Of course, China denies it happened but other intel around the world says it did.

Quote:Fifty-five Chinese sailors are feared dead after their nuclear submarine apparently got caught in a trap intended to ensnare British sub-surface vessels in the Yellow Sea.

According to a secret UK report the seamen died following a catastrophic failure of the submarine's oxygen systems which poisoned the crew.

The captain of the Chinese PLA Navy submarine '093-417' is understood to be among the deceased, as were 21 other officers.

Quote:The UK report into the fatal mission reads: 'Intelligence reports that on 21st of August there was an onboard accident whilst carrying out a mission in the Yellow Sea.

Incident happened at 08.12 local resulting in the death of 55 crew members: 22 officers, 7 officer cadets, 9 petty officers, 17 sailors. Dead include the captain Colonel Xue Yong-Peng.

'Our understanding is death caused by hypoxia due to a system fault on the submarine. The submarine hit a chain and anchor obstacle used by the Chinese Navy to trap US and allied submarines.

'This resulted in systems failures that took six hours to repair and surface the vessel. The onboard oxygen system poisoned the crew after a catastrophic failure.'

As yet there is no independent confirmation of the suspected loss of the Chinese submarine in the public domain.

Beijing has dismissed open source speculation about the incident as 'completely false' while Taiwan has also denied internet reports.

Mail Plus approached the Royal Navy to discuss the details contained in the UK report but official sources declined to comment or offer guidance.

Quote:A British submariner offered this explanation: 'It is plausible that this occurred and I doubt the Chinese would have asked for international support for obvious reasons.

'If they were trapped on the net system and the submarine's batteries were running flat (plausible) then eventually the air purifiers and air treatment systems could have failed.

'Which would have reverted to secondary systems and subsequently and plausibly failed to maintain the air. Which led to asphyxia or poisoning.

'We have kit which absorbs co2 and generates oxygen in such a situation. It is probable that other nations do not have this kind of tech.'

The Chinese Type 093 submarines entered service in the last 15 years. The vessels are 351ft-long and are armed with torpedoes.

The Type 093s are among China's more modern submarines and are known for their lower noise levels.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article...w-sea.html

So the Chinese basically got taken out by their own trap.

Sucks for those sailors and their families.

Awful way to die.

Just for comparison purposes, here's the typical crew complement of our Virginia Class attack subs:

132: 15 officers; 117 enlisted

Here's who was aboard this Type 093:

55: 22 officers, 7 officer cadets, 26 enlisted


Even if you adjust for size difference, and drop off the Officer Cadets or roll them into CPO roles; that's still a massive excess on officer to crew ratio.

Oh, and this ship has two captains, who have to agree on everything...........If you want to know the role of the 2nd captain, he'd be of the same occupation as the guy Ramius killed at the start of Hunt for Red October.

Clancy was yet again over the target decades ago. Got the enemy incorrect by a scosche, but close enough.

(10-04-2023 04:10 PM)JMUDunk Wrote:  Clancy was yet again over the target decades ago. Got the enemy incorrect by a scosche, but close enough.

Clancy was one of my favorite authors. I always enjoyed reading his books due to the knowledge he had. Some in intel community wanted to open an investigation into him, thinking that he was stealing info, when he had sources in the military giving him the info. Legally.

Bummer.

Would this qualify as play stupid games, get stupid prizes?

That sucks. Brings back memories of the Kursk, although under different circumstances, obviously. Terrible way to go.

Makes it sound like this thing eventually raised itself but everyone was dead.....

That don't seem right.

(10-05-2023 09:47 AM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  Makes it sound like this thing eventually raised itself but everyone was dead.....

That don't seem right.

I dont think they all died. My understanding is the crew for that vessel is about 100. So, its sounds like over half the crew died. That said, I agree. The article talks about the vessel being repaired and surfacing---but refers to it "sinking" in multiple places in the article. So--which is it? Did the vessel sink or was it just damaged? Hard to tell from this article.

(10-05-2023 11:14 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-05-2023 09:47 AM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  Makes it sound like this thing eventually raised itself but everyone was dead.....

That don't seem right.

I dont think they all died. My understanding is the crew for that vessel is about 100. So, its sounds like over half the crew died.

If that's the case, this is one terribly written article. Did they let AI write it?

(10-05-2023 11:17 AM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  

(10-05-2023 11:14 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-05-2023 09:47 AM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  Makes it sound like this thing eventually raised itself but everyone was dead.....

That don't seem right.

I dont think they all died. My understanding is the crew for that vessel is about 100. So, its sounds like over half the crew died.

If that's the case, this is one terribly written article. Did they let AI write it?

Agree. In one paragraph it says it took the crew 6 hours to repair it and to surface----in two others portions of the article it refers to the sub as if it had been sunk (or been "lost"). This article is a mess.

(10-05-2023 11:28 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-05-2023 11:17 AM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  

(10-05-2023 11:14 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-05-2023 09:47 AM)49RFootballNow Wrote:  Makes it sound like this thing eventually raised itself but everyone was dead.....

That don't seem right.

I dont think they all died. My understanding is the crew for that vessel is about 100. So, its sounds like over half the crew died.

If that's the case, this is one terribly written article. Did they let AI write it?

Agree. In one paragraph it says it took the crew 6 hours to repair it and to surface----in two others portions of the article it refers to the sub as if it had been sunk (or been "lost"). This article is a mess.

Our mainstream media is more in line with the talking points. Rookies...and they're supposed to be communists with a closed media?