My uncle JOHN PHILIPP STURRGILL perished aboard this sub. All these years later, I'm still baffled on how it was handled. No one should be informed over a radio. My father was fighting in Vietnam when he heard of his brother's fate. I pray for all those affected...
We’re all grateful for your Father’s service and, of course your Uncle’s last full measure of devotion to a country that had so little respect for them at that time.
The veteran submariner is a sailor not a soldier. From the record of 55% sinking , we still have to hope that those sailors In eternal patrol were proud to be submariners to the end . Because of their earned in blood ,the elite submarine force Is much better now .We will never forget the loss of the USS SCORPION OR THE USS THRESHER . AMEN .
@@ganndeber1621No it's not. It means that nuclear subs were still a new type of vessel, and the crew aboard paid the ultimate price for us to learn and understand more about them. It's not "gibberish", it's about honor, pride, family, and country. The Navy was still hard-core back then, those guys deserve more respect than your comment affords them, in my opinion.
Within the first 15 seconds...say it with me, Sailors, not Soldiers. I'm a Submarine Veteran, please take 5 seconds of research to learn that the Navy has Sailors, not Soldiers
I was a aircrewman on a Patrol Squadron 24, P-3B (Orion), and we were the first aircraft launched out of the Azores to look for the Scorpion. We went to an area 450 miles SW of the Azores which later was the area the sub wreckage was found. Up until that point the squadron had been flying observation operations on a Soviet Echo II SSGN submarine which was conducting operations with two Soviet Oceanographic research ships, the Baikal and the Balklash and a Soviet warship. I have photos of all these ships and submarine. There was no damage noted on any of these Soviet ships and sub and the Echo II just departed the area but the two research ships stayed in the area. I can’t remember when the warship departed.
I’m so sorry for your loss. My dad was on the sister sub, Skipjack. His best friend had been transferred from the Skipjack to the Scorpion and he was aboard when it was lost.
I am a retired submariner, and there is a lot of general misinformation in this video. We were extensively briefed on the loss of the Scorpion. It was rushed through it's shipyard availability and a critical recall on the batteries that powered the torpedo's guidance system was not completed, but deferred to after the deployment. We were told that the most likely cause was one of the defective batteries shorted out, causing a fire in one of the torpedoes in the torpedo tubes. We were told that one of two things happened: the torpedo's warhead detonated in the tube or the boat ejected the torpedo and it almost immediately detonated before the boat could get away from it. The most likely scenario we were presented with was once the torpedo caught fire, the heat caused it to get stuck in the tube when they attempted to eject it. It then detonated in the tube.
That was a plausible cover story. It was confirmed that a traitor gave the Soviets info that led to the Scorpions sinking. It was not a torpedo malfunction.
@@steveunderwood6576 Although there was some people who turned traitor and sold top secret info to the Soviets, I'm pretty sure that even if the Soviets knew exactly where the Scorpion was,and one of their subs was following it I don't think they would have torpedoed and sunk one of our subs,to do that would have required approval front higher Headquarters, probably the Kremlin itself, I don't think that would have happened because the Soviets weren't stupid, they knew that intentionally sinking one of our subs could quickly turn into a global thermonuclear war,and I'm sure they didn't want that anymore than we did.
I went to a parochial school in Norfolk I remember when this happened. I was 8 years old- too young to realize a great many of my classmates had fathers on that boat. Thank you for the info!!
my boat, the USS Blenny (SS324) was operating with the Scorpion in the Med, we almost had one of our radiomen transfer to her, she left the Med just before we did, she never made it back to NL
The leading theory these days is that Scorpion was lost as a result of a hydrogen explosion in the battery well. The hydrogen build-up is thought to have occurred when Scorpion set condition 'baker' (close all watertight doors and vents) as she was going to periscope depth while charging the ship's batteries. Battery charging produces large amount of pure hydrogen and when it reaches about 8% hydrogen mix with oxygen it becomes explosively unstable. Typically the battery wells are vented, but because condition 'baker' had been set, the mix built up until it exploded. This is consistent with two small explosions aboard the submarine, a half-second apart, that were picked up by hydrophones. It is also consistent with the 1968 inquiry into the loss of the Scorpion which determined that she appeared to be in the process of coming to periscope depth when an undetermined fatal explosion occurred. An analysis of the ship's battery cells in 2010 noted "the general battery damage is violent. The high velocity intrusion of pieces of the flash arrestor into both inside and outside surfaces of the retrieved plastisol cover attest to violence in the battery well…The battery probably exploded at some time before flooding of the battery well occurred….”
Unlikely for a number of reasons. First, she had a small battery, and the internal space could’ve easily contained the blast. USS Cochino was a diesel/electric submarine, with 5 or 6 times the battery capacity, and she survived 4 or 5 battery explosions before sinking.
@@jerrylagesse9046 it’s suggested that she had at least one of a batch of suspect torpedoes onboard that might have been prone to unplanned partial activation. This would generate a lot of heat and an explosion that may have caused a flash burn of the warhead. It’s very conceivable that the shout of hot torpedo triggered an about turn as for a hot running torpedo. The low order detonation would likely blow out the escape or loading hatches explaining the lack of implosion in the bow. This over pressure has the possibility of partially deploying the periscope. This all comes from Blind Mans Bluff and so is only one source. Couple this with the routine of checking all systems, including torpedoes, on the return journey to home port. Such activities might’ve triggered the battery issue.
The Sailor who wouldn't get back on the Sub before it's last journey did so because he was terrified it would sink because of the poor condition of the Sub. He refused to get back on for fear of his life. That says a lot about the sea worthiness of this sub and other sailors complained too.
What do submarines really do?? They go out on patrol and chase other countries submarines. It's basically a cat and mouse game. Not a single submarine has fired a live missile on a target since 1982 when the British fired on that Argentina submarine
The reason there was a Soviet submarine fleeing the area at high speed was likely because the USS Scorpion was secretly tailing and surveying the activities of Soviet Subs and surface fleet you mentioned. The wreck didn’t really show any signs of being attacked and nor did the sonar signatures detected from the SOSUS underwater surveillance network indicate such an event. You also failed to mention the theory that a malfunctioning torpedo could have been the culprit, having dangerous and volatile silver-zinc batteries and could have possibly been launched as is protocol for a dangerous and malfunctioning “hot” torpedo and, after not finding a target, homed in on the Scorpion, causing it’s destruction. However, the most plausible explanation was insufficient and faulty maintenance procedures, as was mention that the boat failed to pass the “SUB SAFE” requirements and was rushed back into service after hasty repairs and maintenance. It was then thusly restricted from diving any further down than a little over 100 feet due of this reason. Also, Submariners are referred to as Sailors, not “Soldiers” or “Troops.”
A very sad ending for a good crew. They will never be forgotten by their families, as well as wreck-less actions by unqualified senior officers who didn’t do their jobs properly. R.I.P to the brave men of the USS Scorpion.
I served with the Commander in charge of finding the Scorpion...On the boat I served on he gave us a detail briefing...I'm a 20+ yr Veteran Bubble head... I also dated a girl who's father was a first class QM on the Thresher...When it was lost...The only reason her father survived he was driving to PNSY from New London the day the boat was going on sea trials and he miss movement because he had a flat tire on the way to PNSY...She told me her father was grateful God save him but he has deep regrets losing his shipmates ... He was heartbroken depressed the rest of his life...She told me he was never the same after...
Whatever happened to that sub happened long before she landed on the bottom of the ocean. That boat did not implode like the thresher. Whatever happened was way above crush depth. The sub rests on the bottom, in 11 thousand feet of water and other than a few covers blown off. It looks like it's perfectly in tact
The boat DID implode. The entire engineering spaces were shoved forward into forward end of the boat. The implosion was recorded on SOSUS some minutes after two other explosions were detected. On that class of boat the pressure hull is not a smooth cylindrical shape. It necks down markedly just aft of the Reactor Compartment then steps up in diameter for the rest of the boat's length. Parts of the battery were recovered indicting a battery explosion. It is postulated that a battery hydrogen explosion occurred. Google Bruce Rule + Scorpion for a more technical discussion of the loss of the Scorpion.
I was scheduled to be assigned to the Scorpion, but God intervened and I ended up somewhere else. The Skipjack Class was not well maintained by the government and they attempted to run the subs without the required maintenance and the sinking of the Scorpion was the result. It's a gross disrespect they showed to some of the best and most qualified people in the Navy. RIP
My dad served on the Skipjack in the 60s. His best friend was transferred from the Skipjack to the Scorpion and was on board when it was lost. I only remember my dad’s friend by the name of Sidemeat. I’m not sure if I ever heard his given name.
As a young 9 yr old kid. Arriving w: Mom ta pik up Dad from NorVa . Naval ShipYard. I saw this sub tied to dock. I would become a sailor 10. Yrs later. RIP. Brave warriors of the seas.
I agree with you 💯 percent. The Soviets had nothing to do with it. A hot running torpedo is what I believe happened. It probably blew up inside the submarine
I was serving on-board USS Triton ssn 586 when this tragedy occurrd. We mourned the loss very much and discussed the pros and cons of the reports that came out without any positive answers. Maybe there never will be.
My pop was assigned to that sub. He didn’t like nuclear boats (diesel was in his blood) and he traded orders with a friend. Dad went to Vietnam and his friend went to the Scorpion. Dad came home, his buddy did not… It bothered my dad his whole life.
They knew ,what happened they heard her implode just like thresher did. Later I heard the Natulis was in this condition in 1980 guys were trying to get off . Because it almost did not come up a few times.
The Scorpion did not implode like the Thresher did. The Scorpion is largely intact on the bottom. And about the Nautilus. By 1980, that submarine was over 25 years old. It was a dinosaur long before it was retired.
What a bunch of total 'horse hockey!' Can't keep Scorpion and Skipjack straight and absolutely nothing in this video is either accurate or supported by any factual evidence. It is really a shame that someone thought this was a good idea - just goes to show that anyone can put together anything they'd like and put it out for public consumption. Read 'Silent Steel' for a much more accurate explanation of the loss of USS Scorpion.
Those subs are built either at Electric Boat in Groton, Connecticut, or at what is now Huntington-Ingalls in Newport News, Virginia. Naval Station Norfolk (NOB) does not do repairs, I grew up in Norfolk. The repairs and overhaul to the USS Scorpion were done in Charleston, South Carolina.
When I got my orders after finishing sub school, I was assigned to USS Spadefish SSN 668. I didn’t know it, but the boat was in Newport News Shipyard(what it was called back then) for an overhaul.
I am not clear from video what "fatal error" caused the sub to be sunk, whatever the actual cause. Was the error the mission itself? Any military mission has risk, how what made it an error? If it is not the mission and without any proof how the sub was sunk, how can someone say we could avoid the error? Did they find defect in the torpedo battery, or H2 leak or something.
There was a bunch of strange information connected to the Scorpion, both unclassified up to Gods Eyes only stuff. Worked with a Navy Spook who had gotten off of her at Rota Spain, and he had a very interesting story of the Med Deployment and the rather short deployment. Normally vessels deploy for 6 months, so why 3 months, I really hope that his story was just that, a mess deck story, Tom Clancy would not be able to write this guy's story.
The sailor you are referring to was my father. The other man was an ET I believe who's wife had just has a miscarriage and drove him nuts. When did you have this conversation?
Was from a Spook who was onboard, and got off in Rota. At the time officially we were never onboard, often our orders were written to be vague, "US, underway unit", in the official service records. But the dates matched his story. This is not that unusual for a Spook. @@steveunderwood6576
The guy was a Spook, was stationed with him in the early 70's, often we rode with some, shall I say vague orders, "US Naval Vessel", and he had such orders in his record that matched the dates. Would rather not say more, due to potential issues. Yes she had some mechanical issues, but had a good crew, but the official story leaves much to be questioned. @@steveunderwood6576
My step grandfather served in the Navy and was finishing up his career around 1968. He always told me that he believed USS Scorpion fired a torpedo that ran the circle and blew themselves up. This was the opinion of Senior Chief Voyle Francis Miller. No matter how it happened, it was a terrible loss.
@voylerutledge5017 Why don't you listen to what's being said. They didn't fire any torpedoes. The state of maintenance was woeful and she had a depth restriction of 500 feet. You should focus on that. The torpedo story is a myth
@@Highendaudio1 why don't you listen to what I wrote and save your attitude for where it is warranted? As I wrote above, this was my grandfather's opinion.
@voylerutledge5017 I dont really care as a submariner. We have respect for people who perish at sea doing their duty. The loss of this submarine, plus USS Thresher, had a significant effect on our submarine service. The Sub Safe programme was improved, etc. In the late 70s, I read the first of many reports made available to us because it was engineering issues. Scorpion had a depth restriction due to build and maintenance costs. They were transiting home, so why would they be firing a torpedo. Absolute nonsense, and still, you go on and on about what someone said years ago. Yeah, I was in the Navy, and I know how gossip, exaggeration and conspiracy theories go. Sadly, you have bitten into one, and how many years on, you are still chewing on a dud. Have a good day
@Highendaudio1 , dude, this was the opinion of NY grandfather, a WW2 submariner. I am not chewing on anything when I am telling you what a career bubble head's opinion was. My grandfather was rarely wrong about anything, this is why I shared his opinion, which you somehow take as mine. Stop being a fool and read more carefully.
Okay, I know it’s somewhat knit-picky, ( 1:51 ), but you refer to “Petty Officer” Dan Rogers while depicting two Commissioned naval officers discussing something on a wall map. Then several seconds later you say “Officer Rogers” yada yada yada…. Well, just for the record, a petty officer in the USN is never ever referred to as “Officer” So and So. If you’re going to use the persons rank in speaking of or to them you’d always precede their last name with “Petty Officer” or Petty Officer 2nd Class Jones, or…, by their rating such as Gunners Mate Smith or Gunners Mate 3rd Class Smith. Only a commissioned officer can be addressed as “Officer” Jones or Commander Jones, etc.
The fact that they let the families turn up thinking it was due to arrive would help them cover it up by playing dumb just goes to show what these people are like. Whatever they knew and how soon they knew means little when they pull a stunt like that. But the knowledge of the subs condition is something to be held on.
You need to check your images....SSN 21 is the Seawolf but not the Seawolf from Scorpions time. They are different boats. Also if you want to show a Rear Admiral make sure the man isn;t wearing the uniform on a Commander. Helps make your story more believable
The navy knew the scorpion was already lost when they had the families waiting at the dock that was just a disgusting thing they did. And in most circles is believed that the scorpion was sunk by either a Soviet helicopter dropping a torpedo or there was also rumors that the crew reported they were being followed by a Soviet sub and couldn't lose them and that sub is the one that wants the torpedo because there's only one place on the sub that was damaged and it was obvious it was a torpedo.
The little I’ve read about it, the loss of this boat was a “Cold War Mystery” as you described, in a tit-for-tat or retaliatory action by the Soviets, in response to something the US did. See *All Hands Down: The True Story of the Soviet Attack on the 'USS Scorpion'*. Kenneth Sewell, Jerome Preisler, FWIW.
Finally someone else that knows what really happened to my brother. He was the youngest sailor on the scorpion. Michael Edward Dunn.My mother and his fiance waited in that horrible weather at the pier while the navy knew she was already gone.and like you said look at the wreckage it's obvious what it was. And now 2 navy men who listen to the audio from sosus have stated on record to hearing a Soviet sub leaving area and a Russian commander has admitted to Russia sinking scorpion. Thank you bad monkey2222 I think your a pretty good monkey.
I agree with you 💯 percent. The Soviets had nothing to do with the loss of Scorpion. They were trying to eject a hot running torpedo. It probably blew up inside the submarine as they were making the 180° turn to get rid of it. I have always believed that's what happened
And why didn't the government just tell the people that a faulty torpedo sank the scorpion??? Mistakes do happen. Maybe it was because of the Thresher loss 5 years earlier??
If, what I have heard and read was correct: --test depth for a Skipjack-class submarine was 700 feet; --during her final mission, the Scorpion (which had been given the nickname "USS Scrap Iron" by her crew) was restricted from going below 150 feet --analysis of the SOSUS data shows the Scorpion made a 180 degree turn, and was heading AWAY from Norfolk when she went down --making a 180 degree turn was supposed to disarm a hot-running torpedo
Yes that's the real story of what happened. But they actually expelled the torpedoe since once the motor stops running it explodes. When the torpedoe left the tube it started looking for a target and right next to it was a big fat target. Unfortunately the sub with all it's mechanical problems wasn't able to dive below 150 feet or outrun it
@@jonyjoe8464 From what I gather, they weren't able to expel the torpedo. From what I've seen and heard, the Scorpion's hull didn't appear to have any damage that resembled being hit with a torpedo.
@moosecat that is utter nonsense. Yes there was a depth restriction due to machinery and maintance issues that's not in question. Sosus data and 180 degree turns are simply not true. So that you are aware, submarines don't operate in straight lines for too long and 180-course alteration means absolutely zero You should look where she sank and then where Norfolk Virginia is and see the distance and realise that any course alteration means zero
I remember when i was a kid my grandfather who was chief of the boat at the time for the uss seawolf talking about the scorpion with my dad BM1. Too young to remember the details but specifically remember him saying the uss seawolf was supposed to be on that deployment and talked about how bad it made the navy look having the famlies on the pier waiting. Living in va beach the scorpion was widely discussed and even been to the pier she was to tie up to at NOB.
Within the first 20 seconds I realized that the narrator probably doesn't have his facts straight. With a scorpion Vanishing in 1968, he then states that we are finally finding out more details some 60 years later . Somebody definitely cannot perform math correctly.
Only thing to say is Submariners have to be some of the most courageous men on the planet. Something my tiny brain cannot grasp. I met a submariner up in I think Bayonne N J. He had balls bigger than all outdoors.
Interesting story. I am not in any way connect with Submarines, just a person, interested in historical tragedies. One thing I didn't know that the families were oblivious of the Sub as missing, and were happily awaiting their arrival! What a cruel joke!
Vice Admiral schade was a submarine first officer in WWII, he was ordered by his captain, Howard Gilmore to dive the boat while gilmore lay on the bridge of the conning tower severely wounded and unable to move. The man was no stranger to hard decisions.
We were sent on dungaree liberty to bring all available crew back to our ship (DLG32) from the beach so we could immediately deploy to find the SCORPION.
B.S. A clip they use was From A Movie. Not a documentary movie. An Entertainment Movie!!! How dare they try to pass this p.o.s. and dribble off as real research. It Beatle disrespects the men that died on this submarine!!!
Forgot to mention being hit by their own “hot running” torpedo that was ejected to prevent one catastrophe only to have it circle back onto their stern. Which explains why the shaft was ejected, the entire conical section of the stern had a telescoping inward implosion, and the bow/torpedo room was intact.
Not hot running, but hot as it had a defective battery. The sub did a high speed 180 degree turn before it sank as if it had a hot running torpedo on board to shut it down as torpedoes were designed at that time to shut down if they reversed course but it was just "hot" and not running. The heat of the battery was sufficient to cook off the warhead in a low order explosion to blow the torpedo room hatch open and flood the sub. Source - Book "[Blind man's bluff](en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_Man%27s_Bluff:_The_Untold_Story_of_American_Submarine_Espionage)." The navy at the time had been trying to get a second supplier of torpedo batteries as a single source can be a problem with supply. The second companies batteries were eventually all removed from service for being below par.
Not sure how to say this. Make no mistake. US Navy knows and teaches commanding officers and those with proper security clearances, and with a need to know, what actually happened to Thresher and Scorpion. This piece is convoluted and shows clips and shots of multiple US submarine classes. It is insulting and disrespectful to promote any idea that a coverup took place. Surveillance of the Scorpion wreck and acoustic data made public support the torpedo casualty “speculations.” The creator of this “documentary” should fact check the transcript and re-edit the clips and footage to eliminate non-Skipjack class boats. SSN-21 is the new Seawolf. The 1st Seawolf was the 2nd nuclear submarine in the US Navy. ~ A Cold War Submarine Veteran
This is a story telling that has far to many incorrect references to Submariners. Plus it is simply a rehash of what most of us already knew. CPO/SS 23 YEARS IN THE BOATS.
Getting real tired of the “it’s classified” thing. Govt works for us, we don’t work for them. I pay you, you don’t pay me. Full transparency across the board is what accountability is about.
Around 11:25, there is old footage of military men seated around a table, apparently for a presser. Curiously, I recently saw another UA-cam video framing that same footage as that of a Soviet meeting of military men. Note the small tabletop model of an aircraft carrier! Ah, the internet, where random or misidentified footage may be copied or swapped around to make sloppy "documentaries". It seems this video slapped the wrong footage in. Oh, i hadnt heard -- til this video -- that the Scorpion was attacked by the Soviets. Rather, i thought the crappy-batteries account was firm. Did this channel just throw this sexier idea in? Why do internet "documentaries" just create more noise?
in 1972 a US nuclear Submarine struck a German Cargo Ship MV "Hagen" on the east coast . The big fin on the conetower of that submarine was torn off and got stuck in our hull. Water entered cargo Hold NO 2 quickly. Anyway, later during that investigation the US Navy admitted they had done a "hidden attack" exercise and accetepted guilt for that cunning and outrages maneuver. We spend 4 weeks in a Dock in Baltinore for repair.
Soldiers raised submarines, and can dive, my children missed college, and became drugs dealers, and prostitutes, fy, soldiers can't raise submarines, fy about soldiers and sailors.
There was a recent fire and loss , separate incidents , on ships and submarines , yet around 2018-19 the loss of a Russian sub and an American fireing was broadcast. There was then a black out if you started looking into it , yet rumours were based around some russian communications last heard aboard the sub. It was " torpedoes (or fish) in the water" with the very last words "There shouldn't be that many of them" before the sub went dark. I am not in the habit of looking at things this way yet I started to believe all this was being caused between the South American Mexican gov and the sail of two to four submarines sold by France. France had twenty four mini subs and sold two to Mexico and two were unaccounted for while 19 were being refit to nuclier engines or on manoeuvres which left one unspoken of. It started to surprise me numbers were going wide while engine refits were going on. Also with this swap theory's of underwater pipelines going wrong and oil spills were happening I thought again perhaps these mini subs were piggy backing pipelines causing one to fatally break up on the bottom , another sub to be fired upon while the Canadian coast line had its spill. So these short range subs with a refit to me were taking crude and filtering to useable fuel while using the nuke engines for main drag and so on. There is a constant war at sea we are largely not told of with borders crossed all the time. But for a few interesting sub story's take a look at the mini subs of France and how these short range highly manouverable subs may have been used in a different way . The Russians then follow one to cross a line while these subs go on far longer rides attempting refueling from ready sources that with filtering and prep change crude to useable fuel. Using the nuke engines for tests non nuke subs would have the refinery refit that hopping the lines would be able the long missions and not be so scrutinised by nuke commissions and so go out of sight a little Easter.
I find this video disturbing that it would base it conclusions on the testimony of a couple of radio operators. Being a former member of the USN, I know that a minor participant would not have been privy to any substantial information regardng the lost of top secret asset. It is alos alarming that the narrator would imply that the Navy purposely hide the loss of teh sub from familiy members. In fact, there is still no clear answers as to what caused the loss of the sub and at the time, the only fatc that was know for sure, was that it had missed it's scheduled check ins. They had no proof that the sub had sunk and telling that to the families before it had been confirm would have been inappropriate. Videos like this should be band.
My uncle JOHN PHILIPP STURRGILL perished aboard this sub. All these years later, I'm still baffled on how it was handled. No one should be informed over a radio. My father was fighting in Vietnam when he heard of his brother's fate.
I pray for all those affected...
My condolences to your family.
Sorry for your loss
Horrible, sorry for your loss. Brave men, respect!
We’re all grateful for your Father’s service and, of course your Uncle’s last full measure of devotion to a country that had so little respect for them at that time.
Russia sank her. Pentagon fabricates a story to dispel the truth. Faulty maintenance, my ass-!
The veteran submariner is a sailor not a soldier. From the record of 55% sinking , we still have to hope that those sailors
In eternal patrol were proud to be submariners to the end . Because of their
earned in blood ,the elite submarine force
Is much better now .We will never forget the loss of the USS SCORPION OR THE
USS THRESHER . AMEN .
Very well stated.
Maybe that’s why it disappeared, it had solders instead of sailors.
@@CharlesWrightOrville Its gibberish
@@ganndeber1621No it's not. It means that nuclear subs were still a new type of vessel, and the crew aboard paid the ultimate price for us to learn and understand more about them.
It's not "gibberish", it's about honor, pride, family, and country.
The Navy was still hard-core back then, those guys deserve more respect than your comment affords them, in my opinion.
They are in fact addressed as Seaman and Classed as such. Sailors is only slang.
Within the first 15 seconds...say it with me, Sailors, not Soldiers. I'm a Submarine Veteran, please take 5 seconds of research to learn that the Navy has Sailors, not Soldiers
He goes on to call them troops as well
I was a tin can surface navy sailor, and that lack of ability to use proper terminology really grated on me, too.
Yeah I am an AF vet and him calling them soldiers irked me as well.
You are correct Naval security and assault goes to the Marines
Story teller with wrong terminology , I just watch this subject on another channel and “don’t recommend “ this one.
I was a aircrewman on a Patrol Squadron 24, P-3B (Orion), and we were the first aircraft launched out of the Azores to look for the Scorpion. We went to an area 450 miles SW of the Azores which later was the area the sub wreckage was found. Up until that point the squadron had been flying observation operations on a Soviet Echo II SSGN submarine which was conducting operations with two Soviet Oceanographic research ships, the Baikal and the Balklash and a Soviet warship. I have photos of all these ships and submarine. There was no damage noted on any of these Soviet ships and sub and the Echo II just departed the area but the two research ships stayed in the area. I can’t remember when the warship departed.
I agree with you 💯 percent. The Soviets did not sink the scorpion. A hot running torpedo did them in
Those submariners are on eternal patrol. God Bless
My late brother was friends with several radiomen on the Scorpion. He took it real hard how they died.
Too many inaccuracies in this story. My dad was aboard when she was lost. Do more research if you’re interested in this story.
it is pointless to do any research. The truth has been swept clean and not many are still alive to tell the truth.
The thumbnail says “what happended”. Happended? Lmao.
I’m so sorry for your loss. My dad was on the sister sub, Skipjack. His best friend had been transferred from the Skipjack to the Scorpion and he was aboard when it was lost.
So you belive the Russians? A country that EVERY single thing they ever say is a lie?
What do you expect from someone who uses AI to narrate their videos?
I am a retired submariner, and there is a lot of general misinformation in this video. We were extensively briefed on the loss of the Scorpion. It was rushed through it's shipyard availability and a critical recall on the batteries that powered the torpedo's guidance system was not completed, but deferred to after the deployment. We were told that the most likely cause was one of the defective batteries shorted out, causing a fire in one of the torpedoes in the torpedo tubes. We were told that one of two things happened: the torpedo's warhead detonated in the tube or the boat ejected the torpedo and it almost immediately detonated before the boat could get away from it. The most likely scenario we were presented with was once the torpedo caught fire, the heat caused it to get stuck in the tube when they attempted to eject it. It then detonated in the tube.
That was a plausible cover story. It was confirmed that a traitor gave the Soviets info that led to the Scorpions sinking. It was not a torpedo malfunction.
@@steveunderwood6576oh yeah? Tell me exactly where and when that was confirmed.
@@steveunderwood6576source?
@@steveunderwood6576 Although there was some people who turned traitor and sold top secret info to the Soviets, I'm pretty sure that even if the Soviets knew exactly where the Scorpion was,and one of their subs was following it I don't think they would have torpedoed and sunk one of our subs,to do that would have required approval front higher Headquarters, probably the Kremlin itself, I don't think that would have happened because the Soviets weren't stupid, they knew that intentionally sinking one of our subs could quickly turn into a global thermonuclear war,and I'm sure they didn't want that anymore than we did.
@@hubertwalters4300I absolutely agree with you.
I went to a parochial school in Norfolk
I remember when this happened. I was 8 years old- too young to realize a great many of my classmates had fathers on that boat. Thank you for the info!!
my boat, the USS Blenny (SS324) was operating with the Scorpion in the Med, we almost had one of our radiomen transfer to her, she left the Med just before we did, she never made it back to NL
A Radioman just doesn't "forget" to send an operational message.
The leading theory these days is that Scorpion was lost as a result of a hydrogen explosion in the battery well. The hydrogen build-up is thought to have occurred when Scorpion set condition 'baker' (close all watertight doors and vents) as she was going to periscope depth while charging the ship's batteries. Battery charging produces large amount of pure hydrogen and when it reaches about 8% hydrogen mix with oxygen it becomes explosively unstable. Typically the battery wells are vented, but because condition 'baker' had been set, the mix built up until it exploded. This is consistent with two small explosions aboard the submarine, a half-second apart, that were picked up by hydrophones. It is also consistent with the 1968 inquiry into the loss of the Scorpion which determined that she appeared to be in the process of coming to periscope depth when an undetermined fatal explosion occurred. An analysis of the ship's battery cells in 2010 noted "the general battery damage is violent. The high velocity intrusion of pieces of the flash arrestor into both inside and outside surfaces of the retrieved plastisol cover attest to violence in the battery well…The battery probably exploded at some time before flooding of the battery well occurred….”
Scorpions batteries were small. Cochino was a diesel electric sub, and she survived 3 or 4 battery explosions before sinking…
I choose to believe hot run torpedoe
Unlikely for a number of reasons. First, she had a small battery, and the internal space could’ve easily contained the blast. USS Cochino was a diesel/electric submarine, with 5 or 6 times the battery capacity, and she survived 4 or 5 battery explosions before sinking.
@@jerrylagesse9046 it’s suggested that she had at least one of a batch of suspect torpedoes onboard that might have been prone to unplanned partial activation.
This would generate a lot of heat and an explosion that may have caused a flash burn of the warhead. It’s very conceivable that the shout of hot torpedo triggered an about turn as for a hot running torpedo. The low order detonation would likely blow out the escape or loading hatches explaining the lack of implosion in the bow. This over pressure has the possibility of partially deploying the periscope. This all comes from Blind Mans Bluff and so is only one source.
Couple this with the routine of checking all systems, including torpedoes, on the return journey to home port. Such activities might’ve triggered the battery issue.
Good friend of mines uncle Robert Flesch was on board. Really brings it home how connected we all really are.
They were not solders, they were sailors! ...... They were in the navy, not the army!
The Sailor who wouldn't get back on the Sub before it's last journey did so because he was terrified it would sink because of the poor condition of the Sub. He refused to get back on for fear of his life. That says a lot about the sea worthiness of this sub and other sailors complained too.
I served onn boomers from 77 to 1980 my condolences to the familys. May peace be found in your hearts and minds, all my respect😢
What do submarines really do?? They go out on patrol and chase other countries submarines. It's basically a cat and mouse game. Not a single submarine has fired a live missile on a target since 1982 when the British fired on that Argentina submarine
I've seen this story multiple times and it always seems handled in a shady way by the Navy. Stinks of cover up. We may never know the real truth.
Yeah. It can't be for fear of pissing off the Soviet Union. It doesn't exist.
The reason there was a Soviet submarine fleeing the area at high speed was likely because the USS Scorpion was secretly tailing and surveying the activities of Soviet Subs and surface fleet you mentioned. The wreck didn’t really show any signs of being attacked and nor did the sonar signatures detected from the SOSUS underwater surveillance network indicate such an event. You also failed to mention the theory that a malfunctioning torpedo could have been the culprit, having dangerous and volatile silver-zinc batteries and could have possibly been launched as is protocol for a dangerous and malfunctioning “hot” torpedo and, after not finding a target, homed in on the Scorpion, causing it’s destruction. However, the most plausible explanation was insufficient and faulty maintenance procedures, as was mention that the boat failed to pass the “SUB SAFE” requirements and was rushed back into service after hasty repairs and maintenance. It was then thusly restricted from diving any further down than a little over 100 feet due of this reason. Also, Submariners are referred to as Sailors, not “Soldiers” or “Troops.”
A very sad ending for a good crew. They will never be forgotten by their families, as well as wreck-less actions by unqualified senior officers who didn’t do their jobs properly. R.I.P to the brave men of the USS Scorpion.
Every time they rush the construction of large ocean vessels, the occupants pay the ultimate price.
The Soviets learnt this lesson more that once too.
You don't disassociate yourself with and refuse to board a ship if you don't think it's going to sink.
I served with the Commander in charge of finding the Scorpion...On the boat I served on he gave us a detail briefing...I'm a 20+ yr Veteran Bubble head...
I also dated a girl who's father was a first class QM on the Thresher...When it was lost...The only reason her father survived he was driving to PNSY from New London the day the boat was going on sea trials and he miss movement because he had a flat tire on the way to PNSY...She told me her father was grateful God save him but he has deep regrets losing his shipmates ... He was heartbroken depressed the rest of his life...She told me he was never the same after...
Did they authorize the QM to wear a gold earring?
@@SweatinSixty Don't know about that...
Whatever happened to that sub happened long before she landed on the bottom of the ocean. That boat did not implode like the thresher. Whatever happened was way above crush depth. The sub rests on the bottom, in 11 thousand feet of water and other than a few covers blown off. It looks like it's perfectly in tact
The boat DID implode. The entire engineering spaces were shoved forward into forward end of the boat. The implosion was recorded on SOSUS some minutes after two other explosions were detected. On that class of boat the pressure hull is not a smooth cylindrical shape. It necks down markedly just aft of the Reactor Compartment then steps up in diameter for the rest of the boat's length. Parts of the battery were recovered indicting a battery explosion. It is postulated that a battery hydrogen explosion occurred. Google Bruce Rule + Scorpion for a more technical discussion of the loss of the Scorpion.
The boat DID implode.Detected by SOSUS.
@@DuffyF56 It doesn't look like it imploded from the pictures I've seen. It's hull is not crushed
@@gregorylyon1004 Google "The Commentaries of Bruce Rule" and look at the articles about the Scorpion.
@@gregorylyon1004 Google Bruce Rule + Scorpion
I was scheduled to be assigned to the Scorpion, but God intervened and I ended up somewhere else. The Skipjack Class was not well maintained by the government and they attempted to run the subs without the required maintenance and the sinking of the Scorpion was the result. It's a gross disrespect they showed to some of the best and most qualified people in the Navy. RIP
My dad served on the Skipjack in the 60s. His best friend was transferred from the Skipjack to the Scorpion and was on board when it was lost.
I only remember my dad’s friend by the name of Sidemeat. I’m not sure if I ever heard his given name.
The United States Navy had way too many submarines to maintain back then during the Cold war. The fleet was too big
As a young 9 yr old kid. Arriving w: Mom ta pik up Dad from NorVa . Naval ShipYard. I saw this sub tied to dock. I would become a sailor 10. Yrs later. RIP. Brave warriors of the seas.
The Thresher was lost in 1963. The Scorpion in 1968. How safe are these nuclear subs ? The Russians also suffered loses in theirs. Dangerous ships.
Well. We haven't lost a submarine since the scorpion. That says a lot about the Sub safe program
The visible damage in the bow section of the sub suggest an onboard explosion. I doubt that Scorpion was sunk by hostile action.
I agree with you 💯 percent. The Soviets had nothing to do with it. A hot running torpedo is what I believe happened. It probably blew up inside the submarine
I qualified on USS Sargo (SSN-583). I was in the Submarine Service 1983-91.
I was serving on-board USS Triton ssn 586 when this tragedy occurrd. We mourned the loss very much and discussed the pros and cons of the reports that came out without any positive answers. Maybe there never will be.
My pop was assigned to that sub. He didn’t like nuclear boats (diesel was in his blood) and he traded orders with a friend. Dad went to Vietnam and his friend went to the Scorpion. Dad came home, his buddy did not… It bothered my dad his whole life.
They knew ,what happened they heard her implode just like thresher did.
Later I heard the Natulis was in this condition in 1980 guys were trying to get off .
Because it almost did not come up a few times.
The Scorpion did not implode like the Thresher did. The Scorpion is largely intact on the bottom. And about the Nautilus. By 1980, that submarine was over 25 years old. It was a dinosaur long before it was retired.
What a bunch of total 'horse hockey!' Can't keep Scorpion and Skipjack straight and absolutely nothing in this video is either accurate or supported by any factual evidence. It is really a shame that someone thought this was a good idea - just goes to show that anyone can put together anything they'd like and put it out for public consumption. Read 'Silent Steel' for a much more accurate explanation of the loss of USS Scorpion.
Who is the author of 'Silent Steel'? I can't find it online.
Those subs are built either at Electric Boat in Groton, Connecticut, or at what is now Huntington-Ingalls in Newport News, Virginia.
Naval Station Norfolk (NOB) does not do repairs, I grew up in Norfolk.
The repairs and overhaul to the USS Scorpion were done in Charleston, South Carolina.
When I got my orders after finishing sub school, I was assigned to USS Spadefish SSN 668. I didn’t know it, but the boat was in Newport News Shipyard(what it was called back then) for an overhaul.
May be try reading Blind man’s bluff before telling your story
The people that do the voiceovers for these films usually have no idea what they are talking about. SAILORS !
Neither do the writers, obviously.
This is total BS. This is not what really happen. My Uncle died onboard her and you are now towing the Navy line with their BS story. Clueless.
What happened elaborate please
I am not clear from video what "fatal error" caused the sub to be sunk, whatever the actual cause. Was the error the mission itself? Any military mission has risk, how what made it an error? If it is not the mission and without any proof how the sub was sunk, how can someone say we could avoid the error? Did they find defect in the torpedo battery, or H2 leak or something.
There was a bunch of strange information connected to the Scorpion, both unclassified up to Gods Eyes only stuff. Worked with a Navy Spook who had gotten off of her at Rota Spain, and he had a very interesting story of the Med Deployment and the rather short deployment. Normally vessels deploy for 6 months, so why 3 months, I really hope that his story was just that, a mess deck story, Tom Clancy would not be able to write this guy's story.
The sailor you are referring to was my father. The other man was an ET I believe who's wife had just has a miscarriage and drove him nuts. When did you have this conversation?
Was from a Spook who was onboard, and got off in Rota. At the time officially we were never onboard, often our orders were written to be vague, "US, underway unit", in the official service records. But the dates matched his story. This is not that unusual for a Spook. @@steveunderwood6576
The guy was a Spook, was stationed with him in the early 70's, often we rode with some, shall I say vague orders, "US Naval Vessel", and he had such orders in his record that matched the dates. Would rather not say more, due to potential issues. Yes she had some mechanical issues, but had a good crew, but the official story leaves much to be questioned. @@steveunderwood6576
My step grandfather served in the Navy and was finishing up his career around 1968. He always told me that he believed USS Scorpion fired a torpedo that ran the circle and blew themselves up. This was the opinion of Senior Chief Voyle Francis Miller. No matter how it happened, it was a terrible loss.
@voylerutledge5017 Why don't you listen to what's being said. They didn't fire any torpedoes. The state of maintenance was woeful and she had a depth restriction of 500 feet. You should focus on that. The torpedo story is a myth
@@Highendaudio1 why don't you listen to what I wrote and save your attitude for where it is warranted? As I wrote above, this was my grandfather's opinion.
@voylerutledge5017 I dont really care as a submariner. We have respect for people who perish at sea doing their duty. The loss of this submarine, plus USS Thresher, had a significant effect on our submarine service. The Sub Safe programme was improved, etc. In the late 70s, I read the first of many reports made available to us because it was engineering issues. Scorpion had a depth restriction due to build and maintenance costs. They were transiting home, so why would they be firing a torpedo. Absolute nonsense, and still, you go on and on about what someone said years ago. Yeah, I was in the Navy, and I know how gossip, exaggeration and conspiracy theories go. Sadly, you have bitten into one, and how many years on, you are still chewing on a dud. Have a good day
@Highendaudio1 , dude, this was the opinion of NY grandfather, a WW2 submariner. I am not chewing on anything when I am telling you what a career bubble head's opinion was. My grandfather was rarely wrong about anything, this is why I shared his opinion, which you somehow take as mine. Stop being a fool and read more carefully.
@@Highendaudio1nope ! She was sunk by the Russians .. they were mad about us sinking one of theirs. Both governments agreed to not talk about it.
Okay, I know it’s somewhat knit-picky, ( 1:51 ), but you refer to “Petty Officer” Dan Rogers while depicting two Commissioned naval officers discussing something on a wall map. Then several seconds later you say “Officer Rogers” yada yada yada…. Well, just for the record, a petty officer in the USN is never ever referred to as “Officer” So and So. If you’re going to use the persons rank in speaking of or to them you’d always precede their last name with “Petty Officer” or Petty Officer 2nd Class Jones, or…, by their rating such as Gunners Mate Smith or Gunners Mate 3rd Class Smith.
Only a commissioned officer can be addressed as “Officer” Jones or Commander Jones, etc.
God bless those Brave Men !!!!!
The fact that they let the families turn up thinking it was due to arrive would help them cover it up by playing dumb just goes to show what these people are like. Whatever they knew and how soon they knew means little when they pull a stunt like that. But the knowledge of the subs condition is something to be held on.
I was there looking for her on board the newly commissioned USS Julius A. Furer DEG 6 with our powerful Sonar.
You need to check your images....SSN 21 is the Seawolf but not the Seawolf from Scorpions time. They are different boats. Also if you want to show a Rear Admiral make sure the man isn;t wearing the uniform on a Commander. Helps make your story more believable
The navy knew the scorpion was already lost when they had the families waiting at the dock that was just a disgusting thing they did. And in most circles is believed that the scorpion was sunk by either a Soviet helicopter dropping a torpedo or there was also rumors that the crew reported they were being followed by a Soviet sub and couldn't lose them and that sub is the one that wants the torpedo because there's only one place on the sub that was damaged and it was obvious it was a torpedo.
The little I’ve read about it, the loss of this boat was a “Cold War Mystery” as you described, in a tit-for-tat or retaliatory action by the Soviets, in response to something the US did.
See *All Hands Down: The True Story of the Soviet Attack on the 'USS Scorpion'*. Kenneth Sewell, Jerome Preisler, FWIW.
This is correct.
“Most circles” where’s your proof? Bold internet claims aren’t enough.
@@Dolorous_Edd_ the documentary for one and if you would do some research instead of asking stupid questions you might figure it out for yourself.
Finally someone else that knows what really happened to my brother. He was the youngest sailor on the scorpion. Michael Edward Dunn.My mother and his fiance waited in that horrible weather at the pier while the navy knew she was already gone.and like you said look at the wreckage it's obvious what it was. And now 2 navy men who listen to the audio from sosus have stated on record to hearing a Soviet sub leaving area and a Russian commander has admitted to Russia sinking scorpion. Thank you bad monkey2222 I think your a pretty good monkey.
Cut it then shut it . Can't do that with subs . These sailors were test men . Families should get the truth now .
USS DIXON AS-37 79-81 Point Loma Ca. Westpac to Diego Garcia 1981
Tended Subs and Skimmers during the Iranian hostage issue.
I was in Sosus...and examined the recordings of this incident..There are NO Soviet torpedo signatures..only an American torpedo signature.
So she shot herself a very tragic story .
BS.
I agree with you 💯 percent. The Soviets had nothing to do with the loss of Scorpion. They were trying to eject a hot running torpedo. It probably blew up inside the submarine as they were making the 180° turn to get rid of it. I have always believed that's what happened
And why didn't the government just tell the people that a faulty torpedo sank the scorpion??? Mistakes do happen. Maybe it was because of the Thresher loss 5 years earlier??
Somebody should tell this guy there are no soldiers on a sub
If, what I have heard and read was correct:
--test depth for a Skipjack-class submarine was 700 feet;
--during her final mission, the Scorpion (which had been given the nickname "USS Scrap Iron" by her crew) was restricted from going below 150 feet
--analysis of the SOSUS data shows the Scorpion made a 180 degree turn, and was heading AWAY from Norfolk when she went down
--making a 180 degree turn was supposed to disarm a hot-running torpedo
I was told that story while working at Newport News Shipbuilding during the first Gulf War.
Yes that's the real story of what happened. But they actually expelled the torpedoe since once the motor stops running it explodes. When the torpedoe left the tube it started looking for a target and right next to it was a big fat target. Unfortunately the sub with all it's mechanical problems wasn't able to dive below 150 feet or outrun it
@@jonyjoe8464 From what I gather, they weren't able to expel the torpedo. From what I've seen and heard, the Scorpion's hull didn't appear to have any damage that resembled being hit with a torpedo.
@moosecat that is utter nonsense. Yes there was a depth restriction due to machinery and maintance issues that's not in question. Sosus data and 180 degree turns are simply not true. So that you are aware, submarines don't operate in straight lines for too long and 180-course alteration means absolutely zero You should look where she sank and then where Norfolk Virginia is and see the distance and realise that any course alteration means zero
@@Highendaudio1 Okay...then do tell what happened, please.
Thanks again for the Navy.
My goodness if you're gonna say Norfolk this many times in a video, you gotta at least try to say it right
Nahfick.
This is right pronunciation if you’re from Va. or points south
"Norfuck"...
If “soldiers” were operating Scorpion, that itself spells trouble!😆
I spent the 1980s on submarines of the US Navy.
I'm a sailor.
I have *NEVER* been a soldier.
I remember when i was a kid my grandfather who was chief of the boat at the time for the uss seawolf talking about the scorpion with my dad BM1. Too young to remember the details but specifically remember him saying the uss seawolf was supposed to be on that deployment and talked about how bad it made the navy look having the famlies on the pier waiting. Living in va beach the scorpion was widely discussed and even been to the pier she was to tie up to at NOB.
A teacher at my elementary school lost her husband when the USS Scorpion went down. It was very sad.
Within the first 20 seconds I realized that the narrator probably doesn't have his facts straight. With a scorpion Vanishing in 1968, he then states that we are finally finding out more details some 60 years later . Somebody definitely cannot perform math correctly.
I read the salors called it the Scrap Iron.
I've heard that, too, and NOT as a term of endearment.
I like these videos better without the robot narrator
Only thing to say is Submariners have to be some of the most courageous men on the planet. Something my tiny brain cannot grasp. I met a submariner up in I think Bayonne N J.
He had balls bigger than all outdoors.
It is indeed difficult to search for a vehicle specially designed not to be found.
Interesting story. I am not in any way connect with Submarines, just a person, interested in historical tragedies. One thing I didn't know that the families were oblivious of the Sub as missing, and were happily awaiting their arrival! What a cruel joke!
Battery/hydrogen explosion plain and simple. 😮
Vice Admiral schade was a submarine first officer in WWII, he was ordered by his captain, Howard Gilmore to dive the boat while gilmore lay on the bridge of the conning tower severely wounded and unable to move. The man was no stranger to hard decisions.
That is a mystery! Roa Aotearoa nui.
We were sent on dungaree liberty to bring all available crew back to our ship (DLG32) from the beach so we could immediately deploy to find the SCORPION.
B.S. A clip they use was From A Movie. Not a documentary movie. An Entertainment Movie!!!
How dare they try to pass this p.o.s. and dribble off as real research.
It Beatle disrespects the men that died on this submarine!!!
I was in second grade in Norfolk. A friend of my Mom lost her husband on the Scorpion. I remember.
Far too many mistakes in the first two minutes of this video. To call sailors "soldiers" by itself says you have no clue what you are talking about.
Well you didn't uncover the mystery then did you? So you got a dislike for a clickbait video and I'll unrecommend the channel.
Lol
Unlike surface and aviation assets, there is ZERO margin for error in subsurface.
Forgot to mention being hit by their own “hot running” torpedo that was ejected to prevent one catastrophe only to have it circle back onto their stern.
Which explains why the shaft was ejected, the entire conical section of the stern had a telescoping inward implosion, and the bow/torpedo room was intact.
Not hot running, but hot as it had a defective battery. The sub did a high speed 180 degree turn before it sank as if it had a hot running torpedo on board to shut it down as torpedoes were designed at that time to shut down if they reversed course but it was just "hot" and not running. The heat of the battery was sufficient to cook off the warhead in a low order explosion to blow the torpedo room hatch open and flood the sub. Source - Book "[Blind man's bluff](en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_Man%27s_Bluff:_The_Untold_Story_of_American_Submarine_Espionage)." The navy at the time had been trying to get a second supplier of torpedo batteries as a single source can be a problem with supply. The second companies batteries were eventually all removed from service for being below par.
John Craven put forth that theory. Disproved by SOSUS data. The reason the aft end telescoping forward is the boat imploded.
Served 4 years on the Scorpion. Watching these are like reading a comic book. Where do these people get their info.
Hey. Did the sailors call the Scorpion the USS Scrap Iron ???? That's what I heard
You probably know more about this boat than all of the top brass in Washington. Thank you for your service to our country sir
Not sure how to say this.
Make no mistake. US Navy knows and teaches commanding officers and those with proper security clearances, and with a need to know, what actually happened to Thresher and Scorpion.
This piece is convoluted and shows clips and shots of multiple US submarine classes.
It is insulting and disrespectful to promote any idea that a coverup took place.
Surveillance of the Scorpion wreck and acoustic data made public support the torpedo casualty “speculations.”
The creator of this “documentary” should fact check the transcript and re-edit the clips and footage to eliminate non-Skipjack class boats.
SSN-21 is the new Seawolf. The 1st Seawolf was the 2nd nuclear submarine in the US Navy.
~ A Cold War Submarine Veteran
Back then the navy had seamen, not like they have today though!
Don clay ? Ron Haskell rip
"Soldiers" on board? I'm !eaving now before it gets any worse.
SECNAV once described serving on a submarine was like being in prison with the opportunity to drawn…
Good video except that Russian sub clip coming up.
'NOT' Soldiers, dude. SAILORS!!
I don't listen to AI narration.
And they located USS SCORPION (SSN 589) using Our S.O.S.U.S. warning net, not 'pingers!'
Submariners are truly a breed apart. If we ever build military starships, we should choose the crew from men and women who serve aboard submarines.
Wow, a submarine with torpedoes,missiles and sonar equipment? Amazing,
What missiles?
Soldiers? Uh you got that wrong big time.
This is a story telling that has far to many incorrect references to Submariners. Plus it is simply a rehash of what most of us already knew. CPO/SS 23 YEARS IN THE BOATS.
an intentional death sentence for it and its crew. did he say that. what is wrong with people now days. good god.
Getting real tired of the “it’s classified” thing. Govt works for us, we don’t work for them. I pay you, you don’t pay me. Full transparency across the board is what accountability is about.
Around 11:25, there is old footage of military men seated around a table, apparently for a presser. Curiously, I recently saw another UA-cam video framing that same footage as that of a Soviet meeting of military men. Note the small tabletop model of an aircraft carrier!
Ah, the internet, where random or misidentified footage may be copied or swapped around to make sloppy "documentaries". It seems this video slapped the wrong footage in.
Oh, i hadnt heard -- til this video -- that the Scorpion was attacked by the Soviets. Rather, i thought the crappy-batteries account was firm.
Did this channel just throw this sexier idea in? Why do internet "documentaries" just create more noise?
in 1972 a US nuclear Submarine struck a German Cargo Ship MV "Hagen" on the east coast . The big fin on the conetower of that submarine was torn off and got stuck in our hull. Water entered cargo Hold NO 2 quickly. Anyway, later during that investigation the US Navy admitted they had done a "hidden attack" exercise and accetepted guilt for that cunning and outrages maneuver. We spend 4 weeks in a Dock in Baltinore for repair.
Soldiers?
My man, the proper term is "sailors."
Everyone makes mistakes except you.
@@chipcook6646That's a rather glaring mistake.
Did the narrator mistakenly refer to the Scorpion as the Skipjack, at least twice?
Soldiers raised submarines, and can dive, my children missed college, and became drugs dealers, and prostitutes, fy, soldiers can't raise submarines, fy about soldiers and sailors.
They are not Troops they are Sailors get your facts strait.
17:03 I've read this book, and highly recommend it if you're interested in this subject.
Spiffing well done Sir
I've heard it said the sailors on board referred to her as "USS scrap iron"
Well the Scorpion was a lot newer of a boat than the Nautilus was. Scrap iron or not
There was a recent fire and loss , separate incidents , on ships and submarines , yet around 2018-19 the loss of a Russian sub and an American fireing was broadcast. There was then a black out if you started looking into it , yet rumours were based around some russian communications last heard aboard the sub. It was " torpedoes (or fish) in the water" with the very last words "There shouldn't be that many of them" before the sub went dark. I am not in the habit of looking at things this way yet I started to believe all this was being caused between the South American Mexican gov and the sail of two to four submarines sold by France. France had twenty four mini subs and sold two to Mexico and two were unaccounted for while 19 were being refit to nuclier engines or on manoeuvres which left one unspoken of. It started to surprise me numbers were going wide while engine refits were going on. Also with this swap theory's of underwater pipelines going wrong and oil spills were happening I thought again perhaps these mini subs were piggy backing pipelines causing one to fatally break up on the bottom , another sub to be fired upon while the Canadian coast line had its spill. So these short range subs with a refit to me were taking crude and filtering to useable fuel while using the nuke engines for main drag and so on. There is a constant war at sea we are largely not told of with borders crossed all the time. But for a few interesting sub story's take a look at the mini subs of France and how these short range highly manouverable subs may have been used in a different way . The Russians then follow one to cross a line while these subs go on far longer rides attempting refueling from ready sources that with filtering and prep change crude to useable fuel. Using the nuke engines for tests non nuke subs would have the refinery refit that hopping the lines would be able the long missions and not be so scrutinised by nuke commissions and so go out of sight a little Easter.
Soldiers raised both submarines from the bottom, 9000 feet.
How many subs sank ? Makes me think an underwater war going on with subs getting sunk and all sinking having non war reasons.
I find this video disturbing that it would base it conclusions on the testimony of a couple of radio operators. Being a former member of the USN, I know that a minor participant would not have been privy to any substantial information regardng the lost of top secret asset. It is alos alarming that the narrator would imply that the Navy purposely hide the loss of teh sub from familiy members. In fact, there is still no clear answers as to what caused the loss of the sub and at the time, the only fatc that was know for sure, was that it had missed it's scheduled check ins. They had no proof that the sub had sunk and telling that to the families before it had been confirm would have been inappropriate. Videos like this should be band.
Those responsible for ordering the quick overall should have remembered that those who decide to rush often cause others to perish.