surface or sub???

[cjones2106]

Hey again, my ship date is Oct 11 and i'm trying to move it to june or july....still pending; but anyway, I am trying to decide if I want to try life as a bubblehead or if I want to try life on the open sea. Any advice would be great! o- almost forgot, I'll be 18 when I ship, and I joined the navy to travel, not sure if that will make a big differance, but I thought it was worth adding in. Thanks Again!

[Rad Sponge]

I can't, I just can't, I just don't have it in me.

A word: Subs.

[shayne]

I took the surface route.  At the time, they usually visited more ports and I enjoy seeing the sun everyday.

[LaFeet]

Hey again, my ship date is Oct 11 and i'm trying to move it to june or july....still pending; but anyway, I am trying to decide if I want to try life as a bubblehead or if I want to try life on the open sea. Any advice would be great! o- almost forgot, I'll be 18 when I ship, and I joined the navy to travel, not sure if that will make a big differance, but I thought it was worth adding in. Thanks Again!

A lot can go into the choice.  I was claustrophobic and decided to conquer my fears by taking on the subs.

If you NEED FRESH AIR, SUNSHINE< FRESH FOOD... go surface

If you can deal with powdered eggs and milk and wilted lettuce - go subs (the money is better)

[hamsamich]

Don't forget about the seasick thing....I get seasick.  I think for someone who gets seasick, a submarine would be better.  On a sub, the only time you have to deal with seasickness is when on the surface in choppy or worse seas, which isn't very often, except for going in and out of port.  I was on a sub and a tender; when the tender was at sea I usually felt a little rough in all but the calmest of seas.  When the sub was at sea at normal cruise depth, which was 98% of the time, I felt AOK.  The tender didn't go out to sea too often, so I was ok there.  I think I would have been miserable on a cruiser or even a carrier possibly; they go out to see for 6months or more. 

Plus when you are going in and out of port on the sub (called the maneuvering watch), you have a special station to be on, and everybody on the sub has to be awake/alert/on the job.  I would go to my station and just lay there and puke/drool for the next 12 hours, so I had an excellent excuse to be laying around on the job.  I could get up and do something just barely if I had to, but if nothing was going on, which was 95% of the time where I was, I'd be lying down with my face pointed torwards the bilge drooling.

[M1Ark]

Don't forget about the seasick thing....I get seasick.  I think for someone who gets seasick, a submarine would be better. 

Not really true.  Hamsamich, have you been underway on a carrier?

[hamsamich]

no, but I have been on a huge cruise ship and a tender.  I was thinking if I get seasick on those, a carrier wouldn't be much better.  I'm trying to look at this from all points of view.

-remember, I get very seasick with the lightest roll
-when a sub is underwater, you don't feel seasick unless it goes shallow or surface
-I'd rather deal with really bad seas for the maneuvering watch only, then know that all will be well until the next port.

this is all about personal pref.  I was just giving my view to remind people to at least THINK about getting seasick before choosing one or the other.  I could be off base here if you NEVER feel rolls at all on a carrier, no matter how high the seas are.  is that true?  if not, I probably was correct, for me anyway.  For people who get only somewhat seasick, maybe a carrier would be better....

[Bighouz107501]

I see alot of great info about this decision, but I was wondering which one would give me more qualifications in the commercial field. I strive for the most and will not settle for the minimum; therefore, I want to receive all the quals possible.  Thanks

Dennis

[Fermi2]

I see alot of great info about this decision, but I was wondering which one would give me more qualifications in the commercial field. I strive for the most and will not settle for the minimum; therefore, I want to receive all the quals possible.  Thanks

Dennis

The positions are the same on both. Both are equivalent qualifications for the commercial world. At times things go in cycles. When I was getting out in 1990 there was a big commercial push for Prototype instructors, having that on your resume was almost a guarantee to at least get an interview.

Mike

[LaFeet]

no, but I have been on a huge cruise ship and a tender.  I was thinking if I get seasick on those, a carrier wouldn't be much better.  I'm trying to look at this from all points of view.

-remember, I get very seasick with the lightest roll
-when a sub is underwater, you don't feel seasick unless it goes shallow or surface
-I'd rather deal with really bad seas for the maneuvering watch only, then know that all will be well until the next port.

this is all about personal pref.  I was just giving my view to remind people to at least THINK about getting seasick before choosing one or the other.  I could be off base here if you NEVER feel rolls at all on a carrier, no matter how high the seas are.  is that true?  if not, I probably was correct, for me anyway.  For people who get only somewhat seasick, maybe a carrier would be better....

Carriers do experience rolls and sways, although not nearly as bad a smaller surface craft, or submarines.  And even on subs, you can get rolls some 200 + feet down when the weather is really bad topside.

You are right about personal preference though.  If you only experienced choppy seas during manuevering watches and a few surface follies, you were lucky.  Todays subs are NOT designed for surface ops.

As for any other reason, I think the availability of different quals is better on suns than surface.  You (or at least when I was in) were encouraged to qualify all your "in rate" watchstations as well as some outside your billet.  Times were such that it almost required nukes to be qualified as Chief of the Watch (coner qual) for any chance at making E-7.

I hope the best for you cjones2106, fair winds and following seas.....

[hamsamich]

we seemed to stay at a good depth, I don't want to mention what that was. my memory isn't perfect though.  when we were in decent water on the tender, it still seemed to roll a little.  the sub usually stuck to our cruise depth unless doing something special.  I think we went near a bad storm at our normal depth one time on the sub, and it was a little rolly, but it was a nasty storm (one time only).  I felt what the tender felt like in much less of a storm (maybe 8 foot seas?) and I did not like it compared to the sub.  i can only assume the carrier would also roll, but maybe not as much.

[retired nuke]

Ahhh, but the occasional surface transit of the North Sea in the fall - that's a roller coaster ride - only had to feed 4 people for that day and 1/2.....and we ate good!!
Water over the bridge - nobody topside, drive by scope.... and all hands turn green !!
One of my fondest memories, but then, I enjoys other's suffering...

[RCLCPO]

I recall once, on the Topeka, sitting in crews mess watching the hopper for the coffee pot launch itself out of its holder (on the stbd side)....it hit the port bulkhead after clearing the tables without effort....

Ahhh, there ain't nothin' worse than calm seas and the sight of land...

The reality of it is, once we submerged you never knew we were moving, unless we did angles and dangles.........

[LaFeet]

I guees the worst for me was Alpha trials on the Maryland.... right into a nor-easter.

Managed to absorb most of the water in through the sail with the temp bunks from the torpedo room.....  I did manage to get sick on that one.....

[Rad Sponge]

I would offer this aspect to consider:

All the seasick stuff is secondary at best, because all things in water will move.

What you need to think about are these:

1. Do you prefer small intimate groups or large gatherings of people?
2. Do you want to attain leadership positions sooner?
3. Do you mind confined spaces?

Being a nuke is hard, regardless of the locale, so you need to consider the additional environmental pressures of a submarine lifestyle.

[LaFeet]

I would offer this aspect to consider:

All the seasick stuff is secondary at best, because all things in water will move.

What you need to think about are these:

1. Do you prefer small intimate groups or large gatherings of people?
2. Do you want to attain leadership positions sooner?
3. Do you mind confined spaces?

Being a nuke is hard, regardless of the locale, so you need to consider the additional environmental pressures of a submarine lifestyle.

While this is true, life as a nuke on the surface is much more relaxed than that of a sub.

Toss in that with the lack of fresh food, inability to communicate with loved ones, long periods of time without sunlight and the fact that once the hatch closes, you may loose the ability to recognize body odor until the hatch opens again........ 

Subs have the terrors and faults, but I would not have traded any of my sub experiences for life on a "Target" with fresh salad.

[Bighouz107501]

Good point guys, I think I'm going to stick to seeing sunlight and stars. Thanks for the advice from all the sub guys.

[visserjr]

Best Marine is a SUBMARINE. Sorry Third gen bubblehead.
John

[hamsamich]

good idea.  If it weren't for the seasick thing, and the fact I didn't want to stay in the navy 1 more minute, I would have tried a carrier.  good luck, and if you like the nav, don't forget to at least give subs a try.  you can easily tour one when you get to your carrier.  also, fast attacks are good for the travel thing!!  but so are carriers I think.

[Bighouz107501]

Yes, I would like to try subs. I'm a big fan of being a somewhat small group that you can bond with easily. I think there are positives of both, but I'll sure to tour a few to see if I could handle it.

[taterhead]

This whole "intimate group" thing is a little misleading from the surface perspective.

I ate, drank, slept, stood watch, showered, brushed teeth, bitched, moaned, cleaned bilges, fought fake fires, etc, with the same 15 or 20 people all the time.  Sure, there are a multitude of other people around or in the background, but your world is as big (or small) as you make it on a carrier. 

[M1Ark]

This whole "intimate group" thing is a little misleading from the surface perspective.

I ate, drank, slept, stood watch, showered, brushed teeth, bitched, moaned, cleaned bilges, fought fake fires, etc, with the same 15 or 20 people all the time.  Sure, there are a multitude of other people around or in the background, but your world is as big (or small) as you make it on a carrier. 

Well said, Tater!

[Fermi2]

Heck even in a department or shift of about 20 guys you'll find yourself hanging out with the same 4 or 5 on a routine basis. The others are just sort of there, you chew the fat with them at work and for the most part like them, but in most cases you only hang with a select few.

Go to a website for CVN 65 Nukes. You'll be surprised at how many actually knew each other, even if they were in different parts of the department.

Mike

[LaFeet]

Sounds like comparing the "open range" to city life

[Fermi2]

On the surface in the San Fran Bay wasn't ever fun on a submarine!

Three of my best friends , including my best friend all came from carriers. Good people are good people regardless of where they come from.

On the subs you'll meet your fair share of arsewipes, as you will on a surface ship. If you're a good guy you'll attract good people around you and won't have to sweat it.

One thing I'm glad we never had on the 687, no personnel inspections before going ashore. I heard on the CVNs this was a big thing.

Mike