Argentinian Navy Submarine Missing

[parsifal]

Its obvious that it blew up, but what caused the explosion. Sea water onto a lead acid battery, if the submarine was fully closed up might cause production of deadly chlorine gas, but risk of explosion should be minimal. if the ship was open and venting, risk of asphyxiation is very low as well.

The ocean state was poor and the boat did report an electrical problem in the forward battery room. There are a number of possible scenarios that could lead to a dangerous situation, and that could well relate to the ARAs operating procedures for their submarines. If training has been cut short or curtailed, the risk of human error goes up exponentially.

Just the same as an air crash investigation, the causes of the loss need to be better understood and appropriate responses and safety procedures worked out. It might simply be that hull maintenance had been allowed to slide too far to the point that it was now dangerous to operate the sub to its design diving limits.....or it could be an issue of watertight integrity if operating on the surface.

Whatever the cause, more details are needed to ascertain the cause of the loss. I get the distinct impression the Argentine government doesn't want to delve too deeply in the causes of the loss......

 

[GrauGeist]

Since the boat broke up and scattered across a large area at half a mile deep, the recovery cost would be profound if they intended to recover all pieces for a forensic model.

I could see recovering the boat if it was still intact...this would allow them to recover the sailors as well as having a fairly clean model to examine to find the source of the sinking.

But the condition of the sub currently seems like it would offer up little in the way of an exact cause as most of the interior systems would be shredded, contaminated and scattered about, losing context.

 

[jetcal1]

Its obvious that it blew up......."

".Whatever the cause, more details are needed to ascertain the cause of the loss. I get the distinct impression the Argentine government doesn't want to delve too deeply in the causes of the loss......

I'm wondering if they had a secondary explosion from hydrogen gas along with issues of chlorine gas from the sea water. (Were they able to dewater the battery compartment?) An imploded hull implies that all the major compartments were closed off. That may have been done due to the original accident but would have been partially relaxed so the crew could eat and make head calls. I think they had another engineering casualty while the boat was buttoned up.

Looking at one of the pictures, the marine growth on the bow was particularly disturbing, it certainly implies there was a bunch of deferred maintenance.

 

[TheMadPenguin]

**Content advisory: Speculation**
IF the sub sank with hatches closed, then on implosion there is a temperature/pressure spike that can set off explosives such as torpedo warheads.
c.f. after-sink explosions on Kirishima http://www.navweaps.com/index_lundgren/Kirishima_Damage_Analysis.pdf pages 26 & 27 especially.

Unknown: Were there closed compartments able to experience sudden collapse; did this include the torpedo room.
Unknown: Were there torpedoes aboard.