Wednesday, October 29, 2014


This is coolbert:

As extracted some interesting comments from that previous blog entry:

"Female Sailors to be Assigned to Submarines with Female Officers"

Women in submarines is a done deal? Indeed, the goal again is to have two of the Virginia class nuclear attack submarines with all-female crews.

* "I wonder I they will/should/could make all female crewed submarines. Combat is no place for a woman let alone a submarine, bad enough the men that served in combat don't want to be there. Don't get me wrong I know there are plenty of historical female military leaders, but is the exception not the rule. Its just a recipe for disaster."

Strength, separate toilet and berthing facilities and possible POW status is not a problem with an all-female crewed submarine? This is do-able?

 Qualification, efficiency, and just plain ability to do the job is an issue?

* "As a retired submarine Captain, I would love to conduct qualification exams, ashore and afloat for these females. I conducted the same for male SSBN officers and found them woefully unqualified. Great engineers, lousy submariners"

Understand that any crew member of a submarine is qualified at their particular skill BUT ALSO MUST BECOME FULLY QUALIFIED AT A NUMBER OF SUBMARINE SPECIFIC TASKS THAT ARE OJT AND ARE NOT TAUGHT AT SCHOOL!

Of major concern among the men also seems to be the monthly female menstrual cycle.

* "The only way that's going to work is if they make sure that everyone has their periods at the same time. Then they will have 'hell week' once a month. Can you imagine what it's going to be like with someone on their period all the time?"
* "I understand that, thrown into close quarter situations, women begin to 'cycle' together. Daunting thought."


Aberrant mental behavior as normally associated with PMS and the monthly female menstrual cycle not a problem as might be thought? American nuclear attack submarines are no longer equipped with atomic munitions of any sort? So it is reputed!


No comments: