Mr Bombastic

I feel like a technological dinosaur.

EN Submarine Qualified Loc: Wisconsin East coast

Yep, I have heard there is even a pressurized water reactor installed back aft somewhere instead of those wonderful GM 16-278A's and FM 38D 8 and 1/8's. How times change!! Grins.

Mr Bombastic

I served in the modern Navy, but my ship was a dinosaur. An Iowa class. We needed those old fashioned troubleshooting skills to work on most of the equipment we used. I also needed to know a bit about hydraulics.

EN Submarine Qualified Loc: Wisconsin East coast

Iowa Class battleship, I'm guessing.
I live in a 3 story apartment house. The man who lives just below me was an electrician's Mate on USS Wisconsin (BB-64)

Mr Bombastic

I was on the USS Missouri BB-63. Gunners Mate 16"/50 three gun turret. Sounds glamourous, but that thing leaked oil like a sieve. I think I spent more time cleaning than anything else.

EN Submarine Qualified Loc: Wisconsin East coast

While on the subject of Iowa class, I was on a Gator ship and it didn't ride real well. During one storm, a 1st class Engineman we got from New Jersey (BB-62) commented that it got so rough on the jersey one time, they had to secure the pool table. Oh my, the horrors of that.
Another little tidbit. The Kentucky (BB-66) was built up to the main deck. Barbettes in but no turrets. It was in Portsmouth VA yard and I went aboard. impressive 888 feet of unobstructed view from bow to stern.
The Wisconsin was in a collision and tore up the bow for 75 or so feet. They towed Kentucky to Newport News and cut a piece to fit from her and installed it on Wisconsin. Then they took the damaged portion and placed it on the deck of Kentucky and towed her off to scrap. Anyone liking to see pics can google USS Wisconsin (BB-64). They have a bunch of pics.

Mr Bombastic

Those battleships were pretty stable. One time we hit the edge of a typhoon, down around the Cape of Good Hope. 50 foot seas. I believe the worst roll we took was 17 degrees. The guys on the tin cans were walking on the bulkheads and had to strap themselves into their bunks so they wouldn't fall out. I heard they also missed several hot meals because the mess cooks couldn't cook anything.

kmsmncm

The advantage of submarines is that we could dive until it was as calm as can be. I remember once up above the Arctic Circle we were coming to periscope depth for housekeeping evolutions and started taking rolls of 35-40 degrees (we were shaped like a cigar) and pitches up to 25 degrees, at 225 feet below the surface. We decided to wait on that periscope depth thing; it was quite calm below 400 feet.

Mr Bombastic

I've always wondered about the sanity of someone who would serve on a ship that was designed to sink on purpose.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

Excuuuussseeeeee meee~ have you ever met a woman that was wrong??? Lololl

As for the water issue I only drink reverse osmosis which is striped of impurities to 99.% of them..

Was involved in some Cali water litigation years back~~ city water litigation and learned plenty about water.. mainly it's dang deadly given what floats in it unless it's gone through reverse osmosis.. If they advertised spring water that's what your getting , any animal that has urunated, defecated etc included... Salt filteration does strip your body of its needed oils etc..

I even use my reverse osmosis water in my coffee pot.. Soooooo much better!!! I mean real coffee.

Mr Bombastic

Actually, spring water comes from underground aquifers. It's the best water on Earth.

kmsmncm

Sinking is a one-way process; submerging brings with it the concept of resurfacing. I am reminded of a story of a get together of senior officers and an Aviator Admiral was chiding a Submarine Admiral in much the same way. The Submariner turned to the Aviator and said, "I've seen a lot more planes under water than I've seen submarines in the air."

Mr Bombastic

That may be true, but subs don't have ejection seats.

EN Submarine Qualified Loc: Wisconsin East coast

Agree with all you write. Can only vouch for what happens in diesel boats. We were equipped with a snorkel so we could run engines and revitalize the atmosphere without surfacing.
Problem was the air in the boat was pretty rank by 4-5 in the afternoon even with the crew being pretty much laid back. We really didn't have a choice. Problem was the waves are still very active at periscope depth which was also snorkel depth so we felt it big time.
Additionally the snorkel mast had a head valve which went shut when water got to it to prevent taking water down the mast and and the ventilation piping. When running one or two main engines and the head valve went shut, it didn't take long for the engines to pull a 6" Hg vacuum in the boat. At this time, a vacuum switch shut down the engine(s). Stand by ear drums, you have a thrill coming. Point being, waves are there even submerged. Not much concern for a boat at 500 feet, we couldn't do that anytime but when snorkelling, we were at 58 feet so depth control was a real bear for the planesmen. We termed the vacuum trip of the engines as a 'flame out'. If it was really rough, you might have 10 or 15 flameouts in a 4 hour watch. Certainly not every day but enough to stay in practice lighting off and blowing the water out of the exhaust stack which free flooded when the engines shut down on high vacuum. It was only the flow of the engine exhaust which kept the water out of the exhaust stack.
It was an interesting way to make a living. I was discharged in 1961 but I will assure you, I could still light off snorkelling even today.
One other little thing when I reread the post I am responding to. Yes on a nuke, a dive in rough seas is definitely a thing to do. Actually during a dive, the center of gravity and the center of buoyancy swap positions. This simply means the boat could easily roll over. As a consequence of that little gem, we rode out some pretty rough seas on the surface. Remember when surfacing, the same thing happens on your stability but a surface takes longer to get up than a dive so you hung out longer on a surface.

lindajoy Loc: right here with you....

Some do, most do not... Have to disagree with you here..! I was present in any number of test standards done on raw waste waters, lakes, rivers, ocean etc.. Stood right there while samples of each was tested.. Spring water and purified water are very different. Purified water has had impurities and contaminants removed... Spring water may have been disinfected, but most impurities and contaminants remain...In terms of quality, spring water is much closer to tap water than purified water... And that is a fact...
Government regulations ensure that spring water has to be significantly purer and healthier than what's coming out of the tap??? Nope, not at all.. Not even close. Government regulations pertaining to spring water are mainly designed to ensure that the water is free from certain harmful bacteria and that bottling is done under clean and sanitary conditions. There are no special requirements for "purity" of spring water products....In fact, some of the most popular spring water brands actually have a much higher impurity level than the average glass of U.S. municipal tap water... Full of wastes, chemicals, arsinc, drugs etc..
Nor does Spring water emerge naturally from deep within the earth. Most spring waters are drawn to the surface through elaborate pumping systems, rather than "springing" forth naturally..... which is why it has to be treated..
Nothing ecologically pristine, or protected in its source....

Sorry, Mr. B but what I'm telling you comes from a lawsuit I was actively involved in because I was fascinated by it all.. I can't say what the underlining case was as it involves a municipality but it was over water..

Do yourself a favor~drinking water is good for you, just make sure it's reverse osmosis or your throwing away your money...