The concept of women at sea on subs does require an understanding of what the traditional and current “going to sea on subs” (nuke or any other kind of propulsion) actually entails. The “tube” is precisely that and in the “old days” was affectionately known as a “sewer pipe”. Boat sailors actually reveled in the fact that, on deployments, the shower was filled with potatoes and they had to use their sinks to both brush their teeth and take the occasional “Marine bath” in. Today, we know women can care for and operate nuke plants…we’ve seen it on our carriers, but, even with air replenishment and filtering equipment and evaporators that can produce sufficient fresh water to satisfy most needs, on deployment, just the large crew and rider complement on our SSN’s bumped up against the load out and hull-confined space insures privacy, per se, is virtually non-existent. This is where the concern over “expense” (the article/possible April Fool’s Joke) entailed in making subs CO-ED starts to have validity. Basically, sailing on subs requires a “mind set” in its complement that differs from that required in crews going to sea in any other craft. Once you deploy and submerge, there is nowhere to escape to if social issues or just plain “enclosed-itis” starts to get one to climbing the bulkheads. This type of threat to mission and overall safety of the boat becomes a paramount consideration and, to minimize this threat, our Navy borrowed from the Germans in instituting a “Medical Research” arm into sub recruiting. This bunch had all the Rohrschadt, inkblot and “cartoon” tests needed to bolster their decisions to reject (for psychological reasons) sailors that had made it as far into the pipeline as sub school. Believe it or not, a sailor having more than one tattoo gave the shrinks “pause”. Even still, while not totally in the “hardhat” category, sub sailors were, and I think still are; “different” and absolutely irreverent. The “band of brothers” concept (and women do fit in this category) , usually assigned to Army and Marine Corps people in combat, exists on subs, big time…common situational exposure does it. Now HAVING SAID ALL THIS TO MORE OR LESS FRAME THE SOCIAL EXISTANCE ON SUBS, if we (Navy’s hierarchy) so desire to put ladies on the boats, all they have to do is make the decision to do it…and then do it. The ladies will change “band of brothers” to include “sisters” as well. There are some sub-construction and design issues that must be taken into consideration but if the change is needed, those issues can be solved by “throwing money” at the problem…after all, it is (by article) an “expense” issue. (I, for one, would not support a female only crew as that just continue s the segregation issue.) Again, if the Swedes can do it, so can the U S Navy. Can women satisfactorily do the job on subs? They sure as hell CAN! It’s not “rocket science”. Going to sea on subs just puts another dimension on going to sea. You still have to “keep from dragging your nose in the mud”, keep from hitting anything you’re not supposed to hit, get from A to B and do well what you have to do as a unit and then get back home again. In the extra dimension, there are only two additional rules to learn. They are easy…mathematically “make the surfaces equal the dives”, and “keep from getting your socks wet while submerged”. It’s also this other dimension that gave rise to the creation of a separate “sub community”. Again, in the early days, to get to sub school as an officer, you had to already possess your OOD (underway) qual… that meant the SWO bunch lost one of their own…and usually at the LT level. Today, that’s not so important. What is important is that the officer applicant have the educational background and record to insure success in his obtaining a MS in Nuclear Engineering and the potential to safely operate a nuclear power plant. (And you can take this as gospel from one who experienced this through being rejected.) Is this last sentence so important? Well, the Brits could care less about the need for “ …SSN skippers with nuke plant operational experience” and the MS in Nuke Engineering bit…their common “ship drivers” become their SSN skippers and the “nuke-trained” become their SSN engineers. But even still, our community does indeed require these items of potential in our officer input. Then also, one has to remember the community pipeline requirements existing in eventually making it to XO and then to command…then to Unit Command, etc. In sh o rt, nuke school+sub school, ALL the at-sea JO jobs, shore staff/school/training jobs), the pre-XO screening and XO tour, staff or school tour and you’re well out in “community years” before coming up for consideration for a SSN command. Can this community obstacle be circumvented? Sure! Our Navy did this back in the ‘50s-‘60s time frame when they (the hierarchy) had the need to man our newly born, strategic SSBN fleet (with two crews for each boat coming into existence)…and didn’t have the normal manpower pipeline in existence to pull it off. We just got “good people” and invented a truncated pipeline for them to “fleet-up to command”. The operative word here is “need”! If the need exists and we want to use women in the SSN business up to the command and later levels, that can and should be done…but, since I don’t see the crushing (strategic) need here, done using our normal pipeline! I know that wasn’t the route taken when the GEORGE WAS HI NGTON and the original SSBN fleet appeared, but that was a different time and (strategic) need. Again, in summary, “submarine-ing” entails only one more dimension on going to sea…and if the Swedes can do it, so can the U S Navy. I’ve seen and assisted with the introduction of women at sea and deployed and I know it happened well! I also know that none of that happened without some strong political and social pushing and…the total cooperation of all levels of command in the fleet. I’ve also experienced the impact (of that mostly social change) that change had on the integrated command and all non-integrated commands that formally came in (social) contact with integrated/matriculated commands. Some of this impact was “over the top” and had to be formally addressed and firmly corrected where needed to make the “project” work. It worked well! We now have a sexually integrated Navy (with the exception of the submarine business) and we’re better for it. If the desire is to insure integration of that last hold-out bastion (and from reading-in the elation of those thinking the “article” was genuine, there are many of you that feel that way) my strong suggestion is; GO FOR IT! Just know this Navy goes with “NEED” to effect change…either in weapons systems or any other aspect of bringing weapons to bear on the enemy…so whatever effort is expended in bringing women into submarines, please insure your arguments include the NEED to make that happen…and then have patience. I think it’s going to be a while before we see a female SSN skipper. But, I personally think it’s a no-brainer to be certain that females can do the “SSN skipper” job well. Hell, if the Swedes can do it, so can the U S Navy!...AND MAYBE WE SHOULD! — Howard Venezia
