China’s New Autonomous, Self-Sinking Nuclear Submarine

 

A startling rumor has surfaced that earlier this year that the People’s Republic of China, the most innovative nation on the planet, that has made such amazing technological advances as high-speed trains that sometimes don’t need rails, high-rise buildings that autonomously destroy themselves to create more open spaces in cities, self-driving, self-exploding EVs, and self-cleaning sewer systems which also explode and spew human feces over city streets – has now created the world’s first autonomous self-sinking nuclear attack submarine. Official Chinese state media outlets have made no comment about the new technological wonder, and coy CCP authorities have stated that there never was an autonomous self-sinking nuclear submarine. They that report that there was a submarine, but that it may have sunk without any human intervention, human intelligence or control are simply fantasies promoted by anti-CCP, running dogs of capitalist countries. Though, a spokesman for the CCP has stated that if China wanted to build such an amazing vessel it certainly wouldn’t tell anyone about it unless it wanted to, so there.

The new technological wonder that the Chinese government denies having made, may have very briefly been on display at a pier near Wuhan (yes, that Wuhan) when the amazing nuclear sub determined all on its own, that it was time to display its artificial intelligence prowess by sinking without any human intervention whatsoever. There are no reports – and absolutely no rumors – that President Xi was said to have been so impressed with the new technological breakthrough, that he immediately ordered that the builders and several high-ranking Chinese naval officers report to him immediately to receive a special accommodation commendation. There are absolutely no concerns about oil or radioactive material leaking into the Yangtze River near Wuhan. None. Stop it.

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 43 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Percival (View Comment):

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):

    Arahant (View Comment):

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):
    Heck, there was a U-boat on the Chicago River, once.

    There still is. Its not in the river anymore… But U 505 is at the Griffin Museum in Chicago. Its in a dry dock boat house so that you can walk completely around it.

    Griffin Museum? What? Oh, it changed names a mere four-and-a-half months ago. Man, are you ever up to date.

    No. I just googled it after you said there was a U Boat in Chicago. That sounded interesting.

    Been there since ’54.

    The U-505 was drawn up onto the 57th Street Beach, preparatory to crossing Lake Shore Drive.

    It seems almost easier to flood Chicago and float it across.

    • #31
  2. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    cdor (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):

    Arahant (View Comment):

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):
    Heck, there was a U-boat on the Chicago River, once.

    There still is. Its not in the river anymore… But U 505 is at the Griffin Museum in Chicago. Its in a dry dock boat house so that you can walk completely around it.

    Griffin Museum? What? Oh, it changed names a mere four-and-a-half months ago. Man, are you ever up to date.

    No. I just googled it after you said there was a U Boat in Chicago. That sounded interesting.

    Been there since ’54.

    The U-505 was drawn up onto the 57th Street Beach, preparatory to crossing Lake Shore Drive.

    It seems almost easier to flood Chicago and float it across.

    There are people who have homes on the east shore who don’t want Lake Michigan water levels to rise.   

    • #32
  3. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    cdor (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):

    Arahant (View Comment):

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):
    Heck, there was a U-boat on the Chicago River, once.

    There still is. Its not in the river anymore… But U 505 is at the Griffin Museum in Chicago. Its in a dry dock boat house so that you can walk completely around it.

    Griffin Museum? What? Oh, it changed names a mere four-and-a-half months ago. Man, are you ever up to date.

    No. I just googled it after you said there was a U Boat in Chicago. That sounded interesting.

    Been there since ’54.

    The U-505 was drawn up onto the 57th Street Beach, preparatory to crossing Lake Shore Drive.

    It seems almost easier to flood Chicago and float it across.

    There are people who have homes on the east shore who don’t want Lake Michigan water levels to rise.

    Between the Chicago River and the 57th Street Beach, you’ve got a lot of real estate. Like the entire Loop.

    • #33
  4. Percival Thatcher
    Percival
    @Percival

    • #34
  5. Sisyphus Member
    Sisyphus
    @Sisyphus

    Percival (View Comment):

    Careless.

    • #35
  6. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    cdor (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):

    Arahant (View Comment):

    OccupantCDN (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):
    Heck, there was a U-boat on the Chicago River, once.

    There still is. Its not in the river anymore… But U 505 is at the Griffin Museum in Chicago. Its in a dry dock boat house so that you can walk completely around it.

    Griffin Museum? What? Oh, it changed names a mere four-and-a-half months ago. Man, are you ever up to date.

    No. I just googled it after you said there was a U Boat in Chicago. That sounded interesting.

    Been there since ’54.

    The U-505 was drawn up onto the 57th Street Beach, preparatory to crossing Lake Shore Drive.

    It seems almost easier to flood Chicago and float it across.

    There are people who have homes on the east shore who don’t want Lake Michigan water levels to rise.

    Well, OK, but other than that…

    • #36
  7. OccupantCDN Coolidge
    OccupantCDN
    @OccupantCDN

    A few years ago (2021) the USS Connecticut was involved in a submerged collision. While it didnt sink it was a pretty serious accident. 

    • #37
  8. CACrabtree Coolidge
    CACrabtree
    @CACrabtree

    Stad (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    CACrabtree (View Comment):

    Ah, the Chinese were just keeping up with India…

    https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/how-sink-3-billion-dollar-nuclear-submarine-leave-hatch-open-208170

    India’s sub didn’t sink. It was just a case of excessive moisture.

    IIRC, we (the US) had a nuke sub sink at the pier. I forgot which one, so I’ll look it up later. I believe what happened was an internal tank started filling with water. The topside watch, who is supposed to take hourly waterline readings fore and aft, failed to notice the rising water level. Once the water reached the first open hatch, it was all over …

    I believe you’re referring to the USS Miami (SSN-755), a Los Angeles class submarine.  In May of 2012 a depressed painter by the name of Casey J. Fury threw some lit rags on a bunk starting a fire.  He was sentenced to 17 years in prison.  The submarine was scrapped.

    • #38
  9. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    CACrabtree (View Comment):

    Ah, the Chinese were just keeping up with India…

    https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/how-sink-3-billion-dollar-nuclear-submarine-leave-hatch-open-208170

    India’s sub didn’t sink. It was just a case of excessive moisture.

    IIRC, we (the US) had a nuke sub sink at the pier. I forgot which one, so I’ll look it up later. I believe what happened was an internal tank started filling with water. The topside watch, who is supposed to take hourly waterline readings fore and aft, failed to notice the rising water level. Once the water reached the first open hatch, it was all over …

    These days, no surprise, any search for “submarine sinking” is filled with the China story, even when “US” is specified.

    But, do you mean the USS Guitarro (SSN-665)? If so, that sub was still under construction so it wasn’t a miliary watch that failed. And under “normal” circumstances the total flooding and sinking could have been prevented by closing hatches and watertight doors, but while under construction those had cables etc passing through them, and could not be closed.

    Yes!  That’s it!

    As for fouling the hatch, if there were cables and hoses passing through, there would be (or in this case, should have been) extra vigilance in watching the waterline.  For fully operational boats, shore power can be brought in via the engine room hatch, but they’re attached in the escape trunk.  This allows the lower hatch to be shut and dogged.

    However, because the Guitarro was floating, that implies it had already been launched, which means the crew is on board and in charge of all the systems.  OTOH, this was the case for my submarine, which I was part of the launch crew.  The ride out during the actual launch was a blast:

    If you look hard enough, you can see me standing on the starboard fairwater plane, saluting with my right hand as I held on for dear life with my left . . .

    • #39
  10. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Stad (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    CACrabtree (View Comment):

    Ah, the Chinese were just keeping up with India…

    https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/how-sink-3-billion-dollar-nuclear-submarine-leave-hatch-open-208170

    India’s sub didn’t sink. It was just a case of excessive moisture.

    IIRC, we (the US) had a nuke sub sink at the pier. I forgot which one, so I’ll look it up later. I believe what happened was an internal tank started filling with water. The topside watch, who is supposed to take hourly waterline readings fore and aft, failed to notice the rising water level. Once the water reached the first open hatch, it was all over …

    These days, no surprise, any search for “submarine sinking” is filled with the China story, even when “US” is specified.

    But, do you mean the USS Guitarro (SSN-665)? If so, that sub was still under construction so it wasn’t a miliary watch that failed. And under “normal” circumstances the total flooding and sinking could have been prevented by closing hatches and watertight doors, but while under construction those had cables etc passing through them, and could not be closed.

    Yes! That’s it!

    As for fouling the hatch, if there were cables and hoses passing through, there would be (or in this case, should have been) extra vigilance in watching the waterline. For fully operational boats, shore power can be brought in via the engine room hatch, but they’re attached in the escape trunk. This allows the lower hatch to be shut and dogged.

    However, because the Guitarro was floating, that implies it had already been launched, which means the crew is on board and in charge of all the systems. OTOH, this was the case for my submarine, which I was part of the launch crew. The ride out during the actual launch was a blast:

    If you look hard enough, you can see me standing on the starboard fairwater plane, saluting with my right hand as I held on for dear life with my left . . .

    Apparently, at least back in the 60s, they would be floating while still being finished inside etc.  It was “launched” in 1968, and “commissioned” in 1972.

    From Wikipedia I got these details:

     

    On 15 May 1969, Guitarro was moored in the Napa River at Mare Island Naval Shipyard while construction was still underway. At about 16:00, a civilian nuclear construction group began to calibrate the aft ballast tanks, which required them to fill the tanks with approximately 5 short tons (4.5 t) of water. Within 30 minutes, a different, non-nuclear civilian construction group began an assignment to bring Guitarro within a half-degree of trim; this entailed adding water to the forward ballast tanks to overcome a reported two-degree up-bow attitude. Until shortly before 20:00, both groups continued to add water, unaware of each other’s activities.[1]

    Twice between 16:30 and 20:00, a security watch advised the non-nuclear group that Guitarro was riding so low forward that the 1.5-foot-high (0.46 m) wakes of boats operating in the Napa River were sloshing into the sonar dome manhole, but the group ignored the warnings. At 19:45, the non-nuclear group stopped adding water to the ballast tanks and began to halt work for their meal break, leaving at 20:00. At 19:50, the nuclear group completed their calibrations and began to empty the tanks aft.[1]

    At 20:30, both the nuclear group, still aboard, and the non-nuclear group, returning from their break, noticed Guitarro taking a sudden down angle which put the forward hatches underwater. Massive flooding took place through several large open hatches. Efforts between 20:30 and 20:45 to close watertight doors and hatches were largely unsuccessful because lines and cables ran through the doors and hatches, preventing them from closing. At 20:55, Guitarro sank, leaving only her sail above water, earning her the nickname “Mare Island Mud Puppy”.[1]

     

    More at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Guitarro_(SSN-665)

    • #40
  11. cdor Member
    cdor
    @cdor

    Stad (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    CACrabtree (View Comment):

    Ah, the Chinese were just keeping up with India…

    https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/how-sink-3-billion-dollar-nuclear-submarine-leave-hatch-open-208170

    India’s sub didn’t sink. It was just a case of excessive moisture.

    IIRC, we (the US) had a nuke sub sink at the pier. I forgot which one, so I’ll look it up later. I believe what happened was an internal tank started filling with water. The topside watch, who is supposed to take hourly waterline readings fore and aft, failed to notice the rising water level. Once the water reached the first open hatch, it was all over …

    These days, no surprise, any search for “submarine sinking” is filled with the China story, even when “US” is specified.

    But, do you mean the USS Guitarro (SSN-665)? If so, that sub was still under construction so it wasn’t a miliary watch that failed. And under “normal” circumstances the total flooding and sinking could have been prevented by closing hatches and watertight doors, but while under construction those had cables etc passing through them, and could not be closed.

    Yes! That’s it!

    As for fouling the hatch, if there were cables and hoses passing through, there would be (or in this case, should have been) extra vigilance in watching the waterline. For fully operational boats, shore power can be brought in via the engine room hatch, but they’re attached in the escape trunk. This allows the lower hatch to be shut and dogged.

    However, because the Guitarro was floating, that implies it had already been launched, which means the crew is on board and in charge of all the systems. OTOH, this was the case for my submarine, which I was part of the launch crew. The ride out during the actual launch was a blast:

    If you look hard enough, you can see me standing on the starboard fairwater plane, saluting with my right hand as I held on for dear life with my left . . .

    Nice pic Stad. I see you there…lookin’ good!

    • #41
  12. Stad Coolidge
    Stad
    @Stad

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Stad (View Comment):

    Percival (View Comment):

    CACrabtree (View Comment):

    Ah, the Chinese were just keeping up with India…

    https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/how-sink-3-billion-dollar-nuclear-submarine-leave-hatch-open-208170

    India’s sub didn’t sink. It was just a case of excessive moisture.

    IIRC, we (the US) had a nuke sub sink at the pier. I forgot which one, so I’ll look it up later. I believe what happened was an internal tank started filling with water. The topside watch, who is supposed to take hourly waterline readings fore and aft, failed to notice the rising water level. Once the water reached the first open hatch, it was all over …

    These days, no surprise, any search for “submarine sinking” is filled with the China story, even when “US” is specified.

    But, do you mean the USS Guitarro (SSN-665)? If so, that sub was still under construction so it wasn’t a miliary watch that failed. And under “normal” circumstances the total flooding and sinking could have been prevented by closing hatches and watertight doors, but while under construction those had cables etc passing through them, and could not be closed.

    Yes! That’s it!

    As for fouling the hatch, if there were cables and hoses passing through, there would be (or in this case, should have been) extra vigilance in watching the waterline. For fully operational boats, shore power can be brought in via the engine room hatch, but they’re attached in the escape trunk. This allows the lower hatch to be shut and dogged.

    However, because the Guitarro was floating, that implies it had already been launched, which means the crew is on board and in charge of all the systems. OTOH, this was the case for my submarine, which I was part of the launch crew. The ride out during the actual launch was a blast:

    If you look hard enough, you can see me standing on the starboard fairwater plane, saluting with my right hand as I held on for dear life with my left . . .

    Apparently, at least back in the 60s, they would be floating while still being finished inside etc. It was “launched” in 1968, and “commissioned” in 1972.

    From Wikipedia I got these details:

     

    On 15 May 1969, Guitarro was moored in the Napa River at Mare Island Naval Shipyard while construction was still underway. At about 16:00, a civilian nuclear construction group began to calibrate the aft ballast tanks, which required them to fill the tanks with approximately 5 short tons (4.5 t) of water. Within 30 minutes, a different, non-nuclear civilian construction group began an assignment to bring Guitarro within a half-degree of trim; this entailed adding water to the forward ballast tanks to overcome a reported two-degree up-bow attitude. Until shortly before 20:00, both groups continued to add water, unaware of each other’s activities.[1]

    Twice between 16:30 and 20:00, a security watch advised the non-nuclear group that Guitarro was riding so low forward that the 1.5-foot-high (0.46 m) wakes of boats operating in the Napa River were sloshing into the sonar dome manhole, but the group ignored the warnings. At 19:45, the non-nuclear group stopped adding water to the ballast tanks and began to halt work for their meal break, leaving at 20:00. At 19:50, the nuclear group completed their calibrations and began to empty the tanks aft.[1]

    At 20:30, both the nuclear group, still aboard, and the non-nuclear group, returning from their break, noticed Guitarro taking a sudden down angle which put the forward hatches underwater. Massive flooding took place through several large open hatches. Efforts between 20:30 and 20:45 to close watertight doors and hatches were largely unsuccessful because lines and cables ran through the doors and hatches, preventing them from closing. At 20:55, Guitarro sank, leaving only her sail above water, earning her the nickname “Mare Island Mud Puppy”.[1]

     

    More at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Guitarro_(SSN-665)

    There was still ongoing construction after we were launched, so yes, what you have there is correct.  I bet Guitarro is the reason why anything fouling the hatches after this incident has to be quick disconnect . . .

    • #42
  13. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Stad (View Comment):
    There was still ongoing construction after we were launched, so yes, what you have there is correct.  I bet Guitarro is the reason why anything fouling the hatches after this incident has to be quick disconnect . . .

    That, and making sure “the left hand knows what the right hand is doing.”

    • #43
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.