SecNav, CNO: Women should serve on subs

[QMCNAVY]

I believe that the intergration of women on Submarines will significantly affect the environment and lifestyle of the current force. Based on the OPTEMPO of the Submarine Force these days and the effect of change like this to crews which must maintain a focused effort towards the current missions. This change would introduce a distraction to that purpose and potentially place the crews at risk. A qualified Submariner knows that an error by one person could potentially harm a crew of many. The risk on a surface ship may not be as drastic.

My final point is that the Submariners, if directed, will follow the orders given them no matter what. They are the best of the best. The ones who really have a problem with this action are the spouses of the sailors. In my discussion with my wife about this subject, she revealed that she did not like me being totally isolated for many months with women onboard my ship. It wasn't a matter of trust towards me but of the temptation of men and women in particular.

Robert McLean
QMC(SS) (Ret)

Originally Posted by NavySubmariner

I'm all for it..with conditions. For one, I think they should wait on putting woman on submarines, until the next class of submarines are designed. This way, in the design phase, they can plan for woman and give them their own berthing area and head. I don't think it would be possible to put woman on LOS ANGELES or VIRGINIA CLASS Submarines.

All well and good, but then you'd be removing the sub's ability to perform the submarine force's primary mission since the Cold War, to go into littoral waters off of other country's coasts for spying and SEAL insertion and extractions. You do realize one of the reasons they decided not to make anymore Seawolf class submarines was because of the size and cost. They simply did not need a submarine that size anymore since we no longer trail Soviet submarines as our primary focus. Virginia class was specifically designed to accomplish these new missions and designed small so as to do it as efficiently as possible.

The larger SSBN force can probably make this happen more so than the attack boats. A major problem that would have to be overcome is flushing items into the sanitary systems. This could possibly scrub a mission. A freezer of some sort would be the answer, but I would hate to be the one that cleaned it out upon return from an extended deployment. I am not joking about this.

[CYCLE156]

Originally Posted by AlaskanHokie

Having served with Adm. Roughead when he helped integrate PORT ROYAL, as his Integration officer and one of the first women to integrate a cruiser - I am a huge fan! It's about time.
If I could serve on a frigate for three months taking showers in a swim suit in a decontamination station, they can find a way to integrate women onto submarines.

And, I've always found it hypocritical that women researchers have been deplying on polar ice cap deployments on submarines for years, but just because Navy women would be permanently assigned to the subs, they were not allowed to deploy.

Way to go, Adm. Roughead! I eagerly await the too-long delayed change.

You would be one of the exceptions that would not have a problem with the close quarters. This could be done right now on a TRIDENT, but Female Sailors (Officers and Enlisted) would need to start at the junior level as everyone stands watch. Each watch station, to include off going and on coming have responsibilities wrt casualties. This would be a part of the learning progression.

2 SSNs, 1 SSBN and a Sub Tender, ready to see the next future of the force.

[garhkal]

Originally Posted by Retired ETC(SS)

The larger SSBN force can probably make this happen more so than the attack boats. A major problem that would have to be overcome is flushing items into the sanitary systems. This could possibly scrub a mission. A freezer of some sort would be the answer, but I would hate to be the one that cleaned it out upon return from an extended deployment. I am not joking about this.

Easy. Since the women would be the one stocking it up, THEY would be the ones cleaning it.

[DeepWaterDolphins]

This guy is a skimmer. he has never served on a boat. he does not truly understand how having a female onboard will disrupt the everyday operation and morale of the crew. Let the brass spend a little time in the deep and then let him make a statement. The surface fleet is not the same navy as the sub force.

Green board.....

DeepWaterDolphins

As a 20 year submariner with both enlisted and officer experience, I understand many of the concerns voiced here. However, most of these concerns are minor and easily overcome.
Ability: The concerns about whether or not a woman could do my job as easily as a man are baseless. Face the facts. There are very few submarine tasks that require serious upper body strength and of these, there are plenty of men who have struggled with them, but as a team, we were able to properly accomplish the tasks. We routinely place the best person in the proper position to handle these items (yes in some cases it may be a man). Issues of knowledge or ability have little to no gender relation in submarine operations.
Medical: The idea that we could not come up with a workable solution to monthly issues is also silly. I also don't believe that women would require any more medical evacuations than we see with men. A negative pregnancy test prior to deployment would become part of the normal preparations.
The idea of a female only submarine is a non-starter because of the extensive experience required to operate and command a submarine. Women will have to be integrated into male crews to grow that experience.
The real problems all boil down to privacy and the cultural expectations we have grown to know. The idea that we will be a less-prepared or less capable force because we can't tell bawdy jokes or scratch or balls is laughable. Yes we have stress, so do many lines of work (ok maybe not on the same level). Space considerations are the real issue. If we want to integrate women, then change the regulations about separate spaces and really integrate them. No separate berthing or heads. Integrate them and hold your people accountable for their actions. Would there be some problems... of course. Would we be able to address the problems and maintain the premier submarine force in the world... you bet. The solution lies in the proper personnel vetting and training prior to assignment and continued adherence to standards onboard the ship to maintain command and control.

[euzkadiCA]

As a former submariner, this is possible the most cockamamie idea i have ever heard from some NUB-ass Admirals. Get your fish on a fast-attack and then find me some room, let alone indroducing a bunch of women with (for submarines) unfeasible rules of seperate berthings and heads. A fast attack has 3 showers and 4 stalls for the majority of enlisted. We hot rack up to and including E-6's. The only Corpsman has a medical bag stuffed into the counter-measure closet for crying out loud! These guys go on about small surface combatants (frigates and destroyers i assume) which are positively like the Marriot compared to a 688. Not even remotely comparable. When i got off my last attack less than 2 years ago we were losing 6-8 of every 10 new guys we got aboard to stress, going crazy and just quitting. Now we have to take into account pregancies!!?? Subs cant just fly someone off if they get knocked up. You get on mission it could take weeks of careful transits to get on station, you cant jump pop up and get her off...you have to do the same thing in reverse. Meanwhile the crew is down another valuable crew member. Skimmers need to keep their nose and policies out of a world that is not translateable to what they did. Submarines dont have enough room for the "big Navy" let alone a bunch of females. Much respect to females who do serve in the Military but this is stupid, political and coming from people who have no comprehesion of the matter in which they speak

[euzkadiCA]

Originally Posted by STRASSDADDY

hey rough head! you're crew of women vs my crew of dirty old sea dogs , and will see who sinks your battle ship!
FAST ATTACK NO SLACK ! HOOYAH CHICAGO! SSN 721

Couldn't have said it better myself. Roughhead is a DINQ NUB trying to open the inner and outer tube doors, trying to sacrifice an utterly capable service in the name of PC. We will still perform, but at the cost making life more miserable for people who already have one of the most miserable lifestyles in the Navy

[SubMM]

“Having commanded a mixed gender surface combatant, I am very comfortable addressing integrating women into the submarine force. I am familiar with the issues as well as the value of diverse crews,”

that statement offends me highly. yet again, a Surface Officer feels it is so important to leave his mark upon something. Why not fix the PRT issues, or Manning issues.


Instead, he is after something that 99% of the Submarine Fleet DOES NOT WANT.



From a purely Economical standpoint, the idea is ludicrous with our current ideology and notions of self-space and privacy. Anybody ever seen StarShip Troopers? That sort of mentality is the only way a COED Submarine Fleet would work.

As things presently are...yeah. You put 120-150 men into a 200-300 ft sewer tube. then toss a handful of women in the mix...and just for some spice, lets seal the whole Powder Keg up for 2+ months.

And this sounds like a good idea to whom exactly? At the very least, you will have Sexual Harrassment issues. And hopefully nothing more. People in favor of Coed Crews obviously have never been underway on a Submarine for any significant amount of time.


A submarine is a strange and scary place after a few months. People change and do some very strange...and creepy stuff. Especially when you don't get to surface or port calls.







I hope this idiotic idea never gets past the planning stage. I would likely get out of the Navy if it occurs. I've had to work with Women at my Shore Duty. Never again. The hassle is not worth the gains...which I never did see. Some jobs women will excell at. In others, they cause tremendous issues.