Mistakes Surface in Submarine Tragedy

* As the captain of a container ship frequenting the waters off Honolulu, I have been following the reports concerning the collision between the submarine Greeneville and the trawler Ehime Maru with great interest (“Look Below the Surface in Probe of Sub Tragedy,” Commentary, Feb. 21).

I fully concur on the difficulty of seeing a small ship like the Ehime Maru. This can be hard enough from the open bridge of a ship 100 feet above the surface. I would think it would be next to impossible through the restricted view of a periscope just breaking clear of the sea, particularly with a strong sea and swell running. This argues for a change in procedure, calling for surfacing the submarine and making a check for traffic by both a lookout outside on the conning tower and by radar. Then, when sure the area is clear of other ships, submerge and proceed with such a drastic, invisible maneuver.

Another thing that haunts me about this tragedy is why the Greeneville was practicing this maneuver in an area with as much maritime traffic as there is in the waters south of Diamond Head. There are ships, tugs, barges, fishing boats--you name it--out there. Why wasn’t the Greeneville 100 miles or more to the southwest of Oahu, where very few ships go?

SEAN M. DOLAN

Long Beach

*

Roger C. Dunham lectures us that it is entirely understandable that the sub was not aware of the presence of the 190-foot fishing trawler. After all, its silhouette head-on might be only 25 feet, and this could be lost on the horizon if it was five nautical miles away.

I hope to God he is dead wrong and that our nuclear subs would be perfectly aware of any 190-foot coast defense corvette bearing down on them. Besides, if the fishing vessel was five miles away, how did it manage to close in during the few minutes the sub was performing its whoop-de-do for the civilians? Somewhere there was a series of very tragic goofs that should never, ever happen again.

STEPHEN J. HALASZ

Desert Hot Springs