"David Oberman" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 09:08:19 -0800, The Other Guy
wrote:

The ship was NOT hit by a tsunami. Even if there HAD been a tsunami,
a ship at sea wouldn't have even felt it).

I would love to be on a boat in deep water whilst a tsunami passed
under. I would imagine that there is an unnoticeable swell upward (by
perhaps a few inches) -- undistinguishable from the general surface
swell -- which, owing to the enormous wavelength, doesn't subside for
perhaps twenty or thirty minutes.

There were some eyewitness accounts published years ago of military
men on a submarine who happened to be close to the bottom of deep
water when a tsunami was propagating. They say they saw sediment
stirred up for fifteen or twenty minutes, not knowing what was causing
this.

I wonder how they would see anything going on outside the submarine. I'm
not aware of windows on submarines.

"charles" wrote in news:YMAkn.376443$FK3.12341@en-nntp-
06.dc1.easynews.com:

I wonder how they would see anything going on outside the submarine. I'm
not aware of windows on submarines.

Cameras.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

On 5 Mar, 22:31, "Dave Cornwell"
wrote:
"Keith (Southend)G" wrote in message

...



On 5 Mar, 12:30, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On 5 Mar, 11:54, "Keith (Southend)G"
wrote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8550025.stm?ls

What exactly caused these waves in the Mediterranean Sea?

They occurred the day the low on the west of Iberia became the low on
the east of Iberia.

And of course you know from following the incomparably wonderful
Weatherlawyer that the low was linked to that earthquake that had been
so upsetting for everyone uik.sci.weather for the last month or so?

Looks like there could be another set of such wave trains on Sunday:
https://www.fnmoc.navy.mil/wxmap_cgi..._atlantic&dtg=

I'm not sure the link will work. The cookies I had were for the
previous days. Instead of going back to the other pages I just chopped
the URL and it worked for me.

So it was the weather, not a Tsunamii cause by an earthquake?

Don't know yet but will probably find out soon as it's one of the ones I
work on doing the hygiene inspections in the summer. I'm sure they will have
a few stories to tell!

As someone noted, the chances of them getting lucky twice are slim.
Still, one can always hope for the best.

On 5 Mar, 11:54, "Keith (Southend)G"
wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/8550025.stm?ls

What exactly caused these waves in the Mediterranean Sea?

Keith (Southend)

Talking of large waves
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8546032.stm

Oh yeah, they saw this through the glass bottom or the sliding glass
door..........r i g h t. I sure hope they had the screen door shut at
a depth of 1,000 meters to keep out the phallactic aspirators. Those
little buggers cause havoc on a Sub. Where in the f**k do people come
up with this crap?

There were some eyewitness accounts published years ago of military
men on a submarine who happened to be close to the bottom of deep
water when a tsunami was propagating. They say they saw sediment
stirred up for fifteen or twenty minutes, not knowing what was causing
this.

In article ,
says...
Oh yeah, they saw this through the glass bottom or the sliding glass
door..........r i g h t.

They wouldn't need to. Suspended solids show up well on sonar
and are easily seen as such. It is generally considered a bad
thing, both in tems of the reduced efficency of the sonar and
increased noise from the submarine.

If the submarine was nuclear, there would also be a constant
intake of sea water for various reasons, primarily coolant and
life support. This intake is obviously very important and is
therefore constantly monitored.

Periscopes can be, and occasionally are, used underwater but
visibilty is generally poor even just below the surface and
decreases rapidly with depth.

I sure hope they had the screen door shut at
a depth of 1,000 meters to keep out the phallactic aspirators. Those
little buggers cause havoc on a Sub. Where in the f**k do people come
up with this crap?


The idea that a modern military submarine could operate near
the sea bed without the crew being aware of what is happening
outside is simply preposterous.

--
Alan LeHun

In article ,
says...
I wonder how they would see anything going on outside the submarine. I'm
not aware of windows on submarines.

Cameras.



Unlikely. Without powerful lights they are completly useless at
depth (even at IR frequencies).

--
Alan LeHun

On 6 Mar, 22:10, David Oberman wrote:
On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 09:08:19 -0800, The Other Guy

wrote:
The ship was NOT hit by a tsunami. Even if there HAD been a tsunami,
a ship at sea wouldn't have even felt it).

I would love to be on a boat in deep water whilst a tsunami passed
under. I would imagine that there is an unnoticeable swell upward (by
perhaps a few inches) -- undistinguishable from the general surface
swell -- which, owing to the enormous wavelength, doesn't subside for
perhaps twenty or thirty minutes.

There were some eyewitness accounts published years ago of military
men on a submarine who happened to be close to the bottom of deep
water when a tsunami was propagating. They say they saw sediment
stirred up for fifteen or twenty minutes, not knowing what was causing
this.

I don't think they were necessarily military men as the department of
defence gear their ships up for killing other people. Not that the use
of cameras on them is precluded.

A lot of interesting stuff about the deep has come from the less
defensive sector. One celebrated research vessel found brightly
coloured creatures at depths where steam is liquid.

But a few feet under the surface the rotational forces change to mere
to and fro effects.

What search terms have you tried? Sediment research is a major arm of
the petro-chemical industry but Wood's Hole do a lot of their own
research in it for various reasons.

Alan LeHun wrote in
:

In article ,
says...
I wonder how they would see anything going on outside the submarine.
I'm not aware of windows on submarines.

Cameras.



Unlikely. Without powerful lights they are completly useless at
depth (even at IR frequencies).

Well, since we do not know which submarine it is, this is all
conjecture. There are military submarines with cameras and/or
windows. There are some designed for bottom work. Further, we
don't know that it was even a military sub, only military men.


On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 09:08:19 -0800, The Other Guy
wrote:

There were some eyewitness accounts published years ago of military
men on a submarine who happened to be close to the bottom of deep
water...


I think some folks read what they wanted to read, and not what
was actually written. I have a hunch some thought the implication
was a big missile carrying nuke aka "boomer".

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?

On 7 Mar, 21:04, David Oberman wrote:
On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 11:20:50 -0800 (PST), Weatherlawyer

wrote:
I don't think they were necessarily military men

It may have been one of those robotic research vessels armed with
cameras.

Whatever, there haven't been that many tsunami. One on the (get this)
NW shoes of the Balearic Islands after a quake in Morocco and of
course the one off Sumatra the 26th December 2004.

It might have been someone searching for a wreck in the Med. I think
it was about 2001 or 2. There'd have been any amount of ships down
there from WW 2.