OT: Poor navigation skills

[tallbloke]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4157517.stm

"A US nuclear submarine has run aground south of the Pacific island of Guam,
injuring several sailors on board....

.....The submarine is on its way back to its base on Guam, nearly 600km (350
miles) south of where the incident occurred. "

So lets get this straight. The Sub ran aground south of Guam, which is 350
miles south of where it ran aground.

Hmmm. No wonder they ****ed it up.


--
tallbloke
Tasmin350i MatchlessG80
BONY#1 DIAABTCOD#8 OSOS#27 SKA#3

[jsp]

tallbloke wrote:

> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4157517.stm
>
> "A US nuclear submarine has run aground south of the Pacific island of Guam,
> injuring several sailors on board....
>
> ....The submarine is on its way back to its base on Guam, nearly 600km (350
> miles) south of where the incident occurred. "
>
> So lets get this straight. The Sub ran aground south of Guam, which is 350
> miles south of where it ran aground.
>
> Hmmm. No wonder they ****ed it up.


It was a US sub. Says it all really.

--
John

SV650
Black it is
and naked

[Alan]

jsp wrote:
> tallbloke wrote:
>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4157517.stm
>>
>> "A US nuclear submarine has run aground south of the Pacific island of
>> Guam, injuring several sailors on board....
>>
>> ....The submarine is on its way back to its base on Guam, nearly 600km
>> (350 miles) south of where the incident occurred. "
>>
>> So lets get this straight. The Sub ran aground south of Guam, which is
>> 350 miles south of where it ran aground.
>>
>> Hmmm. No wonder they ****ed it up.
>
>
>
> It was a US sub. Says it all really.
>
Except it doesn't. The OP misquoted the original article which clearly
says the sub was on it's way back to Guam, 350 miles North of the incident.

If you think only the Americans run aground in the Pacific just google
for "HMS Nottingham". I'm sure every Navy in the world has run at least
one ship onto dry land unintentionally.

--

Alan ZX9R E2 (Green of course) '03 Tiger 955i (A pleasant shade of green)

[Eiron]

Alan wrote:


> If you think only the Americans run aground in the Pacific just google
> for "HMS Nottingham". I'm sure every Navy in the world has run at least
> one ship onto dry land unintentionally.


Left hand down a bit!

There isn't any land 350 miles north of Guam, or south either.
And Krakatoa isn't east of Java, unless you go the long way round.

--
Eiron.

[tallbloke]

Alan <alanb_stard@nospambtopenworld.com> wrote in news:crr9re$oj8$1
@sparta.btinternet.com:

> Except it doesn't. The OP misquoted the original article which clearly
> says the sub was on it's way back to Guam, 350 miles North of the incident.
>

I emailed them to tell them they'd ****ed up. They must have taken some
notice. :-)

My original post was cut and paste direct from the article, with a bit
snipped out.

--
tallbloke
Tasmin350i MatchlessG80
BONY#1 DIAABTCOD#8 OSOS#27 SKA#3

[muddycat]

In article <1w8Ed.48$0n1.9@newsfe3-gui.ntli.net>,
jsp <jataomm@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

> tallbloke wrote:
>
> > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4157517.stm
> >
> > "A US nuclear submarine has run aground south of the Pacific island of
> > Guam,
> > injuring several sailors on board....
> >
> > ....The submarine is on its way back to its base on Guam, nearly 600km (350
> > miles) south of where the incident occurred. "
> >
> > So lets get this straight. The Sub ran aground south of Guam, which is 350
> > miles south of where it ran aground.
> >
> > Hmmm. No wonder they ****ed it up.
>
>
> It was a US sub. Says it all really.

Friendly fire, eh?

[Alan]

Eiron wrote:
> Alan wrote:
>
>
>> If you think only the Americans run aground in the Pacific just google
>> for "HMS Nottingham". I'm sure every Navy in the world has run at
>> least one ship onto dry land unintentionally.
>
>
>
> Left hand down a bit!
>
> There isn't any land 350 miles north of Guam, or south either.
> And Krakatoa isn't east of Java, unless you go the long way round.
>
Ok - for dry land read rocks, coral reef, uncharted shallows or whatever.

--

Alan ZX9R E2 (Green of course) '03 Tiger 955i (A pleasant shade of green)

[Salad Dodger]

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 18:01:41 +0000 (UTC),
Alanm<alanb_stard@nospambtopenworld.com> wrote:

>Eiron wrote:
>> Alan wrote:
>>
>>
>>> If you think only the Americans run aground in the Pacific just google
>>> for "HMS Nottingham". I'm sure every Navy in the world has run at
>>> least one ship onto dry land unintentionally.
>>
>>
>>
>> Left hand down a bit!
>>
>> There isn't any land 350 miles north of Guam, or south either.
>> And Krakatoa isn't east of Java, unless you go the long way round.
>>
>Ok - for dry land read rocks, coral reef, uncharted shallows or whatever.

Quite.

About 400 miles SSE of Guam, the sea floor is only 16m deep.

Conversely, about the same distance SW, it descends to 10924m.

Or seven *miles* deep.

--
| ___ Salad Dodger
|/ \
_/_____\_ GL1500SEV/CBR1100XXX/KH500A8/TS250C
|_\_____/_| ..73066../..17485.../..3184./.19406
(>|_|_|<) TPPFATUICG#7 DIAABTCOD#9 YTC#4 PM#5
|__|_|__| BOTAFOT #70 BOTAFOF #09 two#11 WG*
\ |^| / IbW#0 & KotIbW# BotTOS#6 GP#4
\|^|/ ANORAK#17 IbB#4
'^'

[Dr Ivan D. Reid]

On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 13:10:37 +0000, Eiron <e1ron@hotmail.com>
wrote in <34cosvF492e7fU1@individual.net>:
> Alan wrote:

>> If you think only the Americans run aground in the Pacific just google
>> for "HMS Nottingham". I'm sure every Navy in the world has run at least
>> one ship onto dry land unintentionally.

> Left hand down a bit!

> There isn't any land 350 miles north of Guam, or south either.
> And Krakatoa isn't east of Java, unless you go the long way round.

The way I read it, it wasn't exactly "dry" land they ran into.
Especially as all the injured suffered head injuries, suggesting a quite
severe deceleration.

--
Ivan Reid, Electronic & Computer Engineering, ___ CMS Collaboration,
Brunel University. Ivan.Reid@brunel.ac.uk Room 40-1-B12, CERN
GSX600F, RG250WD. "You Porsche. Me pass!" DoD #484 JKLO# 003, 005
WP7# 3000 LC Unit #2368 (tinlc) UKMC#00009 BOTAFOT#16 UKRMMA#7 (Hon)
KotPT -- "for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty".

[Alan]

Dr Ivan D. Reid wrote:
> On Sun, 09 Jan 2005 13:10:37 +0000, Eiron <e1ron@hotmail.com>
> wrote in <34cosvF492e7fU1@individual.net>:
>
>>Alan wrote:
>
>
>
>>>If you think only the Americans run aground in the Pacific just google
>>>for "HMS Nottingham". I'm sure every Navy in the world has run at least
>>>one ship onto dry land unintentionally.
>
>
>
>>Left hand down a bit!
>
>
>
>>There isn't any land 350 miles north of Guam, or south either.
>>And Krakatoa isn't east of Java, unless you go the long way round.
>
>
> The way I read it, it wasn't exactly "dry" land they ran into.
> Especially as all the injured suffered head injuries, suggesting a quite
> severe deceleration.
>
OK, poor choice of words, not "dry" land but hey, my point is still
valid - just ask the captain of the Nottingham.

--

Alan ZX9R E2 (Green of course) '03 Tiger 955i (A pleasant shade of green)

[Christopher Des Clayes]

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 12:59:26 +0000 (UTC), Alan
<alanb_stard@nospambtopenworld.com> wrote:

>jsp wrote:
>> tallbloke wrote:
>>
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4157517.stm
>>>
>>> "A US nuclear submarine has run aground south of the Pacific island of
>>> Guam, injuring several sailors on board....
>>>
>>> ....The submarine is on its way back to its base on Guam, nearly 600km
>>> (350 miles) south of where the incident occurred. "
>>>
>>> So lets get this straight. The Sub ran aground south of Guam, which is
>>> 350 miles south of where it ran aground.
>>>
>>> Hmmm. No wonder they ****ed it up.
>>
>>
>>
>> It was a US sub. Says it all really.
>>
>Except it doesn't. The OP misquoted the original article which clearly
>says the sub was on it's way back to Guam, 350 miles North of the incident.
>
>If you think only the Americans run aground in the Pacific just google
>for "HMS Nottingham". I'm sure every Navy in the world has run at least
>one ship onto dry land unintentionally.


"Number 1, I think the Navigator is trying to work his ticket!"

--
Chris Des Clayes (Header addresses are munged)
Reply to chris@ffcc.powernet.co.uk, but remove one "f"
VN1500 Drifter (Gertrude) - Twice the fun at half the speed.
Barrel Bikers (Buckingham) MCC (www.barrelbikers.co.uk) UKMC#9

[Grimly Curmudgeon]

It was somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the
drugs began to take hold. I remember Salad Dodger
<salad.dodger@gmail.com> saying something like:

>>> There isn't any land 350 miles north of Guam, or south either.
>>> And Krakatoa isn't east of Java, unless you go the long way round.
>>>
>>Ok - for dry land read rocks, coral reef, uncharted shallows or whatever.
>
>Quite.
>
>About 400 miles SSE of Guam, the sea floor is only 16m deep.

Passing through shallow waters, they might have ploughed into an
uncharted wreck. There must be plenty of them roundabout there.

--

Dave

GS 850 x2 / SE 6a
SbS#6 DIAABTCOD#16 APOSTLE#6 FUB#3
FUB KotL OSOS#12? UKRMMA#19 COSOC#10

[platypus]

Christopher Des Clayes wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 12:59:26 +0000 (UTC), Alan
> <alanb_stard@nospambtopenworld.com> wrote:
>
>> jsp wrote:
>>> tallbloke wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4157517.stm
>>>>
>>>> "A US nuclear submarine has run aground south of the Pacific
>>>> island of Guam, injuring several sailors on board....
>>>>
>>>> ....The submarine is on its way back to its base on Guam, nearly
>>>> 600km (350 miles) south of where the incident occurred. "
>>>>
>>>> So lets get this straight. The Sub ran aground south of Guam,
>>>> which is 350 miles south of where it ran aground.
>>>>
>>>> Hmmm. No wonder they ****ed it up.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It was a US sub. Says it all really.
>>>
>> Except it doesn't. The OP misquoted the original article which
>> clearly says the sub was on it's way back to Guam, 350 miles North
>> of the incident.
>>
>> If you think only the Americans run aground in the Pacific just
>> google
>> for "HMS Nottingham". I'm sure every Navy in the world has run at
>> least one ship onto dry land unintentionally.
>
>
> "Number 1, I think the Navigator is trying to work his ticket!"

"This is a lighthouse, mate. Your call."

--
platypus

no need to ask

[Dave Emerson]

"platypus" <monotreme@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:6JhEd.7177$GG1.5431@text.news.blueyonder.co.u k...
> Christopher Des Clayes wrote:
>> On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 12:59:26 +0000 (UTC), Alan
>> <alanb_stard@nospambtopenworld.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Number 1, I think the Navigator is trying to work his ticket!"
>
> "This is a lighthouse, mate. Your call."
>

Just wot I was thinking, but I wasn't sure if anyone else knew the story...

Dave

[platypus]

Dave Emerson wrote:
> "platypus" <monotreme@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:6JhEd.7177$GG1.5431@text.news.blueyonder.co.u k...
>> Christopher Des Clayes wrote:
>>> On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 12:59:26 +0000 (UTC), Alan
>>> <alanb_stard@nospambtopenworld.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Number 1, I think the Navigator is trying to work his ticket!"
>>
>> "This is a lighthouse, mate. Your call."
>>
>
> Just wot I was thinking, but I wasn't sure if anyone else knew the
> story...

I've got an mpeg of it somewhere. One day, I'll get my **** together to put
it up on a website somewhere.

--
platypus

no need to ask

[Champ]

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 22:37:34 -0000, "Dave Emerson"
<Dave_dot_Emerson@LineOne.net> wrote:

>
>"platypus" <monotreme@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
>news:6JhEd.7177$GG1.5431@text.news.blueyonder.co.u k...
>> Christopher Des Clayes wrote:
>>> On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 12:59:26 +0000 (UTC), Alan
>>> <alanb_stard@nospambtopenworld.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> "Number 1, I think the Navigator is trying to work his ticket!"
>>
>> "This is a lighthouse, mate. Your call."
>>
>
>Just wot I was thinking, but I wasn't sure if anyone else knew the story...

Urban Miff, innit. http://www.snopes.com/military/lighthse.htm
--
Champ

[Dr Ivan D. Reid]

On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 21:11:06 +0000 (UTC),
Alan <alanb_stard@nospambtopenworld.com>
wrote in <crs6la$1j0$1@hercules.btinternet.com>:
> Dr Ivan D. Reid wrote:

>> The way I read it, it wasn't exactly "dry" land they ran into.
>> Especially as all the injured suffered head injuries, suggesting a quite
>> severe deceleration.

> OK, poor choice of words, not "dry" land but hey, my point is still
> valid - just ask the captain of the Nottingham.

Yeah, but he wasn't aboard at the time, was he? And that _was_
a charted rock.

--
Ivan Reid, Electronic & Computer Engineering, ___ CMS Collaboration,
Brunel University. Ivan.Reid@brunel.ac.uk Room 40-1-B12, CERN
GSX600F, RG250WD. "You Porsche. Me pass!" DoD #484 JKLO# 003, 005
WP7# 3000 LC Unit #2368 (tinlc) UKMC#00009 BOTAFOT#16 UKRMMA#7 (Hon)
KotPT -- "for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty".

[Alan]

Dr Ivan D. Reid wrote:
> On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 21:11:06 +0000 (UTC),
> Alan <alanb_stard@nospambtopenworld.com>
> wrote in <crs6la$1j0$1@hercules.btinternet.com>:
>
>>Dr Ivan D. Reid wrote:
>
>
>>> The way I read it, it wasn't exactly "dry" land they ran into.
>>>Especially as all the injured suffered head injuries, suggesting a quite
>>>severe deceleration.
>
>
>
>>OK, poor choice of words, not "dry" land but hey, my point is still
>>valid - just ask the captain of the Nottingham.
>
>
> Yeah, but he wasn't aboard at the time, was he? And that _was_
> a charted rock.
>
Doesn't matter, in the RN it's the captain that is responsible whether
he's on board or not. I seem to remember he wasn't actually punished but
he was court-marshalled, along with his navigator and the o-o-w. My
point about the USN not being the only ones to ever put a ship/boat/sub
aground in the Pacific is still valid.

--

Alan ZX9R E2 (Green of course) '03 Tiger 955i (A pleasant shade of green)

[Dave Emerson]

"Champ" <news@champ.org.uk> wrote in message
news:t1g3u0dq29sda5t7q5g0bhjgf2cu54cmk5@4ax.com...
> On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 22:37:34 -0000, "Dave Emerson"
> <Dave_dot_Emerson@LineOne.net> wrote:
>
>>
>>"platypus" <monotreme@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
>>news:6JhEd.7177$GG1.5431@text.news.blueyonder.co.u k...
>>> Christopher Des Clayes wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 12:59:26 +0000 (UTC), Alan
>>>> <alanb_stard@nospambtopenworld.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Number 1, I think the Navigator is trying to work his ticket!"
>>>
>>> "This is a lighthouse, mate. Your call."
>>>
>>
>>Just wot I was thinking, but I wasn't sure if anyone else knew the
>>story...
>
> Urban Miff, innit. http://www.snopes.com/military/lighthse.htm

"a miff is as good as a smile"

Dave