Excellent article and correct regarding the cause of the sinking. In May of 1968 I was a nuke MM on an Atlantic-based Permit class SSN, and I have studied the sinking in great detail, and the battery explosion theory is the only one that fits the available evidence. Scorpion was apparently at periscope depth, based on the fact that the periscope was raised and the clamshell doors over the bridge were still closed (ship was not on the surface). She was also most likely dumping trash, a common practice while at periscope depth. Trash bags are dumped using a device called the Trash Disposal Unit (TDU), which is sort of a mini torpedo tube, and located in the kitchen/scullery. Unfortunately, the TDU on the Scorpion had a history of failing to close, causing sea water flooding (it was scheduled to be repaired). It’s not hard to imagine that, on that fateful day, the TDU might have suffered flooding of a nature that couldn’t be contained, and all that sea water had nowhere to go but down two decks to the battery, which was located at the very bottom of the Operations Compartment (not the Reactor Compartment). And, as you correctly pointed out, when the battery exploded it instantly killed everyone in the Operations Compartment, which is to say everyone who was controlling the ship. Other crew members were probably heavily stunned or knocked unconscious. This was followed by a slow descent as the ship took on more seawater, followed by a greater descent angle which probably approached vertical, until it reached crush depth, when the ship broke up.
I'll agree that the battery exploding is the most likely cause, however, a little food for thought. It's true the Soviets were a little over 200nm away from scorpion when she met her demise, however that is well within the range of both "Hormone" & "Helix" anti-submarine helos, of which there were a couple deployed with that Flotilla.. a helo would NOT be picked up with sonar.. one helo launched anti-sub torpedo would be all it would take to do the job AND there's that pesky little "shark bite" thing at the sail/hull juncture......just thinkin' out loud here based on the known facts.......and the Russkys swear up & down on a stack of rubles that we(US Navy) sunk K-129 in the Pacific to this very day, there's no convincing them otherwise.
@@martypalmiere7672 I'm not an acoustic expert, and the acoustic record of the sinking is murky and subject to varying interpretation; however, my understanding is that the initial muffled sound was determined to be internal to the hull, as opposed to a torpedo attack, which would have sounded very different, and probably more familiar to the experts, generating masses of bubbles. It's also likely that a torpedo splashing into the water and running toward the boat would have been detected by the SOSUS system. As far as the "shark bite" on the sail, keep in mind that the aft end of the sail contains the snorkel pipe, which exits the sail where it meets the hull, then travels aft under a fairing to the Auxiliary Machinery Space (AMS) where the diesel was located. It's likely the snorkel fairing was ripped off at the time of implosion, tearing a piece of the sail with it.
Having served on subs back in '80's I would believe any surviving crew would have spent the last moments doing anything possible to save themselves. I know the crews I served with would not have waited for death, they would have fought for life.
Any Navy sailor would have done this regardless of what type of ship they were on. Especially on a submarine where everyone would have known and acted upon their memorized emergency action procedures.
I was in the crew of the USS Scamp SSN-588, the sister ship of Scorpion, but did not arrived onboard until 1969. I recall a comment on this tape that the battery was located in the reactor compartment. The battery was located under the 3rd level of the Operations compartment. I used to sleep right above it. I also doubt there was a hydrogen explosion. The electricians closely monitor battery out-gassing and would have stopped the charge if there was any danger. This is not like a diesel boat where you have to surface and run the diesels to charge batteries. Nuc boats can charge batteries at any time and not wait until the battery is almost flat. I have read books about this incident and claims it was the Russians. Most likely the reports of numerous operating issues was the source of the catastrophe. But no one knows. Every May 22nd I think of Scorpion, her crew and pray for our subs and sailors. Subs are a dangerous business and we all took our jobs seriously.
Great video! I detect a little B'more drawl there! I wonder why the aft crew did t get forward to try to move the bow planes, etc and try to surface the boat? I was an AO at Whidbey Island NAS so subs are not in my area of expertise.
Not 100% sure, the likely scenario seems to be that the crew was incapacitated in some fashion, preventing them from attempting to surface or there was a failure with the subs systems that prevented it. I inquired with aubmariners who know more about this than I do and that was the direction they pointed me towards Also, great hearing haha. I try my best with the annunciation of certain words to make sure I'm speaking as clearly as possible, I noticed in my recording that sometimes things can get lost in an accent I didn't realize I even had! Can't fix how I pronounce Baltimore in my latest video though 😅 🙃
Based on the time it took the sound from the implosion to reach the hydrophones and knowing the speed that sound travels in water and the depth of the hydrophones
Depth is calculated from the acoustic bubble pulse frequency. SOSUS identified the hull implosion and torpedo tube implosions from amplitude, but frequency is a function of depth. Google "Commentaries of Bruce Rule" for information on this, and more detail on the battery gas explosion theory.
Nice video, just fyi the battery isnt located in the reactor compartment. It's well forward of it. This is why the explosion and subsequent flooding kept this section of the hull mostly intact, as it did not experience the same implosion as the rest of the submarine.
@crasyhorse44 @todayshistory Yes, I paused at 9:26 to comment on the battery location. Found it already noted - good catch & thanks! Did you serve on one of these "S" boats (Skipjack, Scamp, Scorpion, Shark, Sculpin, Snook)? I have 'fond' (not!!) memories of my many excursions into the battery well for pre-charge checks on USS Scamp (SSN-588) in the early 1980's. Such as, the exposed energized bus-bars and the minute airborne droplets of battery acid burning into uniforms & skin (good times!!). Also recall some very eerie moments when coming across Reactor Plant Manual references to ship-specific Scorpion details, which had apparently been overlooked when updating the Class manuals. Shivers. RIP.
I remember EMs climbing out of the battery well with their uniforms getting holed up from battery acid and/or blackened up with battery well paint. Same paint used to paint ‘BOHICA’ with a set of Dolphins on the captain’s gig off the Truxton whilst in Subic Bay.
From what I've heard, more than a few of the Scorpion's crew referred to her as the "USS Scrap Iron" due to her poor condition. I believe her test depth was 700 feet, but I recall hearing that she was restricted from diving that far down (maybe 150 or 350 feet). I also remember hearing of at least one sailor who actively lobbied getting transferred off of her, which saved his life.
Thank you for this explanation of this tragedy. I was a sailor aboard USS Lawrence DDG 4. We were also returning to the States following a Med cruise. Lawrence was one day ahead of the Scorpion and was doing periodic routine radio checks when she no longer responded. All the way back to Norfolk, every hour, it was "Brandywine, this is Proud Star, radio check, over." No answer. When we reached port, the entire fleet was being dispatched to begin the search. As Lawrence needed a scheduled boiler repair we went to the dry dock in Portsmouth. RIP Scorpion! Very sad.
OK, this is about the best theory as to what happened to Scorpion. I was stationed aboard USS Flasher SSN 613 at Pearl when we heard about Scorpion. Flasher was the first SUBSAFE certified submarine after the Thresher sinking. There were a thousand rumors going around as to what happened to Scorpion and I have known one of the men who sat on the board of inquiry about the sinking. I've read some of the books written about it and to a submariner they don't make sense. As a boat sailor I'm inclined to believe this theory more than any other at this time. Yes, accidents happen but submariners are well trained and are very careful people. The boat was known to have had insufficient maintenance due to the Navy cutting back on attention to needs over workload and the crew had begun to call her the Scrapiron instead of Scorpion. Rest in Peace Shipmates! Hand Salute! Two!
Thank you for your service and your input!! I consulted with a lot of former submariners (in an informal sense) and they all agreed with and pointed me towards the hydrogen explosion.
I was stationed on Flasher also and I believe we were not in PH but rather on patrol in the North Pacific. I distinctly remember we received a message in regards to Scorpion sinking.
Some additional information. We were in Port at Rhoda getting ready to go on our FBM patrol. The Scorpion had just returned from ops off of the Black Sea region. That evening some of our crew got together with the Scorpion crew at what we called the slop shoot, just off the pier. One of the crew did a fantastic impersonations of Tiny Tim, you know tip toe through the tulips. I was sitting with the Aux gang having a few beers. In that conversation, I found that the boat was in terrible mechanical condition. They had hoping to get some maintenance completed at the tender. One of the main pumps was inoperative, forget it was Drain pump or Trim pump but one of them was down. Other items were also needing work. The shaft seal was leaking 5 gallons a minute into the aft room. That would equate to about 40 +/- pounds per minute. It would have been a on going nightmare for the ballast control operation. When I look at some of the photos of the Scorpions last resting place, it appears the shaft and screw are not in place and the engine room and maybe the reactor space are driven into the aft part of the boat. My thought is that something catastrophically happened to the shaft and the boat. If enough sea water managed to get into the engine room it would shut down some critical equipment aft. I do know that the Aux gang members were not happy with the mechanical state of the boat. The Scorpion was a test model to minimize maintenance down time and control cost while keeping deterrents on station. They did not get a full upgrade of Sub Safe on their last upkeep which the crew freely complained about. We were on patrol when we found out she was overdue in port. This information in not a conspiracy, it was information acquired while having an evening, drinking a few beers and chow with the Scorpion crew.
The Men I talked with wanted off the boat, A gang types. I was amazed to see the boat gone the next morning. They were hoping to at least get the Pump repaired. All that was present the night before were devastated to get the communication that it was overdue. Ships passing in the night a brief encounter. Fleeting friendships.
You are correct, the shaft and screw were ejected, as seen in the photographs. I read that, at the time of implosion, a sea water ram would have travelled from the Operations Compartment, travelling aft at something approaching 2,000 mph and crushing everything in its path. This would have driven all the reactor plant machinery to the after bulkhead, and as the main turbines were driven aft it is conceivable that the shaft would have been broken off and squeezed out the stern, coming to rest separately from the other sections, with the screw still attached.
I have no idea what happened to Scorpion. But it seems very unlikely that a battery compartment explosion was responsible. There are numerous hydrogen monitors in the battery compartment. An Electrician's Mate (EM) would have been monitoring them, especially if a battery charge was in progress. I do know this. I once met a fellow submariner who was transfered off Scorpion just before her loss. He said she was in very poor shape, with lots of problems that had not been properly addressed.
Little known fact: this was the SECOND USS Scorpion SSN-589; the original was cut in half, had a missile compartment added to her, and was renamed the USS George Washington (SSBN-598). A friend of mine served on the Washington, and said that there were numerous pipes, fittings and other items that had "USS Scorpion SSN-589" etched in them.
Submarines do not hang out at Periscope depth stationary unless they lose propulsion, they are normally going 3-5 knots although submarines have been know hover at a depth while submerged and not move. You have to be moving to control your depth at PD, also you can charge your battery submerged. You know nuclear reactor generating steam to turn the generators. Yes it has been theorized that it was a battery explosion that caused the sinking and that could have caused the periscope to extend/be forced out while submerged. As someone said below the battery is not in the reactor compartment. Overall I say you did a good job.
Thank you for the video. I have been interested in Submarines since i was a small boy. I have nothing but the utmost respect for anyone that serves in the 'silent service'. USS Scorpion, On eternal patrol. God bless them all.
One additional feature I've seen in engineering reports that lends credence to the battery explosion is that pieces of batteries were recovered and were found to be melted, as if exposed to high heat as in an explosion.
That's more reason why it makes no sense. Proponents of the theory contend that the US sank a Soviet sub earlier in 1968 so the US stayed silent when USSR retaliated....but that goes back to why would the USSR not say anything about that??
An excellent, concise video about the USS Scorpion disaster. The sub was poorly maintained to begin with, which might have led to a spark igniting the hydrogen gas given off by the battery. Puts to flight the various conspiracy theories that have arisen since that time. RIP the 99 crew members of the Scorpion. 🙏🏻🙏🏻⚓⚓⚓
At the time the Mk 37 electric torpedoes were bad about initiating a hot run. Normal hot run procedures would be for the boat to turn 180 degree to set the anti-circular safeties as you stated. Unlike diesel boats nuke boats do not have to surface or snorkel to charge batteries as they are kept charged via the steam generators which are fed by steam supplied by that big ol’ hibachi pot stuck between the ops compartment and machinery space; the reactor. The air onboard boats is constantly monitored for any atmosphere contaminants, such as hydrogen, plus to insure all O2, CO2, etc levels are kept within specs for crew safety. Any out of spec hydrogen levels would have been dealt with immediately. O2 is generated through electrolysis where the hydrogen and oxygen molecules are separated via an electrical charge. Oxygen is either pumped into the crew spaces or pumped into holding tanks between the pressure and outer hills. The hydrogen is pumped overboard, gotten rid of. I rode on her sister ship, SSN 588, as a sonarman back in the 70’s. Though everyone is either looking for a soviet boogeyman or a battery well explosion it was something more mundane and far more treacherous; bad refit and overhaul topped off with a Mk 37 hot run. The last E7 LPO I had on the 588 was one of three who left the 589 in Rota as he had gotten emergency leave and a flight back to the states. His father had had a heart attack and was not expected to live. He never went to sea with us. In fact he was disqualified from submarines as it was required to go to sea to keep your qual status. He was ordered off the boat and out of the submarine service. Which, to be honest, he was rather glad off. Not a bad video even though your premise is way off base and a bit dramatic given your penchant for enhancing the actual occurrence of her loss. Big, and black, and never come back. That’s why they call them fast attacks.
I believe that a hot running torpedo downed this boat. That's why the sub is facing away from home on the bottom. She was making a turn to eject the torpedo when it exploded inside the sub
Eerrily enough the sonar evidence is very similar to the same sonar evidence of the sinking of the Argentine submarine ARA San Juan in 2017. An internal explosion sounds (possibly the battery) followed by sounds of her implosion.
There are few submarines that could survive a descent to this depth. Contrary to popular belief, most military submarines are not rated for the extreme depths that submersibles can descend to, it's not practical to build something as big as a military submarine that robustly. Most military submarines (to public knowledge) operate somewhere between 1500 feet underwater, up to the surface. Below this depth, the submarine is destroyed by the extreme water pressure. According to the scenario presented in the video, Scorpion suffered the explosion, began sinking, and imploded at 1,500 feet down or so. All of the crew were dead when this ocurred, the submarine was crushed like a soda can. The wreckage of the submarine then continued descending the remaining 8,500 feet to the seafloor, none of the crew were alive for the last 90% of the descent to the ocean floor, they were all killed by either the initial explosion in the battery compartment, or the inplosion several minutes later.
@@jeebeejabba180most submarines do not operate anywhere near 1500 feet. The max published depth of US subs is 800’. They typically operate much shallower than that. 20 years as a Submariner, 4 Boats, 3 SSNs and 1 SSBN.
@@Subdood04 I didn't say they typically operate at 1500 feet, just giving a general window of where they CAN operate. Seawolf Class, Los Angeles Class, and Virginia class have all been tested to at least 1500 feet, per public records, and likely deeper, confidentially. I'm aware that issues in communication arise at these depths even over VLF systems ( at least publicly), but it is not outside the physical capabilities of the sub to achieve. Various Soviet submarines, despite being loud as shit, have been tested to deeper depths due to their titanium construction. Also prior Navy, less service, not a bubblehead EDIT: meters to feet.
No that's not what happened She left the port of charleston in within one hour disappeared I know this because my father actually has to patches to the US escorping. He was removed off to ship because of nuclear Clearance it was Transfer to a new place Can I have the actual patch for the u s s scorpion But then again he was Transfer to a new base Wright Patterson Air Force base
Was stationed with one of the people that got off at Rota, and all I have to say is there is much more to the story. He talked some about that run some years later, not much but made you think, next he was in the OIC's office the next day, never to talk about the Scorpion again. He was induced to retire soon afterward. May all be just be coincidence or not, but there are times when you really DON'T want to know.
Could potentially be due to the Navy not wanting the poor maintenance record of the Scorpion to make it into the media. That's just pure speculation on my part. I didn't go into great detail on Scorpion's maintenance issues largely because it wasn't necessarily part of the WHY it sunk part of the equation
@@todayshistory1398 I hear it ran into the cavern wall whilst navigating the subterrain passageway to Navel base under area 51, the thresher was taken by off world nordics. the navy has always been into the capture and investigation of USO's.
I worked on some of the remaining 500's and early 600's numbered subs in Guam in the early 70's, the batteries on a nuclear can be charged at any time and are monitored at all times... I have no evidence that would prove error on the crew. However, I keep thinking about an encounter outside the sub may have existed... No conclusions on my part is possible, it is all in the actions of the crew... In training in the 70's this was a classical read for submarine crew. Learned about it at Vallejo Sub base. There were changes made to the battery banks on later class subs and their location on the boat... This brought memories back about how I and other repairmen considered ourselves to be responsible for keeping everyone safe on the many boats patrols. One of the main considerations was the redesign of the electrical panels and keeping them free from bilge water and condensation, a main reason for gassing of the batteries... RIP my fellow Sailors
also as a general note is that this is the time that the deadliest spy in USN history was active....John Walker, Jr. The Soviets knew exactly where our ships and subs were, in real time. They were reading our coded messages faster than we were.
I was on the Hugh Purvis DD709 out of Newport RI - a Sumner Class Destroyer with a Variable Depth Sonar. Were involved in the "search" operating off Cape Hatteras. The weather was terrible for days. It was pure hell. We were either on watch or strapped in our racks. Meals were sandwiches delivered to our racks. Interior passageways awash mixed with vomit. People collapsing to the deck sobbing.
I think the hydrogen theory has some problems. The whole submarine did NOT implode, which means that part of it was already flooded before they reached crush depth. Also, it fails to address the 180 degree turn from it's original course. The book Blind Man's Bluff digs deep into the story and makes a compelling case for a torpedo explosion.
I was in elementary school in Norfolk when this happened. My grandfather worked at the Norfolk Naval Shipyard. I was too young to understand what had happened, but I remember the solemn mood and so many of my classmates that had lost their fathers. So much grief!!!
Served on 2 subs in the 70's and 80's. The training is amazing and crazy at the same time. Everyday is important. Every crew member is a important member of the survival and success of each deployment. Food is great, but hours are long and the lack of sleep is terrible. But, I think that the sacrifice of our brothers makes us stronger and still sad of their loss. We don't forget, we learn and honor them.
Just go back to Scamp incident on sea trials outside San Francisco abd remember "all back and blow " order and you will understand why like Scamp propeller and shaft broke off and look at parts on ocean floor and connect the dots
Very good documentary. Better to have explained that the “snorkel” was used during the ventilation on the surface at periscope depth… for that device is most vital for many submarine functions. SSBN624.
Great question that I couldn't find a good answer to and didn't want to add any speculation on The far out theories would suggest that she was facing that way while engaged with an enemy l The other option that would support the torpedo theory would be that the sub had attempted to do a 180 to deactivate it. There's a lot of detailed acoustic information that suggests the sub was stationary and remained stationary when the incident that sunk it occurred. It was a little more in depth than I felt needed to be included due to the lack of hull breach They may have faced east while recharging their batteries due to the knowledge that there was a Russian flotilla in that direction, but I have no sources to back this theory and os just my own. I really didn't want to include my opinion if I could help it
What I don't understand is how did it take 21 minutes to reach crush depth when, from the evidence cited in the SOSUS recording, has the death of Scorpion lasting just 91 seconds. Also, the submarine was largely intact. Had it suffered a total implosion, nothing bigger than a scrap of metal would be left as in the case of the Thresher. This implies the boat was largely flooded with perhaps the aft section being dry and thus imploding forward into the rest of the boat, spitting out the propeller shaft as a result.
Question: Would it have been possible for the surviving crew to have made their way to the operations room and regained control of the submarine? Assuming yhe explosion only knocked out/killed the crew thay were all ready there, the controls should have been intact and operational.
Not likely. From what I understand, if it was in fact a hydrogen explosion from the battery, the battery would've continued putting off hydrogen and the damage to the battery may have created an environment that would be difficult to get through or survive in. In addition, anyone who was alive wouldn't necessarily have the training or know how to operate the functions of the submarine in the operations compartment.
Anyone wearing dolphins would have enough cross-training to return Scorpion to the surface. Portable oxygen equipment was available. The explosion likely killed the entire crew.@@todayshistory1398
This is not what I have been led to believe. All submariners are trained to know every bit and part of their ship. This is done to prevent just this problem from occurring. It is easy to come up with scenarios in which a part of the crew gets incapacitated and the remaining crew members have to take over. Hence everybody is certified to take over any role on the ship. Second: toxic gases on a submarine is something for which submariners train very frequently and have all the necessary equipment right next to them. So again this is not in support of the hydrogen explosion theory. You would have to hypothesize that this explosion killed all crew members or buckeld the hatch covers (or whatever they are called) between the compartments in such a way that the foreward section of the sub couldn't be reached any more. And again - how is the observation that the boat was apparently travelling Eastward when the calamity occurred explained by the hydrogen explosion theory?
@@wkgurr It was facing eastward on the sea floor that does not necessarily mean it was traveling in that direction at the time of the explosion. It also imploded long before reaching it's final depth. the sub could have very well spun one or more times in it's crushed state before reaching the bottom.
Thanks for the well thought explanation, Who knows what really happened. All the information we have is coming from the Navy....Think about that. Great video!
@ARQWELDER 0 seconds ago Retired Submariner here. Nice conspiracy theory type video, but you are WAY off. I’m not going into too much detail, but the SCORPION was not at periscope depth when the boat met her fate and she was not at a stand still. If there had been an explosion at the forward end of the ship with the engineering crew still alive, they would have secured propulsion, steered controlled ships depth from the engineering spaces. Everything on a Submarine is about redundancy, especially during emergency situations. The fact that the batteries are located forward of the engine room and that they’re constantly monitored, forcing the crew to act on any rise of gases completely annihilates your theory; unless your saying that the entire crew just dropped the ball on their daily routines. Best analysis suggests that due to the scattering of debris, that the SCORPION had an explosion that brought down the boat and then imploded fairly quickly with sections of the sub still intact but split in two. Many submarine veterans, Torpedomen and Sonar Techs, believe that there was a hot running torpedo incident while a torpedo was being worked on while it was in the skids and not in a torpedo tube, which is the most conclusive reasoning for an explosion which would have caused the most damage forcing the body to sink.
Thank you for your service and your experienced input!! I didn't intend for this to be a conspiracy theory video, in fact, I intended it to refute some of the popular conspiracy theories out there since I believe those are damaging to the memories of those who died in the tragedy. I did turn towards veteran submariners for information and reasons for the hydrogen explosion theory in the r/submarines subreddit which provided lots of detailed explanations and sources from which I drew my conclusions. I don't claim to be an expert by any means and I certainly didn't intend for this to be considered the definitive conclusion either.
The problem with that is that although the hot run torpedo theory was considered-- and, given certain acoustic data, apparently was for a while a leading candidate-- the Navy eventually ruled it out based on the forensic evidence.
this is well thought out and presented, respect. I have been curious about one thing since I have seen this one pic for years, there is a circular pattern of destruction on the trailing edge of the sail. Previously the torpedo theory seemed to fit. Have you considered how this might have happened?
Ik the picture you're speaking of. It could be from implosion damage or from contact with debris or the sea floor while sinking I'm not a structural engineer so I can't give a better answer. The likelihood is that if it was sunk by its own torpedo (which is still a plausible theory), it would've detonated in it's tube or shortly after being launched to try and jettison the torpedo
@@todayshistory1398 back when the pics were released in the 80s, I think, I noticed that damaged pattern. I then read about the torp theory. So my thinking was a failed torp, the boat tried to turn 180 degrees to turn the torp off, that might have failed so finally the crew ejected the torp and turned tried to outrun it but the torp caught up and hit the flat sail (big return for the targeting sonar). The blew the sail off and breached the hull enough for the sub to sink to crush depth. If possible an internal inspection via ROV should/might reveal more info on the cause. If that has been done we will never know. The fact that no US sub has sink, fingers crossed, since then does point to enhanced safety and maintenance standards navy wide.
@@mikethompson2650 The enhanced safety and maintenance standards actually came into being after Thresher sank on trials. Scorpion was built before Thresher. No submarine built since Thresher has been lost.
I think it's a case of they actually DON'T know, which is why the Navy has a few theories that believe are the most likely and also why some have let their imagination run a little wild
13:56 I don't know if there were any near accidents, but I hope that lessons were learned from any and assume that this loss also taught an expensive lesson.
Hard to say. The USS Connecticut struck a seamount in 2021 and USS San Francisco did as well in 2005. Neither was the result of mechanical failure or an issue with the submarine itself
I am not but I certainly appreciate those who are or have been submariners. The ocean is scary enough as it is much less being in a steel tube submerged beneath it!!
@@todayshistory1398I can tell you never served on a sub! The boat's batteries weren't in the reactor compartment, they were under the torpedo room. We didn't have to be at periscope depth and not moving to recharge them! Don't try to be an expert at things you don't know about! You probably think a critical reactor is a bad thing. What about the effective multiplication factor. Why are hafnium control rods used? What is SINS? Quit making incorrect videos in your uneducated Borak accent! USN '81-'91!!!
Very very plausible theory on what would have happened. Explains why the stern is imploded. However I am very skeptical over when the fall of the Berlin Wall happened and the whole Walker spy ring, that one of our ambassadors went over to Russia and asked about some of the prisoners that had been taken knowing full well Russia knew where they were, and he brought up the K-129 and the video we gave them regarding the burial at Sea we gave the Russian sailors. The russian, I believe it was kgb, official said that he was very young and basically if you read between the lines, that K-129 and USS scorpion were definitely involved in some way, shape or form. Not saying they had a skirmish or anything like that, but that we both lose a sub in 1968? Seems a little tit for tat ish. That's the only thing that remains skeptical with me. This definitely ties in with k129 for me,, I mean if that sub had gone rogue? We would have known about it and we would have sunk it, regardless if it had plans of it's own. I definitely three two to be linked. We've come to the brink of world war 3 more times than you can imagine in 50 years. Earned yourself a sub! No pun intended.
One of the enlisted instructors at naval submarine school, a petty officer 1st class, told a large group of us trainees in class one day, that the Scorpion was torpedoed by the Russians. None of the other lifer dogs in attendance contradicted him. And subsequently at least two different books have claimed the same thing, including the book written by the technical advisor to the film Phantom which dealt with the Soviet submarine service. But the navy’s expert on the subject Dr. Craven disagreed, claiming that the sinking was caused by a hot running torpedo which exploded inside of the boat. I served on both a Polaris submarine and a Sturgeon class fast attack boat. One problem with the two books I mentioned is that they contradict each other in that the one author believed it was a Russian sub that torpedoed them while the other one claimed that it was a Russian naval helicopter that torpedoed them. Supposedly the Russians believed that the US navy had torpedoed one of their own boats in the North Pacific, or in other words the boat which was at least partially recovered by Howard Hughes’ Glomar Explorer. Presumably that boat was hijacked by a KGB Spetznaz team which then attempted to launch a nuclear armed ballistic missile while surfaced in order to create the impression that it was the Chinese who nuked Pearl Harbor in order to start a nuclear war between the United States and Red China in 1968. I would have to completely re-read both books in order to get my head wrapped around this topic, something I’m not going to do right now. My gut tells me that Dr. Craven was probably correct. In 1968 though, the United States probably could have taken out Red China with a fairly limited nuclear strike without destroying the planet, especially if the Russians had actually wanted us to do exactly that for their own perverse reasons. This mastermind of this supposed plot was the then director of the KGB, Yuri Andropov, who subsequently became the premier of the Soviet Union, and if I recall accurately was removed from office for being mentally incompetent owing to his advanced age.
I know of the two books you're talking about. The evidence contradicts most claims of any Russian involvement in the sinking. The more convoluted the conspiracy, the weaker it's grip on truth becomes. I think people want the world to be more exciting than it actually is and spin stories to fit that world.
Thank you for that. The two books on the market claiming that the Scorpion was torpedoed by the Soviets are extremely convincing even if the one claims it was a Russian ASW helicopter and the other claims it was a submarine that launched the torpedo. The books titles are : SCORPION DOWN by Ed Offley and ALL HANDS DOWN by Kenneth Sewell. Kenneth Sewell was also the technical advisor to the movie PHANTOM which was loosely based on his book.@@gdixbrown
Two dominant theories: 1. Scorpion was sunk during a battle with the Soviet Navy. 2. Scorpion was deliberately sunk to keep certain people from talking about the USS Amberjack's role in the Operation Cyanide - USS Liberty affair.
Unfortunately, torpedoes are dangerous to handle because they contain a lot of fuel for the torpedo propulsion system in a very small area. This is why you wonder if a number of subs during World War II were lost due to torpedo explosions on all sides.
Certainly a possibility. There's numerous US subs from WWII listed as "fate unknown" officially and are presumed lost due to enemy action where the cause will forever be uncertain.
@@glennheth3472 You mean the source of energy for the propulsion system. Torpedo batteries are notoriously vulnerable to explosions if not handled properly.
@@Sacto1654 Correct. TheMk.37 torpedo was electrically propelled and there were documented problems with the Silver/Zinc batteries they used, including incidents where they overheated even exploded.
A fuel leak in an old torpedo caused the Kursk to go down...so it makes sense. What DOESN'T make sense, was that a fuel leak was noted on the projectile; but was still loaded on the Kursk.
Your a little shy on info. The sub was sunk by a Soviet helicopter launched homing torpedo. The reds knew exactly where the sub was because of the John Walker spy ring which gave the russians the daily key codes for their radio commo. The reason for the attack: The loss of the Soviet sub K129. The russians blamed it on a collision with a US sub and retaliated. That russian sub was actually attempting a ballistic missile launch against Hawaii. See the book "RED STAR ROGUE" by Kenneth Sewell and Clint Richmond. Non fiction, a very good read.
The Echo II was a slow, loud, noisy POS even by early 60's Soviet standards. The idea that it took out a vastly superior fast attack submarine is frankly laughable.
@@glennheth3472 One of the books written on the subject- I can't recall which- suggested it was a sub-hunter helicopter that torpedoed Scorpion, not an Echo II; and they drop close so it's hard to evade the weapon. But that means a ship had to be nearby, and I don't recall if that element was addressed. They point to the big chunk missing from the sail as evidence of a hit, and it is a really odd bit of damage- I don't know if there's a good explanation for that. But as mentioned, the SOSUS traces apparently don't show a high-order explosion like a torpedo warhead detonation- presumably even a smaller helicopter-carried type of torpedo. Whatever the case, it's a sad event.
The US Navy doesn't have uniforms big enough for giant squids, so they could never have gotten any giant squids to man the sub. (that's a Marine joke). 😀
Excellent article and correct regarding the cause of the sinking. In May of 1968 I was a nuke MM on an Atlantic-based Permit class SSN, and I have studied the sinking in great detail, and the battery explosion theory is the only one that fits the available evidence. Scorpion was apparently at periscope depth, based on the fact that the periscope was raised and the clamshell doors over the bridge were still closed (ship was not on the surface). She was also most likely dumping trash, a common practice while at periscope depth. Trash bags are dumped using a device called the Trash Disposal Unit (TDU), which is sort of a mini torpedo tube, and located in the kitchen/scullery. Unfortunately, the TDU on the Scorpion had a history of failing to close, causing sea water flooding (it was scheduled to be repaired). It’s not hard to imagine that, on that fateful day, the TDU might have suffered flooding of a nature that couldn’t be contained, and all that sea water had nowhere to go but down two decks to the battery, which was located at the very bottom of the Operations Compartment (not the Reactor Compartment). And, as you correctly pointed out, when the battery exploded it instantly killed everyone in the Operations Compartment, which is to say everyone who was controlling the ship. Other crew members were probably heavily stunned or knocked unconscious. This was followed by a slow descent as the ship took on more seawater, followed by a greater descent angle which probably approached vertical, until it reached crush depth, when the ship broke up.
Great information!! Pinning this for others to see!
I'll agree that the battery exploding is the most likely cause, however, a little food for thought. It's true the Soviets were a little over 200nm away from scorpion when she met her demise, however that is well within the range of both "Hormone" & "Helix" anti-submarine helos, of which there were a couple deployed with that Flotilla.. a helo would NOT be picked up with sonar.. one helo launched anti-sub torpedo would be all it would take to do the job AND there's that pesky little "shark bite" thing at the sail/hull juncture......just thinkin' out loud here based on the known facts.......and the Russkys swear up & down on a stack of rubles that we(US Navy) sunk K-129 in the Pacific to this very day, there's no convincing them otherwise.
❤
❤
@@martypalmiere7672 I'm not an acoustic expert, and the acoustic record of the sinking is murky and subject to varying interpretation; however, my understanding is that the initial muffled sound was determined to be internal to the hull, as opposed to a torpedo attack, which would have sounded very different, and probably more familiar to the experts, generating masses of bubbles. It's also likely that a torpedo splashing into the water and running toward the boat would have been detected by the SOSUS system. As far as the "shark bite" on the sail, keep in mind that the aft end of the sail contains the snorkel pipe, which exits the sail where it meets the hull, then travels aft under a fairing to the Auxiliary Machinery Space (AMS) where the diesel was located. It's likely the snorkel fairing was ripped off at the time of implosion, tearing a piece of the sail with it.
Having served on subs back in '80's I would believe any surviving crew would have spent the last moments doing anything possible to save themselves. I know the crews I served with would not have waited for death, they would have fought for life.
Reverse the screw, for instance.
Any Navy sailor would have done this regardless of what type of ship they were on. Especially on a submarine where everyone would have known and acted upon their memorized emergency action procedures.
So their final moments were likely quite chaotic rather than tranquil as the video suggests
If any survived the initial explosion, which is not likely.@@HRHooChicken
@@HRHooChickenvery chaotic
I was in the crew of the USS Scamp SSN-588, the sister ship of Scorpion, but did not arrived onboard until 1969. I recall a comment on this tape that the battery was located in the reactor compartment. The battery was located under the 3rd level of the Operations compartment. I used to sleep right above it. I also doubt there was a hydrogen explosion. The electricians closely monitor battery out-gassing and would have stopped the charge if there was any danger. This is not like a diesel boat where you have to surface and run the diesels to charge batteries. Nuc boats can charge batteries at any time and not wait until the battery is almost flat. I have read books about this incident and claims it was the Russians. Most likely the reports of numerous operating issues was the source of the catastrophe. But no one knows. Every May 22nd I think of Scorpion, her crew and pray for our subs and sailors. Subs are a dangerous business and we all took our jobs seriously.
I agree with you. The Russians are not at fault. This was an onboard explosion inside the submarine. A hot running torpedo or a battery
Clear reasoning. That is the kind I love.
I try my best!!
Good presentation bud. Got my sub!
Great video! I detect a little B'more drawl there! I wonder why the aft crew did t get forward to try to move the bow planes, etc and try to surface the boat? I was an AO at Whidbey Island NAS so subs are not in my area of expertise.
Not 100% sure, the likely scenario seems to be that the crew was incapacitated in some fashion, preventing them from attempting to surface or there was a failure with the subs systems that prevented it. I inquired with aubmariners who know more about this than I do and that was the direction they pointed me towards
Also, great hearing haha. I try my best with the annunciation of certain words to make sure I'm speaking as clearly as possible, I noticed in my recording that sometimes things can get lost in an accent I didn't realize I even had! Can't fix how I pronounce Baltimore in my latest video though 😅 🙃
13:01 How did they find out it was1530 ft?
Based on the time it took the sound from the implosion to reach the hydrophones and knowing the speed that sound travels in water and the depth of the hydrophones
Depth is calculated from the acoustic bubble pulse frequency. SOSUS identified the hull implosion and torpedo tube implosions from amplitude, but frequency is a function of depth. Google "Commentaries of Bruce Rule" for information on this, and more detail on the battery gas explosion theory.
Bruce Rule has the most thorough analysis.
I was there.
It sank.
Nice video, just fyi the battery isnt located in the reactor compartment. It's well forward of it. This is why the explosion and subsequent flooding kept this section of the hull mostly intact, as it did not experience the same implosion as the rest of the submarine.
Appreciate the input!!
@crasyhorse44 @todayshistory Yes, I paused at 9:26 to comment on the battery location. Found it already noted - good catch & thanks!
Did you serve on one of these "S" boats (Skipjack, Scamp, Scorpion, Shark, Sculpin, Snook)? I have 'fond' (not!!) memories of my many excursions into the battery well for pre-charge checks on USS Scamp (SSN-588) in the early 1980's. Such as, the exposed energized bus-bars and the minute airborne droplets of battery acid burning into uniforms & skin (good times!!).
Also recall some very eerie moments when coming across Reactor Plant Manual references to ship-specific Scorpion details, which had apparently been overlooked when updating the Class manuals. Shivers. RIP.
I remember EMs climbing out of the battery well with their uniforms getting holed up from battery acid and/or blackened up with battery well paint.
Same paint used to paint ‘BOHICA’ with a set of Dolphins on the captain’s gig off the Truxton whilst in Subic Bay.
From what I've heard, more than a few of the Scorpion's crew referred to her as the "USS Scrap Iron" due to her poor condition. I believe her test depth was 700 feet, but I recall hearing that she was restricted from diving that far down (maybe 150 or 350 feet). I also remember hearing of at least one sailor who actively lobbied getting transferred off of her, which saved his life.
Thank you for this explanation of this tragedy. I was a sailor aboard USS Lawrence DDG 4. We were also returning to the States following a Med cruise. Lawrence was one day ahead of the Scorpion and was doing periodic routine radio checks when she no longer responded. All the way back to Norfolk, every hour, it was "Brandywine, this is Proud Star, radio check, over." No answer. When we reached port, the entire fleet was being dispatched to begin the search. As Lawrence needed a scheduled boiler repair we went to the dry dock in Portsmouth. RIP Scorpion! Very sad.
OK, this is about the best theory as to what happened to Scorpion. I was stationed aboard USS Flasher SSN 613 at Pearl when we heard about Scorpion. Flasher was the first SUBSAFE certified submarine after the Thresher sinking. There were a thousand rumors going around as to what happened to Scorpion and I have known one of the men who sat on the board of inquiry about the sinking. I've read some of the books written about it and to a submariner they don't make sense. As a boat sailor I'm inclined to believe this theory more than any other at this time. Yes, accidents happen but submariners are well trained and are very careful people. The boat was known to have had insufficient maintenance due to the Navy cutting back on attention to needs over workload and the crew had begun to call her the Scrapiron instead of Scorpion.
Rest in Peace Shipmates! Hand Salute! Two!
Thank you for your service and your input!! I consulted with a lot of former submariners (in an informal sense) and they all agreed with and pointed me towards the hydrogen explosion.
Hi shipmate, did a 3-month Westpack on Flasher in '86, good boat and crew.
I was stationed on Flasher also and I believe we were not in PH but rather on patrol in the North Pacific. I distinctly remember we received a message in regards to Scorpion sinking.
Some additional information. We were in Port at Rhoda getting ready to go on our FBM patrol. The Scorpion had just returned from ops off of the Black Sea region. That evening some of our crew got together with the Scorpion crew at what we called the slop shoot, just off the pier. One of the crew did a fantastic impersonations of Tiny Tim, you know tip toe through the tulips. I was sitting with the Aux gang having a few beers. In that conversation, I found that the boat was in terrible mechanical condition. They had hoping to get some maintenance completed at the tender. One of the main pumps was inoperative, forget it was Drain pump or Trim pump but one of them was down. Other items were also needing work. The shaft seal was leaking 5 gallons a minute into the aft room. That would equate to about 40 +/- pounds per minute. It would have been a on going nightmare for the ballast control operation. When I look at some of the photos of the Scorpions last resting place, it appears the shaft and screw are not in place and the engine room and maybe the reactor space are driven into the aft part of the boat. My thought is that something catastrophically happened to the shaft and the boat. If enough sea water managed to get into the engine room it would shut down some critical equipment aft. I do know that the Aux gang members were not happy with the mechanical state of the boat. The Scorpion was a test model to minimize maintenance down time and control cost while keeping deterrents on station.
They did not get a full upgrade of Sub Safe on their last upkeep which the crew freely complained about.
We were on patrol when we found out she was overdue in port.
This information in not a conspiracy, it was information acquired while having an evening, drinking a few beers and chow with the Scorpion crew.
You're absolutely correct, Scorpion was in bad shape maintenance wise and potentially contributed to it's loss
The Men I talked with wanted off the boat, A gang types. I was amazed to see the boat gone the next morning. They were hoping to at least get the Pump repaired.
All that was present the night before were devastated to get the communication that it was overdue. Ships passing in the night a brief encounter. Fleeting friendships.
You are correct, the shaft and screw were ejected, as seen in the photographs. I read that, at the time of implosion, a sea water ram would have travelled from the Operations Compartment, travelling aft at something approaching 2,000 mph and crushing everything in its path. This would have driven all the reactor plant machinery to the after bulkhead, and as the main turbines were driven aft it is conceivable that the shaft would have been broken off and squeezed out the stern, coming to rest separately from the other sections, with the screw still attached.
I have no idea what happened to Scorpion. But it seems very unlikely that a battery compartment explosion was responsible. There are numerous hydrogen monitors in the battery compartment. An Electrician's Mate (EM) would have been monitoring them, especially if a battery charge was in progress. I do know this. I once met a fellow submariner who was transfered off Scorpion just before her loss. He said she was in very poor shape, with lots of problems that had not been properly addressed.
Yes a lot of speculation was made on her incomplete and possibly faulty overhaul. One of four submarines operating without a subsafe certification.
Little known fact: this was the SECOND USS Scorpion SSN-589; the original was cut in half, had a missile compartment added to her, and was renamed the USS George Washington (SSBN-598).
A friend of mine served on the Washington, and said that there were numerous pipes, fittings and other items that had "USS Scorpion SSN-589" etched in them.
Submarines do not hang out at Periscope depth stationary unless they lose propulsion, they are normally going 3-5 knots although submarines have been know hover at a depth while submerged and not move. You have to be moving to control your depth at PD, also you can charge your battery submerged. You know nuclear reactor generating steam to turn the generators. Yes it has been theorized that it was a battery explosion that caused the sinking and that could have caused the periscope to extend/be forced out while submerged. As someone said below the battery is not in the reactor compartment. Overall I say you did a good job.
Thank you for the video.
I have been interested in Submarines since i was a small boy. I have nothing but the utmost respect for anyone that serves in the 'silent service'. USS Scorpion, On eternal patrol. God bless them all.
Bless the crew of the USS Scorpion.
One additional feature I've seen in engineering reports that lends credence to the battery explosion is that pieces of batteries were recovered and were found to be melted, as if exposed to high heat as in an explosion.
Thank you for both your comments!!!
I don't understand the soviet attack theory. Why would the US actively cover-up soviet aggression?
That's more reason why it makes no sense. Proponents of the theory contend that the US sank a Soviet sub earlier in 1968 so the US stayed silent when USSR retaliated....but that goes back to why would the USSR not say anything about that??
Every year of the Cold War was "the height" of the Cold War... worn out.
Thank you for pointing out this cliche. It’s nearly as bad as “wintry mix”.
An excellent, concise video about the USS Scorpion disaster. The sub was poorly maintained to begin with, which might have led to a spark igniting the hydrogen gas given off by the battery. Puts to flight the various conspiracy theories that have arisen since that time.
RIP the 99 crew members of the Scorpion. 🙏🏻🙏🏻⚓⚓⚓
At the time the Mk 37 electric torpedoes were bad about initiating a hot run. Normal hot run procedures would be for the boat to turn 180 degree to set the anti-circular safeties as you stated.
Unlike diesel boats nuke boats do not have to surface or snorkel to charge batteries as they are kept charged via the steam generators which are fed by steam supplied by that big ol’ hibachi pot stuck between the ops compartment and machinery space; the reactor.
The air onboard boats is constantly monitored for any atmosphere contaminants, such as hydrogen, plus to insure all O2, CO2, etc levels are kept within specs for crew safety. Any out of spec hydrogen levels would have been dealt with immediately. O2 is generated through electrolysis where the hydrogen and oxygen molecules are separated via an electrical charge. Oxygen is either pumped into the crew spaces or pumped into holding tanks between the pressure and outer hills. The hydrogen is pumped overboard, gotten rid of.
I rode on her sister ship, SSN 588, as a sonarman back in the 70’s. Though everyone is either looking for a soviet boogeyman or a battery well explosion it was something more mundane and far more treacherous; bad refit and overhaul topped off with a Mk 37 hot run.
The last E7 LPO I had on the 588 was one of three who left the 589 in Rota as he had gotten emergency leave and a flight back to the states. His father had had a heart attack and was not expected to live. He never went to sea with us. In fact he was disqualified from submarines as it was required to go to sea to keep your qual status. He was ordered off the boat and out of the submarine service. Which, to be honest, he was rather glad off.
Not a bad video even though your premise is way off base and a bit dramatic given your penchant for enhancing the actual occurrence of her loss.
Big, and black, and never come back. That’s why they call them fast attacks.
I believe that a hot running torpedo downed this boat. That's why the sub is facing away from home on the bottom. She was making a turn to eject the torpedo when it exploded inside the sub
Eerrily enough the sonar evidence is very similar to the same sonar evidence of the sinking of the Argentine submarine ARA San Juan in 2017. An internal explosion sounds (possibly the battery) followed by sounds of her implosion.
At 10,000 feet depth, was there really any chance of rescue? These submariners are very brave and know the dangers.
Unfortunately no. The Scorpion's hull completely imploded leaving zero chance for survival
There are few submarines that could survive a descent to this depth. Contrary to popular belief, most military submarines are not rated for the extreme depths that submersibles can descend to, it's not practical to build something as big as a military submarine that robustly. Most military submarines (to public knowledge) operate somewhere between 1500 feet underwater, up to the surface. Below this depth, the submarine is destroyed by the extreme water pressure. According to the scenario presented in the video, Scorpion suffered the explosion, began sinking, and imploded at 1,500 feet down or so. All of the crew were dead when this ocurred, the submarine was crushed like a soda can. The wreckage of the submarine then continued descending the remaining 8,500 feet to the seafloor, none of the crew were alive for the last 90% of the descent to the ocean floor, they were all killed by either the initial explosion in the battery compartment, or the inplosion several minutes later.
@@jeebeejabba180most submarines do not operate anywhere near 1500 feet. The max published depth of US subs is 800’. They typically operate much shallower than that. 20 years as a Submariner, 4 Boats, 3 SSNs and 1 SSBN.
@@Subdood04 I didn't say they typically operate at 1500 feet, just giving a general window of where they CAN operate. Seawolf Class, Los Angeles Class, and Virginia class have all been tested to at least 1500 feet, per public records, and likely deeper, confidentially. I'm aware that issues in communication arise at these depths even over VLF systems ( at least publicly), but it is not outside the physical capabilities of the sub to achieve. Various Soviet submarines, despite being loud as shit, have been tested to deeper depths due to their titanium construction.
Also prior Navy, less service, not a bubblehead
EDIT: meters to feet.
No that's not what happened
She left the port of charleston in within one hour disappeared
I know this because my father actually has to patches to the US escorping. He was removed off to ship because of nuclear Clearance it was Transfer to a new place
Can I have the actual patch for the u s s scorpion
But then again he was Transfer to a new base
Wright Patterson Air Force base
Was stationed with one of the people that got off at Rota, and all I have to say is there is much more to the story. He talked some about that run some years later, not much but made you think, next he was in the OIC's office the next day, never to talk about the Scorpion again. He was induced to retire soon afterward. May all be just be coincidence or not, but there are times when you really DON'T want to know.
Could potentially be due to the Navy not wanting the poor maintenance record of the Scorpion to make it into the media. That's just pure speculation on my part.
I didn't go into great detail on Scorpion's maintenance issues largely because it wasn't necessarily part of the WHY it sunk part of the equation
@@todayshistory1398 I hear it ran into the cavern wall whilst navigating the subterrain passageway to Navel base under area 51, the thresher was taken by off world nordics. the navy has always been into the capture and investigation of USO's.
Under Nevada you're saying there is a underground water passage 350 miles long under California to Nevada area 51🤣@@jasondohery3128
@@jasondohery3128Whut? 😂
@@CraigCholar you have the tech right in front of you to find out, so why not use it?
most horrible way to die, gives me chills.. may their brave souls rest in peace..
I worked on some of the remaining 500's and early 600's numbered subs in Guam in the early 70's, the batteries on a nuclear can be charged at any time and are monitored at all times... I have no evidence that would prove error on the crew. However, I keep thinking about an encounter outside the sub may have existed... No conclusions on my part is possible, it is all in the actions of the crew... In training in the 70's this was a classical read for submarine crew. Learned about it at Vallejo Sub base. There were changes made to the battery banks on later class subs and their location on the boat... This brought memories back about how I and other repairmen considered ourselves to be responsible for keeping everyone safe on the many boats patrols. One of the main considerations was the redesign of the electrical panels and keeping them free from bilge water and condensation, a main reason for gassing of the batteries... RIP my fellow Sailors
also as a general note is that this is the time that the deadliest spy in USN history was active....John Walker, Jr. The Soviets knew exactly where our ships and subs were, in real time. They were reading our coded messages faster than we were.
I was on the Hugh Purvis DD709 out of Newport RI - a Sumner Class Destroyer with a Variable Depth Sonar. Were involved in the "search" operating off Cape Hatteras. The weather was terrible for days. It was pure hell. We were either on watch or strapped in our racks. Meals were sandwiches delivered to our racks. Interior passageways awash mixed with vomit. People collapsing to the deck sobbing.
I think the hydrogen theory has some problems. The whole submarine did NOT implode, which means that part of it was already flooded before they reached crush depth. Also, it fails to address the 180 degree turn from it's original course. The book Blind Man's Bluff digs deep into the story and makes a compelling case for a torpedo explosion.
It was a torpedo explosion. That's why she turned 180 degrees. It makes perfect sense. It all fits perfectly
On eternal patrol. RIP.
I was in elementary school in Norfolk when this happened. My grandfather worked at the Norfolk Naval Shipyard. I was too young to understand what had happened, but I remember the solemn mood and so many of my classmates that had lost their fathers. So much grief!!!
This is the best documentary I've seen about the fate of the vessel. Great work at debunking the theories and laying out plain facts.
Thank you!!
Very informative. Thanks
You're welcome, glad you found it helpful
Excellent video Sir! Well done.
Thank you!
Read WHY THE USS SCORPION (SSN 589) WAS LOST by Bruce Rule. Theory 3 has a lot of acoustical data to back it up.
Make sense
Served on 2 subs in the 70's and 80's. The training is amazing and crazy at the same time. Everyday is important. Every crew member is a important member of the survival and success of each deployment. Food is great, but hours are long and the lack of sleep is terrible. But, I think that the sacrifice of our brothers makes us stronger and still sad of their loss. We don't forget, we learn and honor them.
Just go back to Scamp incident on sea trials outside San Francisco abd remember "all back and blow " order and you will understand why like Scamp propeller and shaft broke off and look at parts on ocean floor and connect the dots
Your theory doesn’t account for the sections that were not imploded.
Very good video. Subscribed.
Awesome!! Glad you're here!
Very good documentary. Better to have explained that the “snorkel” was used during the ventilation on the surface at periscope depth… for that device is most vital for many submarine functions. SSBN624.
Why dodnt they move to the front quarters and blow the balast?
Scorpion had dive plains on the sail. Nad thubnail.
A lot of good information, good research. One of many questions not answered,, why was she headed East, and not West?
Great question that I couldn't find a good answer to and didn't want to add any speculation on
The far out theories would suggest that she was facing that way while engaged with an enemy l
The other option that would support the torpedo theory would be that the sub had attempted to do a 180 to deactivate it. There's a lot of detailed acoustic information that suggests the sub was stationary and remained stationary when the incident that sunk it occurred. It was a little more in depth than I felt needed to be included due to the lack of hull breach
They may have faced east while recharging their batteries due to the knowledge that there was a Russian flotilla in that direction, but I have no sources to back this theory and os just my own. I really didn't want to include my opinion if I could help it
What I don't understand is how did it take 21 minutes to reach crush depth when, from the evidence cited in the SOSUS recording, has the death of Scorpion lasting just 91 seconds.
Also, the submarine was largely intact. Had it suffered a total implosion, nothing bigger than a scrap of metal would be left as in the case of the Thresher. This implies the boat was largely flooded with perhaps the aft section being dry and thus imploding forward into the rest of the boat, spitting out the propeller shaft as a result.
This sub blew up before exceeding crush depth
Question: Would it have been possible for the surviving crew to have made their way to the operations room and regained control of the submarine? Assuming yhe explosion only knocked out/killed the crew thay were all ready there, the controls should have been intact and operational.
Not likely. From what I understand, if it was in fact a hydrogen explosion from the battery, the battery would've continued putting off hydrogen and the damage to the battery may have created an environment that would be difficult to get through or survive in.
In addition, anyone who was alive wouldn't necessarily have the training or know how to operate the functions of the submarine in the operations compartment.
Anyone wearing dolphins would have enough cross-training to return Scorpion to the surface. Portable oxygen equipment was available. The explosion likely killed the entire crew.@@todayshistory1398
This is not what I have been led to believe. All submariners are trained to know every bit and part of their ship. This is done to prevent just this problem from occurring. It is easy to come up with scenarios in which a part of the crew gets incapacitated and the remaining crew members have to take over. Hence everybody is certified to take over any role on the ship. Second: toxic gases on a submarine is something for which submariners train very frequently and have all the necessary equipment right next to them. So again this is not in support of the hydrogen explosion theory. You would have to hypothesize that this explosion killed all crew members or buckeld the hatch covers (or whatever they are called) between the compartments in such a way that the foreward section of the sub couldn't be reached any more. And again - how is the observation that the boat was apparently travelling Eastward when the calamity occurred explained by the hydrogen explosion theory?
@@wkgurr It was facing eastward on the sea floor that does not necessarily mean it was traveling in that direction at the time of the explosion. It also imploded long before reaching it's final depth. the sub could have very well spun one or more times in it's crushed state before reaching the bottom.
Thanks for the well thought explanation, Who knows what really happened. All the information we have is coming from the Navy....Think about that. Great video!
Thank you!!
@ARQWELDER
0 seconds ago
Retired Submariner here. Nice conspiracy theory type video, but you are WAY off. I’m not going into too much detail, but the SCORPION was not at periscope depth when the boat met her fate and she was not at a stand still. If there had been an explosion at the forward end of the ship with the engineering crew still alive, they would have secured propulsion, steered controlled ships depth from the engineering spaces. Everything on a Submarine is about redundancy, especially during emergency situations. The fact that the batteries are located forward of the engine room and that they’re constantly monitored, forcing the crew to act on any rise of gases completely annihilates your theory; unless your saying that the entire crew just dropped the ball on their daily routines.
Best analysis suggests that due to the scattering of debris, that the SCORPION had an explosion that brought down the boat and then imploded fairly quickly with sections of the sub still intact but split in two. Many submarine veterans, Torpedomen and Sonar Techs, believe that there was a hot running torpedo incident while a torpedo was being worked on while it was in the skids and not in a torpedo tube, which is the most conclusive reasoning for an explosion which would have caused the most damage forcing the body to sink.
Thank you for your service and your experienced input!!
I didn't intend for this to be a conspiracy theory video, in fact, I intended it to refute some of the popular conspiracy theories out there since I believe those are damaging to the memories of those who died in the tragedy.
I did turn towards veteran submariners for information and reasons for the hydrogen explosion theory in the r/submarines subreddit which provided lots of detailed explanations and sources from which I drew my conclusions.
I don't claim to be an expert by any means and I certainly didn't intend for this to be considered the definitive conclusion either.
The problem with that is that although the hot run torpedo theory was considered-- and, given certain acoustic data, apparently was for a while a leading candidate-- the Navy eventually ruled it out based on the forensic evidence.
this is well thought out and presented, respect. I have been curious about one thing since I have seen this one pic for years, there is a circular pattern of destruction on the trailing edge of the sail. Previously the torpedo theory seemed to fit. Have you considered how this might have happened?
Ik the picture you're speaking of. It could be from implosion damage or from contact with debris or the sea floor while sinking
I'm not a structural engineer so I can't give a better answer. The likelihood is that if it was sunk by its own torpedo (which is still a plausible theory), it would've detonated in it's tube or shortly after being launched to try and jettison the torpedo
@@todayshistory1398 back when the pics were released in the 80s, I think, I noticed that damaged pattern. I then read about the torp theory. So my thinking was a failed torp, the boat tried to turn 180 degrees to turn the torp off, that might have failed so finally the crew ejected the torp and turned tried to outrun it but the torp caught up and hit the flat sail (big return for the targeting sonar). The blew the sail off and breached the hull enough for the sub to sink to crush depth. If possible an internal inspection via ROV should/might reveal more info on the cause. If that has been done we will never know. The fact that no US sub has sink, fingers crossed, since then does point to enhanced safety and maintenance standards navy wide.
@@mikethompson2650 The enhanced safety and maintenance standards actually came into being after Thresher sank on trials. Scorpion was built before Thresher. No submarine built since Thresher has been lost.
we have not been told what did happened, but I'm sure they do know. Maybe its some secret reason that they need to keep secret????
I think it's a case of they actually DON'T know, which is why the Navy has a few theories that believe are the most likely and also why some have let their imagination run a little wild
13:56 I don't know if there were any near accidents, but I hope that lessons were learned from any and assume that this loss also taught an expensive lesson.
Hard to say. The USS Connecticut struck a seamount in 2021 and USS San Francisco did as well in 2005.
Neither was the result of mechanical failure or an issue with the submarine itself
Good job!
You am ex sub guy?
Scary having been there just considering what I did back then…
I am not but I certainly appreciate those who are or have been submariners. The ocean is scary enough as it is much less being in a steel tube submerged beneath it!!
@@todayshistory1398I can tell you never served on a sub!
The boat's batteries weren't in the reactor compartment, they were under the torpedo room. We didn't have to be at periscope depth and not moving to recharge them!
Don't try to be an expert at things you don't know about!
You probably think a critical reactor is a bad thing. What about the effective multiplication factor. Why are hafnium control rods used?
What is SINS?
Quit making incorrect videos in your uneducated Borak accent!
USN '81-'91!!!
Very very plausible theory on what would have happened. Explains why the stern is imploded. However I am very skeptical over when the fall of the Berlin Wall happened and the whole Walker spy ring, that one of our ambassadors went over to Russia and asked about some of the prisoners that had been taken knowing full well Russia knew where they were, and he brought up the K-129 and the video we gave them regarding the burial at Sea we gave the Russian sailors. The russian, I believe it was kgb, official said that he was very young and basically if you read between the lines, that K-129 and USS scorpion were definitely involved in some way, shape or form. Not saying they had a skirmish or anything like that, but that we both lose a sub in 1968? Seems a little tit for tat ish. That's the only thing that remains skeptical with me. This definitely ties in with k129 for me,, I mean if that sub had gone rogue? We would have known about it and we would have sunk it, regardless if it had plans of it's own. I definitely three two to be linked. We've come to the brink of world war 3 more times than you can imagine in 50 years.
Earned yourself a sub! No pun intended.
Russia torpedo sank scorpion
Possibly, but not known for certain.
Care to post links to evidence to back this up? You cannot refute the argument outlined in the video with subjective opinion .
One of the enlisted instructors at naval submarine school, a petty officer 1st class, told a large group of us trainees in class one day, that the Scorpion was torpedoed by the Russians. None of the other lifer dogs in attendance contradicted him. And subsequently at least two different books have claimed the same thing, including the book written by the technical advisor to the film Phantom which dealt with the Soviet submarine service. But the navy’s expert on the subject Dr. Craven disagreed, claiming that the sinking was caused by a hot running torpedo which exploded inside of the boat. I served on both a Polaris submarine and a Sturgeon class fast attack boat. One problem with the two books I mentioned is that they contradict each other in that the one author believed it was a Russian sub that torpedoed them while the other one claimed that it was a Russian naval helicopter that torpedoed them. Supposedly the Russians believed that the US navy had torpedoed one of their own boats in the North Pacific, or in other words the boat which was at least partially recovered by Howard Hughes’ Glomar Explorer. Presumably that boat was hijacked by a KGB Spetznaz team which then attempted to launch a nuclear armed ballistic missile while surfaced in order to create the impression that it was the Chinese who nuked Pearl Harbor in order to start a nuclear war between the United States and Red China in 1968. I would have to completely re-read both books in order to get my head wrapped around this topic, something I’m not going to do right now. My gut tells me that Dr. Craven was probably correct. In 1968 though, the United States probably could have taken out Red China with a fairly limited nuclear strike without destroying the planet, especially if the Russians had actually wanted us to do exactly that for their own perverse reasons. This mastermind of this supposed plot was the then director of the KGB, Yuri Andropov, who subsequently became the premier of the Soviet Union, and if I recall accurately was removed from office for being mentally incompetent owing to his advanced age.
I know of the two books you're talking about. The evidence contradicts most claims of any Russian involvement in the sinking.
The more convoluted the conspiracy, the weaker it's grip on truth becomes. I think people want the world to be more exciting than it actually is and spin stories to fit that world.
Craven later admitted the hot torpedo theory was wrong.
Thank you for that. The two books on the market claiming that the Scorpion was torpedoed by the Soviets are extremely convincing even if the one claims it was a Russian ASW helicopter and the other claims it was a submarine that launched the torpedo. The books titles are : SCORPION DOWN by Ed Offley and ALL HANDS DOWN by Kenneth Sewell. Kenneth Sewell was also the technical advisor to the movie PHANTOM which was loosely based on his book.@@gdixbrown
Incapacitated
Well, I guess this suggests that Percy didn't squeeze the hull.
Two dominant theories: 1. Scorpion was sunk during a battle with the Soviet Navy. 2. Scorpion was deliberately sunk to keep certain people from talking about the USS Amberjack's role in the Operation Cyanide - USS Liberty affair.
3. Scorpion was in poor condition. Reports had been made to that effect.
Both those theories are nonsense.
Unfortunately, torpedoes are dangerous to handle because they contain a lot of fuel for the torpedo propulsion system in a very small area. This is why you wonder if a number of subs during World War II were lost due to torpedo explosions on all sides.
Certainly a possibility. There's numerous US subs from WWII listed as "fate unknown" officially and are presumed lost due to enemy action where the cause will forever be uncertain.
Another theory is that it wasn't the torpedo's warhead that detonated but rather the battery.
@@glennheth3472 You mean the source of energy for the propulsion system. Torpedo batteries are notoriously vulnerable to explosions if not handled properly.
@@Sacto1654 Correct. TheMk.37 torpedo was electrically propelled and there were documented problems with the Silver/Zinc batteries they used, including incidents where they overheated even exploded.
A fuel leak in an old torpedo caused the Kursk to go down...so it makes sense. What DOESN'T make sense, was that a fuel leak was noted on the projectile; but was still loaded on the Kursk.
Your a little shy on info. The sub was sunk by a Soviet helicopter launched homing torpedo. The reds knew exactly where the sub was because of the John Walker spy ring which gave the russians the daily key codes for their radio commo. The reason for the attack: The loss of the Soviet sub K129. The russians blamed it on a collision with a US sub and retaliated. That russian sub was actually attempting a ballistic missile launch against Hawaii. See the book "RED STAR ROGUE" by Kenneth Sewell and Clint Richmond. Non fiction, a very good read.
That book has zero basis in reality
@@todayshistory1398And you know how? The submarine was on the surface when torpedoed by the Russians. That is all I am going to say.
except there's no sonar or SOSUS data to confirm this
By mutual agreement between the Us and the soviets, they covered It up.@@eggbert123123123
The Soviet attack theory is THE correct answer as to what sunk the Scorpion.
There isn't a shred of evidence to support it
The Echo II was a slow, loud, noisy POS even by early 60's Soviet standards. The idea that it took out a vastly superior fast attack submarine is frankly laughable.
Means nothing if Scorpion is not a war believing all is ok, then gets ambushed and or fired upon.. @@glennheth3472
@@glennheth3472 One of the books written on the subject- I can't recall which- suggested it was a sub-hunter helicopter that torpedoed Scorpion, not an Echo II; and they drop close so it's hard to evade the weapon. But that means a ship had to be nearby, and I don't recall if that element was addressed. They point to the big chunk missing from the sail as evidence of a hit, and it is a really odd bit of damage- I don't know if there's a good explanation for that. But as mentioned, the SOSUS traces apparently don't show a high-order explosion like a torpedo warhead detonation- presumably even a smaller helicopter-carried type of torpedo. Whatever the case, it's a sad event.
@@todayshistory1398 There’s not a shred of evidence to support any of the other theories therefore the Soviet attack theory is the logical solution
0:10 ...my personal ideea is that the sub was attacked by one or two giant squids just like in the movie 20000 Leagues Under The Sea...🤔🤔🤔
That would certainly be one of the wilder theories
...Hi. It is scientific fact that the area around the Azores it is a hotspot for giant squids and sperm whales...🤔
The US Navy doesn't have uniforms big enough for giant squids, so they could never have gotten any giant squids to man the sub. (that's a Marine joke). 😀
Standard bad American workmanship while building killed Scorpion & Thresher....
Soviet ASW chopper dropped a mine on it is another theory from a book I read.
Good stuff.
Look forward to your next video!
Thank you!! Glad you're here!!