Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   You're a painter and you want to get out of work early. Do you: a) fake an illness, b) just leave and hope no one notices, or c) start a fire that causes $400 million in damages to a USN submarine?   ( news.yahoo.com) divider line
    More: Followup, Maine, federal public defender, life imprisonments, arsons  
•       •       •

14367 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Jul 2012 at 5:43 PM (5 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



193 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-07-23 11:08:18 PM  
Now I have to go to work tomorrow and see if this clown is a DoD civilian or a contractor...I really hope he was a contractor..

/Not a painter
//Tired of explaining to painters what no paint means.
 
2012-07-23 11:34:14 PM  

wxboy: That's OK, we can rely on Canada's superior submarine firepower.


Heh, a brief history of the Victoriafail class.

The submarines entered service from 1990 to 1993. Initially they were unable to actually fire torpedoes and the first three were refitted in 1992 and 1993 to have this fixed at a cost of some £9 million. They were operating from HMS Dolphin (at Gosport) but with only 4 submarines the base was deemed uneconomic and they transferred to Devonport Naval Base.

British
: FARK, these are a huge moneypit, maybe we can sell them to Canada?

Canada: Yes sir, them look like some quality submarines!

British: Sucker!

A fire, a death, and more money later they actually fire a torpedo. Fleet status: 1 submarine of 4 in active service until 2013.
 
2012-07-23 11:42:45 PM  
So a judge will accept a confession, during a polygraph test, of a man with a history of depression and anxiety ?

IANAL, but i surely hope they have more than that...
 
2012-07-23 11:52:20 PM  
Nobody can force you to take a polygraph test.
 
2012-07-23 11:59:32 PM  

Madbeefer: Now I have to go to work tomorrow and see if this clown is a DoD civilian or a contractor...I really hope he was a contractor..

/Not a painter
//Tired of explaining to painters what no paint means.


One secret: don't let them have a lunch break...it takes too long to retrain them.

/A painter
 
2012-07-24 12:12:04 AM  

Radioactive Ass: Igor Jakovsky: so all it took to put the sub out of commission was some rags and a lighter?

Submariners are much more concerned about fire than they are pretty much any other type of casualty, up to and including flooding. It's the most common drill that the crew does underway (sometimes 3-4 times a day for weeks at a time).


With the exception of (1) getting a fish up the ass or (2) a high pressure steam leak outside the RC, I agree.
 
2012-07-24 12:36:17 AM  
well. it looks like there will be all kinds of in-dock fire standards in case some other nut job wants to leave work early.
 
2012-07-24 12:51:55 AM  

powhound: With the exception of (1) getting a fish up the ass or (2) a high pressure steam leak outside the RC, I agree.


I was addressing the types of casualties that most people would expect us to be as trained for. Flooding isn't really one of them (the result of a fish up your ass) if only because you can really only hit the chicken switches and emergency closures and then hope and pray that you can get to the roof in time. A MS leak is serious without a doubt but it's rare to even get close to having one because of the QA involved. I think we did one or two drills for that just before our ORSE's to bone up on the procedures but otherwise it wasn't a normal part of the drill rotation (probably in part because it was such a pain in the ass to run). The only boat that I can recall where that casualty was a real worry was the Tullibeast. It had a horrendous MS piping layout that ended up contributing to the erosion of some parts of the main line down to something like 10% -15% of its original thickness at some bends. That one got decommissioned (it was a second line boat anyway) because it was too expensive to fix.
 
2012-07-24 01:03:58 AM  

studebaker hoch: Nobody can force you to take a polygraph test.


Unless it's a condition of your employment.
 
2012-07-24 01:05:36 AM  

ideamaster: well. it looks like there will be all kinds of in-dock fire standards in case some other nut job wants to leave work early.


The thing is that as it stands there is a minimal crew kept on when a boat goes in for overhaul, usually it's just a couple of guys from each division forward and about half of the divisions aft. Everyone else goes to a new command. The guys who are kept around are busy not only standing watches but also observing the removal and replacement of equipment and witnessing tests to make sure that they are done correctly and that no documents are falsified. The "offices" are on a barge that may be up to a 15 minute walk away, which isn't going to do any good in an emergency. If that's not enough there's also no habitability accommodations because all of that type of stuff is usually the first thing ripped out and the last thing to be put back in, it's in the way of the real work that needs to be done. All of those sailors standing around will certainly get in the way of the yardbirds and only extend the overhaul and jack up the cost.
 
2012-07-24 01:09:44 AM  
Yeah, I read you. Tell you what though, the drills on MS leaks tend to stick in your head, knowing what's inside there.

/former ELT
//my boat was older than dust so I was a bit paranoid on a few levels
 
2012-07-24 01:18:01 AM  

Gough: Madbeefer: Now I have to go to work tomorrow and see if this clown is a DoD civilian or a contractor...I really hope he was a contractor..

/Not a painter
//Tired of explaining to painters what no paint means.

One secret: don't let them have a lunch break...it takes too long to retrain them.

/A painter


Haha, I suppose I could try that. I heard an arguement once between another inspector and a painter.
Painter: I'm not qualified to know if something has paint on it.
Inspector: Well are you qualified to know if somethings not painted.
Painter: ....
 
2012-07-24 01:46:47 AM  

powhound: Yeah, I read you. Tell you what though, the drills on MS leaks tend to stick in your head, knowing what's inside there.

/former ELT
//my boat was older than dust so I was a bit paranoid on a few levels


Yeah, most of my ustafishes are razor blades and have been for well over a decade. The only one still around is the one I was on for shore duty and even then it was as old as you can get and still be called a nuclear submarine.
 
2012-07-24 03:28:12 AM  
Damn, and I thought torching aircraft was an ungodly expensive hobby.
 
2012-07-24 03:54:56 AM  

Radioactive Ass: JonnyG: Just another way to milk the citizens. These subs don't cost that much to build, but are inflated to that price. Likewise, nothing you could do would cause $400M worth of damages. Someday people will wise up to the scam that is defense contracting. Not any time soon. And not soon enough to make a difference, but you know...

By the time you end up replacing burned stuff, re-inspecting systems that might have been compromised by the heat (every pipe joint and valve for starters has to be taken apart and put back together again along with all of the paperwork that that can entail for some systems) or smoke (it eats up electronics and a lot of them are specialized boards that can cost upwards of $5000 each due to their not being mass produced but custom made) you can go through 400 million pretty quickly and if this boat hadn't just undergone an expensive refueling there's a good chance that they would've decommissioned her instead of repairing her.



How much would it cost to refuel and recondition one of the older LA Class boats they have sitting in mothballs waiting for disposal? $400 Million seems like it could go a pretty long way, especially if you still have all the custom electronics in place.
 
2012-07-24 04:13:37 AM  

theMagni: Man On Pink Corner: wildcardjack: Don't they have, like, serious fire suppression equipment on submarines because you seriously don't want a fire in your only pocket of air while under water.

There probably isn't much fire suppression equipment at all. What could they do, flood the thing with Halon?

What I don't understand is how you'd set one on fire anyway. Isn't it all just made of metal? Seems like all you'd have to do is shut a few doors and starve the fire of O2. Maybe not using flammable materials in the construction of nuclear submarines would be a first step.

Probably AFFF, but if she's in for repairs that system might be offline.

You'd be surprised as to what can catch fire during a refit.


The Navy originally said the fire started when an industrial vacuum cleaner sucked up a heat source that ignited debris inside the vacuum.
 
2012-07-24 04:44:51 AM  

cptjeff: How much would it cost to refuel and recondition one of the older LA Class boats they have sitting in mothballs waiting for disposal? $400 Million seems like it could go a pretty long way, especially if you still have all the custom electronics in place.


You know, that's a very good question. It shows a bit of thought about a way to work around a problem. Unfortunately that's not how it works and I'll explain why.

The Miami is a 688i. In a nutshell that means that it has an upgraded sonar and weapons suite as well as several other significant structural differences that have an effect on it's operation. All of the boats awaiting disposal are first flight 688's many with older systems (one or two generations behind what is on the 688i's) that were never upgraded to what the Miami has (because it was known that they were on the way out) and were considered second line boats (that means that in a time of war they were to be used in less demanding roles). In addition the boats that have been slated for disposal first usually have some "Problems" that made it cheaper to get rid of them than to refuel and fix them instead. It may be big ticket items that are worn out (like reduction gears) or it might be just a long list of small problems that add up in the end.

In order to take one of those boats and bring it back to life you would have to do a lot (and I do mean a lot) of work and it would probably cost in the neighborhood of $400 million to do so when everything was said and done, and you would still have a boat that would be considered second line at the end of the day. The existing 688's are expected to be phased out as their cores are depleted and the Virginia class can fill in the gaps left behind (and then the 688i's will become the next class of second line boats). Finally, once the last few original 688's are gone the supply system will purge the parts for them.

So to break it down: The final costs would be about the same (or maybe a bit less, I can't say for sure) for a less capable boat, the electronics are different enough to not be able to swap out parts like a junkyard car and there won't be any (class specific) parts left in the supply system for the original 688's in a few years time. There are some other more minor reasons but those are the main ones.

A repaired Miami should be good for another 15 years or so and will have the supply and training support needed during that time. The real question is whether or not it's worth the extra $25 (or so) million a year to fix her or if the navy thinks that it can do without her. That's pretty much a judgement call that I can't make one way or the other without seeing a lot of data that's not available.
 
2012-07-24 04:56:34 AM  

Radioactive Ass: A repaired Miami should be good for another 15 years or so and will have the supply and training support needed during that time. The real question is whether or not it's worth the extra $25 (or so) million a year to fix her or if the navy thinks that it can do without her. That's pretty much a judgement call that I can't make one way or the other without seeing a lot of data that's not available.


Sounds like they're asking for money, so Congress may very well get into that question too.

Thanks for the reply though, that was an informative read.
 
2012-07-24 05:23:33 AM  

cptjeff: Sounds like they're asking for money, so Congress may very well get into that question too.


The money (or at least some of it) is already there. I can assure you that Congress is already involved for getting the rest of the money or for the decision to scrap her instead. I'm pretty sure that the jobs already expected from the overhaul that would be lost if that planned overhaul (not just the new fire repairs) doesn't happen will play into that decision as well as the overall tactical readiness of the fleet as a whole will. Personally I think that it's a coin toss as to whether or not they decide to fix her or scrap her but it will have to be made in the next few months either way due to how the navy budgets and contracts out shipyard work, it's either all or nothing.
 
2012-07-24 06:43:38 AM  
Part of the decision too comes down to politics and blame. Paying $400 million to fix something that accidently caught fire is a slightly harder pill to swallow than spending it to fix something that was intentionally damaged. Fleet pride and all that.

The really interesting thing will be to see what the final decision is about the forward hull. The high-yield steel that keeps the water out and the sailors in doesn't like heat above a certain temperature. And from what I've heard that temperature was not improbable during the fire. There will be samples and tests, but if they can't trust the integrity of the hull it will make the decision a lot easier (and harder).

It's too bad that two of the old LA's are already scheduled for MTS (training ship) duty, this would've been a good candidate.
 
2012-07-24 07:05:34 AM  

whyaduck: The really interesting thing will be to see what the final decision is about the forward hull. The high-yield steel that keeps the water out and the sailors in doesn't like heat above a certain temperature. And from what I've heard that temperature was not improbable during the fire. There will be samples and tests, but if they can't trust the integrity of the hull it will make the decision a lot easier (and harder).


Why do I have a vision of a guy in a lab coat drilling into the hull to take samples?

Does anyone have any idea what it costs to refuel this? Is that part of the reason for considering repairs? Its my understanding that unloading a reactor once its gone active isn't the best thing to do compared to dealing with spent or new fuel.
 
2012-07-24 07:06:52 AM  

whyaduck: It's too bad that two of the old LA's are already scheduled for MTS (training ship) duty, this would've been a good candidate.


I imagine there will never be enough cleaning to get that burny smell out.
 
2012-07-24 07:14:30 AM  

DON.MAC: Does anyone have any idea what it costs to refuel this? Is that part of the reason for considering repairs? Its my understanding that unloading a reactor once its gone active isn't the best thing to do compared to dealing with spent or new fuel.


Yeah, that's a significant contributing factor to why they're considering repairs at all. I think it'll eventually boil down to whether or not they think it's safe to submerge to a useful depth. If it is, they'll fix it up, but they'll probably be limited to ops with minimal chance of encountering submerged threats... i.e., drug interdiction.

On the plus side, give all your intercepted cocaine to the CIA and this could pay for itself.
 
2012-07-24 08:03:49 AM  

Radioactive Ass: incendi: Radioactive Ass: The inside however is an entirely different story.

The real fun is painting the inside of the outside... had some lovely times posted up in MBTs.

Mine comes from inside the chain locker and impulse tank... but at least we didn't leave a ladder inside like a yardbird did to a boat back in the day. I mean how on earth do you miss THAT in a closeout inspection? They ended up having to come back into port and go into drydock just to get it back out. You just know that that cost someone a pretty penny to do, not to mention the lost time at sea.


Wait, how does THAT happen? Tank close out takes a yardbird, plus a ship's force blueshirt, plus an O-Ganger (usually the DCA in my experience). Did all 3 miss that?

StupidSB:
We almost had an incident, when closing out one of the MBTs. The A-ganger who usually went with the yardbirds to close out the tanks wasn't available, and it needed to get done rightfarkingnow (false sense of urgency, check), so the COB actually went in to close out the tank. The DCA (me) found the big frakking monkey wrench after the yardbird and the COB had already signed off their portion of the closeout. And that is why we have 3 people close out tanks...
 
2012-07-24 08:26:30 AM  

PunGent: HopScotchNSoda: PunGent: Bio-nic: I hope he enjoys being in Leavenworth...

Isn't that just for military? pretty sure he's a civilian...

Easy confusion. "Leavenworth" refers to not one, but two (or three), federal prisons at Fort Leavenworth. One is the United States Disciplinary Barracks (that is now the only prison for UCMJ sentences of over a year). The other is the United States Penitentiary, Leavenworth, a medium-security (formerly maximum security) BOP facility with a minimum-security satellite camp.

Huh...I did not know that. Thanks.


I've actualy been inside the USDB prison a couple of times (the old one. They built a new one). Once to fix a computer in the prisoner's computer lab. They took all my pointy tools at security.
"How am I supposed to open the computer case without a screwdriver?"
'Not our problem'
"You want the computer fixed, so it sort of is."

And another time we had to run fiber optic in the sewer tunnels. We asked for prisoner assistance with the long runs, but were told "It is too unsanitary for prisoners down there" I see. but perfectly fine for a soldier. Thanks.

The prisoners also used to cut all the grass on base. You'd see like a row of 12 of them staggered behind each other, mowing all the large grassy areas. But then they stopped. Apparently having prisoners mow was considered 'demeaning'. Guess who got to cut the grass then?
 
2012-07-24 08:29:48 AM  

groppet: Ive worked with people almost as big of idiots as this guy. They work harder trying to get out of work than the actual work would have taken


But working to get out of work is fun, while doing the actual work is not.
My dad could never understand that.
But you use steel wool to wash his car, and he will never make you do it again.
 
2012-07-24 08:33:27 AM  

Oldiron_79: If I accidently arsoned a navy ship I think I'd be trying to defect to the cubans or something


Especially if you accidentlied the whole thing.
 
2012-07-24 08:42:52 AM  
I like how if convicted he can be ordered to pay restitution.

Funny how that never happens on Wall St.
 
2012-07-24 08:46:05 AM  

EbolaNYC: I like how if convicted he can be ordered to pay restitution.

Funny how that never happens on Wall St.


Funnier still that the wall st. folks actually could provide some modicum of restitution, while this man, working for the rest of his life, wouldn't even make a dent in the money owed.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-07-24 08:48:39 AM  
And that is why we have 3 people close out tanks...

I heard NASA had trouble when they assigned redundant inspections because each inspector assumed another would catch anything he missed. One careful guy can beat three lazy guys.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2012-07-24 08:58:31 AM  
Funny how that never happens on Wall St.

Convictions for financial crimes come with restitution orders. Two problems on Wall Street: the government settles for less than the actual loss, and the odds of getting caught are very low.
 
2012-07-24 09:04:38 AM  
He'll probably get a slap on the wrist and a couple months in jail.
 
2012-07-24 09:09:43 AM  

xl5150: Everyone, let's keep this in perspective. Someone who works in a job like painting is obviously there because he's not exactly tipping the scales in intelligence, so something like this is not altogether extremely unexpected.


I've not seen you in a thread until today. Now I've seen you in 3 threads, and in all 3 you seem to make it sound how much smarter you are than everybody else. Aren't you special.

/no, you're not
 
2012-07-24 09:09:54 AM  

ZAZ: And that is why we have 3 people close out tanks...

I heard NASA had trouble when they assigned redundant inspections because each inspector assumed another would catch anything he missed. One careful guy can beat three lazy guys.


Not how the nuclear navy works. You get what you inspect. Trust but verify. This is gospel.

To put it another way, I trusted my Senior Chief implicitly. However, I still was thorough as all get out in my inspections - if I could have found something, I would have mocked him mercilessly until he managed to do the same to me (which would have taken him a whole 5 min, probably). For the most part, it is cultural in the sub fleet. You always second (and sometimes triple) check the important stuff, be it reactor startup, rig for dive, crypto issue and destruction, etc etc. And every once in a while, the second guy will catch something. I've only once seen something pass a two person check, and both guys got railed for it.
 
2012-07-24 09:27:19 AM  

Uisce Beatha: I've only once seen something pass a two person check, and both guys got railed for it.


I've seen it numerous times, and it usually ends up in the wardroom with a green tablecloth.
 
2012-07-24 09:38:38 AM  

incendi: Uisce Beatha: I've only once seen something pass a two person check, and both guys got railed for it.

I've seen it numerous times, and it usually ends up in the wardroom with a green tablecloth.


We must've been luckier. And yeah, of the two guys, one got busted down, the other got kicked off the boat (recurring issues with him)

/The EDPO who put them as the two checkers got yelled at as well
//Two dirtbags doing an OP-8 checklist? Come on...
 
2012-07-24 09:49:58 AM  

Uisce Beatha: We must've been luckier.


Yeah, one the boats I was on was going through a bit of a rough patch with the engineering department. It got into that death spiral of piling on so many extra requirements for everything that someone is pretty much guaranteed to screw it up, thus causing the command to impose more requirements, etc. Eventually they started backing down when they realized the practical result of their actions, only being able to perform one evolution a day, was going to make them miss a lot of deadlines.
 
2012-07-24 10:06:11 AM  

incendi: that death spiral


Ugh, one of the guys I went to nuke school with went to a boat in the middle of one of those. I did not envy him. Typical upper echelon problem solving - pile on additional requirements and inspection points until you suffer analysis paralysis.
 
2012-07-24 11:19:13 AM  

Uisce Beatha: incendi: that death spiral

Ugh, one of the guys I went to nuke school with went to a boat in the middle of one of those. I did not envy him. Typical upper echelon problem solving - pile on additional requirements and inspection points until you suffer analysis paralysis.


analysis paralysis.

thanks, new band name

/working like a dog in a rock and roll band
 
2012-07-24 01:03:45 PM  
i.dailymail.co.ukView Full Size
 
2012-07-24 01:57:18 PM  
MythDragon: Oldiron_79: If I accidently arsoned a navy ship I think I'd be trying to defect to the cubans or something

Especially if you accidentlied the whole thing.


Viva Zombie Fidel
 
2012-07-24 03:47:49 PM  

Uisce Beatha: Wait, how does THAT happen? Tank close out takes a yardbird, plus a ship's force blueshirt, plus an O-Ganger (usually the DCA in my experience). Did all 3 miss that?


It was a long, long time ago. There's a reason why it takes so many people to do it now. When I was in it was just someone from the yard and then someone else (usually the deck div LPO) from ships force and that was it. As usual most procedures get "Fixed" by adding another layer after someone royally screws up.
 
2012-07-24 08:53:26 PM  
Fury could face life imprisonment and a fine of up to $250,000 and be ordered to pay restitution, the U.S. Attorney's Office said.

Right. While in prison. I think he's going to need to work out some kind of installment plan.
 
Displayed 43 of 193 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

On Twitter





Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report