4 Theories of the USS SCORPION

We were on patrol in the North Atlantic near the end of our 70 days underwater. I entered birthing of SSBN 628 and a NUC electrician asked me if I heard anything unusual. I hadn't but it usually took a while after Machinery II Lower-Level watch for my ears to recover due to the noise of the main feed pump motor noise. (Those pumps took water from a vacuum to 900psi. They were engineering marvels.) Anyway, my fellow NUC had saved the ship because he noticed that a ventilation fan for the battery had jammed. He should have received a "Saved the Ship" award from the Captain but our captain at the time had no appreciation for enlisted sailors.

The fact that the Navy promptly dropped the maintenance halfassery despite it being considered vital enough to implement in the first place makes me suspect they know pretty well what happened out there.

Hey my guy thank you for finally releasing this episode. I've done a lot of research on the USS SCORPION, I think you have done the story and mystery justice. Hard to accept "we don't know" as an answer to what happened. I'm personally convinced they know a lot more about what happened to the Scorpion, and are hiding the truth even 56 years later. Now you have to do a story on K129 and its deep-sea recovery. You didn't mention the detail in the video, but they knew the Scorpion was missing for at least 3 days, prior to its return to port, and they still let the families of those sailors show up and wait around for their planned arrival for hours before sending them home.

Imagine being one of the two men who got off that sub just a couple of days before it imploded. There would be no point in them playing the Lotto again, they used up their lifetime supply of good luck right there.

Excellent summary. Good to know the U.S. Navy learned from the tragedy, unlike the sordid blame-game tactic it tried after the 1989 explosion in U.S. Iowa turret 2.

Yas, literally just sat down with a cuppa, and the notification came through.

Many thanks for covering this incident - certainly one of the saddest yet intruiging.

love the whole atmosphere you provide. even the music is balanced with the tone of your voice which really makes for easy listening.

Again, you have done an excellent job explaining this to were a regular Construction worker, like myself can understand! You put out really entertaining and thought, provoking content. Thank you for your time and effort. It really shows.

I believe that your battery theory is the correct one. It make the most sense of the information given. Amazing video!

I find it interesting that the Scorpions name was struck from the naval registry, but the Thresher was not....

Yay! We are always stoked to see a new WS!

When the Scorpion was in the shipyards I went aboard her on a request from their sonar department. They needed help making sure the active sonar was working properly .. and we had a similar system on board my ship the USS Stormes DD780 and we also had variable depth sonar. Their active sonar was only used when coming into port or the like. I was under the impression that they were in the yards because they had a collision with a Russian sub .. they played games with the Russians and one of the chiefs I knew said that when the Scorpion went down it was probably from another collision. Another theory I guess.

Correct answer. I was on USS Skipjack SSN-585 for a year in the mid 80s, so follow the story closely. All the Skipjacks were stationed in Groton CT. at the time, all retired by about 1990. Most of us believed the torpedo theory but more recent battery theory is pretty conclusive. The only water tight sections on the ship were Torpedo room and the reactor tunnel. Crews racks were lower level and aft but still same compartment as Control. The battery compartment was under crew birthing /beds. Getting battery chunks in Control would take a explosion, and there is no torpedo damage. There are active Facebook groups for Skipjack and probably the other 4, people there can probably answer questions better then I can. Fun Fact - Titanic was discovered using left over time after finding Scorpion for the Navy

I think Craven's theory might be close to correct. To Craven, the most compelling evidence was what the Scorpion did immediately before the explosions: a U-turn. At the time this is what submarine skippers did to disarm a hot running torpedo. A fail-safe device in the torpedo disarmed the warhead, so that they could get rid of the torpedo without fear of it turning around and striking the sub that launched it. The SOSUS arrays that caught the accident show that Scorpion made a sharp 180 degree turn 90 seconds before the explosions.   The Naval Underwater Warfare Center in Keyport, WA had found that the batteries of the Mk-37 could overheat and catch fire in vibration testing. The Scorpion suffered from unexplained severe vibrations, part of the reason she was to be overhauled. She also had some torpedoes with batteries from the batch that failed the vibration testing.  There's no way to accurately predict how a warhead that was cooked off from a fire will explode. That's not how they are designed to detonate. Perhaps the torpedo didn't detonate the way it was designed -- instead of a high order detonation, it was somewhat of a dud. That would explain why the torpedo room hatch was blown open, but not obliterated.

They likely just dismissed the Battery theory which is like the primary danger for any submarine likely due to its operator error with poor safety practices and Navy brass don't like any responsibility.

There seems to be an error in the calculation of the explosive equivalence to the implosion. 6.6 kilotons TNT would be twice as much as the displacement of the vessel and comparable to a small nuke. 6,600 kilograms = 6.6 tons would be more plausible.

Firstly, I want to appreciate that you focused on the facts and didn't give any space to baseless conspiracy theories. I didn't know about the battery explosion theory and it indeed sounds very plausible and matches the observable data, unlike all the other craziness. That's why it's such a shame there are these mistakes, like 6kt of TNT (should be 6t of TNT, probably) or that Skipjack was the first class that combined 'nuclear propulsion with advanced hull design of diesel powered submarine'. I suspect that what you wanted to say is that it featured for first time a teardrop hull, which was previously tested on experimental diesel electric USS Albacore and which was a radical departure from previous operational diesel electric submarines, but honestly, it makes no sense like this. Ultimately, it doesn't detract that much, it's just a shame.

Unrelated, but I yearn for another video covering a drilling incident. I really miss hearing you say 'mud'. 😅 I'm sorry, but it's so charming XD

May God bless this crew. They are on Eternal patrol.