Why Did the USS Thresher Sink? New Declassified Documents Reveal the Truth

[Peter1469]

The USS Thresher sank in 1963 during testing trials. Its last transmission was that it was having minor problems and was going to surface. But it went to the bottom instead.

Why Did the USS Thresher Sink? New Declassified Documents Reveal the Truth

A trove of recently declassified files on the tragic 1963 sinking of the nuclear-powered attack submarine USS Thresher confirm the U.S. Navy didn’t cover up the mysterious accident—and, in fact, there was no single event or error that caused the sub to sink.

Last year, a retired Navy submarine commander won a lawsuit forcing the service to release its report on what happened to the Thresher, which sank during diving tests in April 1963, claiming the lives of the entire 129-person crew. The Navy has since released several sets of documents that shed new light on the sinking.

USS Thresher was a first-of-its-class nuclear-powered attack sub. The Thresher class was only the second to use the new teardrop hull designed to maximize speed underwater; unlike conventionally powered submarines, nuclear-powered subs could stay underwater indefinitely and didn’t require an efficient hull shape for sailing on the surface.

On April 9, 1963, the Thresher was conducting diving tests 220 miles east of Cape Cod. The submarine notified ships on the surface monitoring the tests it was encountering “minor difficulties,” and it would blow its ballast tanks to return to the surface. Sonar technicians reported hearing mysterious “air rushing” noises, but the sub failed to surface.

The Thresher never surfaced, and the Navy later found the sub in six pieces on the bottom of the Atlantic Ocean. All 129 personnel on board, including 112 crew members and 17 civilian contractors, were killed. People have come up with many theories about how the sub sank, including blaming the faulty welds that failed during the tests, shorting out the sub’s critical electrical systems and sapping its power.

While the Navy investigation blamed the sinking on a failed seawater pipe, Bryant and other naval experts believe the declassified files show several factors all came together to create the fatal accident.

Read the entire article at the link.

[DGUtley]

Didn't they suspect it had crashed into a soviet vessel?

[Peter1469]

Didn't they suspect it had crashed into a soviet vessel?

That might have been another lost US sub.

[carolina73]

The question is why they would keep it classified? There was certainly no need.

[Standing Wolf]

Didn't they suspect it had crashed into a soviet vessel?

That rumor is generated every time any U.S. or Soviet submarine is lost for almost any reason.

[DGUtley]

That rumor is generated every time any U.S. or Soviet submarine is lost for almost any reason.

USS Scorpion (SSN-5898)?


Scorpion_Launch.jpg


USS_Scorpion_(SSN-589);U136658.jpg


Skipjack_class_submarine_3D_drawing.svg.png

Shaft_end_still.jpg
Broken inboard end of Scorpion shaft lying on ocean bottom

USS_Scorpion_(SSN-589)_H97221k.jpg
A 1985 image of the submarine's fractured stern section

[Standing Wolf]

USS Scorpion (SSN-5898)?

By all accounts the Scorpion was a disaster looking for a place to happen. I don't believe I've ever read any serious speculation about it having collided with another sub, or with anything else.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/reall...193000118.html

I was thinking in particular about the Soviet Yankee-class, K-219, which sank off the coast of Bermuda in 1986. The Soviets later claimed that their boat had collided with a U.S. sub, the Augusta - a claim denied by the skippers of both subs. There was a novel written called 'Hostile Waters' and a British t.v. movie of the same name, in which a collision actually did take place, which added fuel to the false story. Most film references, like IMDB, perpetuate it as well.

My wife happened to be a supervisor on the "watch floor" at NavSta Bermuda at the time and they were tracking both boats; she confirms that they were never in danger of any sort of collision.

An interesting side-note. The skipper of the Soviet sub, played in the film by Rutger Hauer, sued the producers of the movie, claiming that their depiction of him made him appear to have been incompetent during the crisis. He won substantial damages.

[bdtex]

By all accounts the Scorpion was a disaster looking for a place to happen. I don't believe I've ever read any serious speculation about it having collided with another sub, or with anything else.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/reall...193000118.html

I was thinking in particular about the Soviet Yankee-class, K-219, which sank off the coast of Bermuda in 1986. The Soviets later claimed that their boat had collided with a U.S. sub, the Augusta - a claim denied by the skippers of both subs. There was a novel written called 'Hostile Waters' and a British t.v. movie of the same name, in which a collision actually did take place, which added fuel to the false story. Most film references, like IMDB, perpetuate it as well.

My wife happened to be a supervisor on the "watch floor" at NavSta Bermuda at the time and they were tracking both boats; she confirms that they were never in danger of any sort of collision.

An interesting side-note. The skipper of the Soviet sub, played in the film by Rutger Hauer, sued the producers of the movie, claiming that their depiction of him made him appear to have been incompetent during the crisis. He won substantial damages.

I was only 4 when the USS Thresher so I really have no memory of that but I do remember the sinking of the ​USS Scorpion.