuclear sub dont know exactly if it was powered on jus had nukes
A diesel is a quieter sub than any nuke when on batteries.
@@krashd agreed but we talking 5 decade tec plus they were detected and sent to investigate and scorpion was never heard from
To:Peter Lovett ; I agree with you totally sir ... I read his book a few years ago : A other book about the same time & subject stated something Totally dif ; a ki-24 ( a guess at the chopper designation ) ,off a soviet D D , dropped a homing torpedo,ordered by an admiral as a revenge ACT ! ( ,the SCORPION WRECKAGE SEEMED TO REFLECT NO SUCH THING )
The naval enlisted men and officers of that time are now 72-85 and the accuracy of the comments of enlisted men who served earlier on Scorpion or on similar subs are faded and often were never particularly accurate. There is no doubt the loss of Scorpion in deep international waters after a deployment in which had been intensely harraased by Soviet nuclear Echo and November subs was a serious matter. There is much evidence that the USN knew of the subs loss on 22 May 1968 and chose to launch the main search , 5 days later to obscure and defuse the dangerous issue. Not only was tension with the Soviets and NK too high, revealing how frequently and how the USN communicated with its SSNs and SSBNs posed enormous threats to US security, the USN and the declared policy of nuclear deterrence. That issue of the nature, frequency, and vulnerability of communications with nuclear subs (N.Polmar in his recent books on Thresher , 2004, 2017 Lyon paperback - says nuclear subs normally communicated daily with USN bases but had to rise near the surface with the attenae raised above the surface in 1968) and the 1969 Report of Navy board of Inquiry and E.Offley recent Military Quarterly and Navy Times 2019, Scorpions last secret are fascinating on that communication issue.
If it was not Jimmy buffet &the bettencourts keywet fl
It sank.
It was nosing around some alien underwater base and got clobbered...torpedoes are no use against
these aliens. Underwater besides torpedoes what more weapons does a sub have.
Sank your USS scorpian& nuclear tbrashet 1968 tx
attack alien!!!
3 things killed the scorpion 1) US Government 2) US military contractors 3) US Navy higher ups lowering the maintenance.
Wrong. Russian sunk it
Blame me please thank you all: in advance: tx
An American naval warship with a flaw? Not possible! Every US warship is perfect! It had to be the Russians! lol
The fact that the Navy has never revealed what happened proves 100% the Soviets were involved.
Or it proves the USN was culpable and they don't want to pay compensation.
@@krashd Bingo. But I think USN does not really know. Sometimes that's the way it goes. A tragedy though one way or the other. But jaco5187 should explore the definition of "prove".
The Navy will not take responsibility for the subs loss. Lawsuits will 'Flood' the Pentagon and stir up bad relations with Russia
EVENTUALLY TRUTH WILL SURFACE , YOU CANNOT STOP THE TRUTH BECAUSE ONLY THE TRUTH WILL SET YOU FREE 🇺🇸🇺🇸 HONOR THE DEAD AS HEROES , AS PATRIOTS , AS DOING THEIR DUTY AS OTHERS COWARDLY FAILED TO DO THEIRS ,, AS CHESTY PULLER ONCE SAID , WHAT ARE YOU WAITING FOR , YOU CANT LIVE FOREVER ❗️ FLIGHT 92 , LET'S ROLL ❗️ SOUND THE SHIP' S WHISTLE OF DANGER , SIX BLASTS ❗️❗️❗️ GQ , GQ , THIS IS NO DRILL , BATTLE STATIONS , MAN YOUR BATTLE STATIONS ❗️❗️ BE PREPARE ❗️ THIS IS FOR REAL ❗️