# Japanese fishing boat **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [February 11, 2001, 9:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/japanese-fishing-boat/54027 "2001-02-11T09:19:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2001, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/japanese-fishing-boat/54027/21 "2001-02-13T01:04:17Z")
(A) My nearest major naval maneouver area, Vieques Island, has pieces of territorial sea that are designated as “restricted zones” and announced to all local shipping and fisheries operators and port captains, and in which for the duration of the training (1) civilian traffic will be warned to stay clear or be physically removed and (2) any dangerous training is expected to happen within that clear area. I am surprised at how all reports seem to give the impression that the Greenville would just go ahead and do such a risky maneouver anywhere in open water as long as they thought it was OK. (B) **Diceman** , What could we expect of the _Los Angeles_ Class, except for it to have trouble when caught in heavy traffic? 🙂 (C) Oh, regarding some of the comments earlier in the thread… even proper territorial waters (\<12NM) are not an absolute exclusionary zone. And in any case, how the heck would they get between international waters and their port-of-call in Honolulu _without_ going thru territorial waters? (D) Like Hiro said, “_crash_crunch\*” is the sound a captain’s career makes when coming to an unexpected end. ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2001, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/japanese-fishing-boat/54027/22 "2001-02-13T15:04:48Z")
[http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/east/02/12/japan.substrike.05/index.html](http://www.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/east/02/12/japan.substrike.05/index.html) > [@](#): > > The U.S. Navy rejected safety recommendations a decade ago that were aimed at preventing accidents like last week’s collision of a U.S. submarine and a Japanese trawler. > > In a similar incident off California on June 14, 1989, the submarine USS Houston hooked the towline of the U.S. tug Barcona while rising to periscope depth and then dragged the tug partially underwater during an emergency descent. > > The NTSB investigated the incident and in 1991 urged the Navy to require subs to use “active sonar” before surfacing in U.S. coastal waters. But naval officials refused, saying mandating the use of ping-like signals to check objects in the vicinity would make the subs too easily detectable. Question–detectable by _whom_? Silly me, I thought the Cold War was over… :rolleyes: Um, **Hiro**? > [@](#): > > For the submariners, the Cold War is not over. It is their job to track all foreign assests that may in anyway bring harm to the United States or it’s allies. They’re protecting the Good People of the United States from the dastardly inscrutable Japanese factory trawlers? Lest the future of democracy be endangered by the evil overfishing of turbot and pollack? > [@](#): > > All they have to navigate is a clock, a map and their math. And, um, about 20 million dollars worth of state-of-the-art computer equipment? This was a boat full of high school students on a fishing trip. What were they gonna do, invade Pearl Harbor armed with gaffs, landing nets, and 30 lb. high-test monofilament? ---
**Author:** ![egkelly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/db5fbb/32.png) [@egkelly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/egkelly)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2001, 4:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/japanese-fishing-boat/54027/23 "2001-02-13T16:05:04Z")
As an interesting aside, a friend of mine is a commercial fisherman out of Pt. Judith R.I. A few years back, they were dragging their net about 20 miles offshore, in Long Islanf Sound (not too far from the submarine base at new London, CT. All of a sudden, the mate (who was at the wheel) saw the engine revs drop, and the forward speed drop to zero! They couln’t figure out what was going wrong-the captain decided that they had snagged the net on an uncharted wreck! Suddenly, to their surprise, a submarine surfaced astern-tangled in their $50,000 net! The mate snapped a polaroid picture, and they cut the net loose. Later, their lawyer contacted the Navy, to announce a damage claim-the letter was unanswered! later, the lawyer sent a copy of the photo-and the navy promptly paid the claim! ---
**Author:** ![likearock](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a4c791/32.png) [@likearock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/likearock)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2001, 7:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/japanese-fishing-boat/54027/24 "2001-02-14T07:58:41Z")
1. I agree with diceman. 2. New report: There may have been a civilian at the controlls! ---
**Author:** ![curious\_george](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/b487fb/32.png) [@curious\_george](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/curious_george)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2001, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/japanese-fishing-boat/54027/25 "2001-02-14T16:11:55Z")
Yes, two civilians were at the controls. Joyriding civilians explains a lot: [http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/US/uss\_greeneville/](http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/US/uss_greeneville/) ---
**Author:** ![manhattan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/manhattan/32/7_2.png) [@manhattan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/manhattan)\ **Post date:** [February 14, 2001, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/japanese-fishing-boat/54027/26 "2001-02-14T16:21:55Z")
The OP is asked and answered, and this is not a current events forum. I’m closing this thread. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/japanese-fishing-boat/54027.md?page=1)