# Submarine question **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 9, 2003, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-question/212300 "2003-11-09T22:52:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 2\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![swansont](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5fc32e/32.png) [@swansont](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/swansont)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2003, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-question/212300/41 "2003-11-11T23:15:10Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > Out of curiousity, has there ever been an attempt to _manufacture_ a gas for an emergency lift system? Rather than carrying compressed air, couldn’t you use the reactors to electrolyze hydrogen gas? Or carry some chemical that produces copious amounts of gas in reaction to seawater? In addition to the other comments about the impracticality of this, you have absolutely no assurance that whatever landed you in the situation requiring the gas didn’t cause the reactor to scram (automatic emergency shutdown) ---
**Author:** ![Gunslinger](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/4491bb/32.png) [@Gunslinger](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gunslinger)\ **Post date:** [November 12, 2003, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-question/212300/42 "2003-11-12T05:59:12Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by robby \* > \*\*Sorry, but this is complete baloney. U.S. submarines are required to test the emergency blow procedure from test depth quarterly. \*\* Darn. He implied there was a better-than-even chance of it breaking the boat in half, but apparently he was just trying to impress us. Now I’m starting to worry about the quality of my physics education. :eek: [sub]Oh, wait, it was the basic class for non-math majors, so all the dim bulbs and troublemakers were in it (I was smart but lazy). I didn’t learn anything anyway.[/sub] [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/submarine-question/212300.md?page=2)