Females on Submarines

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by John on October 5, 2009 at 9:20am

Dear Sir,

Thanks for your thoughtful and kind and honest reply. I did not mean for you to infer that i was implying you are not a True Christian by endorsing women in combat positions. I would never say that, because i don't think it. I am saying that the traditional views of how men and woman should live together, or not, are being pushed away by an elite Pragmatist cadre, that only see people as Things, products of Chance and Matter, and can therefore be manipulated accordingly. If we are not made in our Creators Image, than we can be made in our own, as we see fit.

I would love to help bring this discussion to a much higher level, and i thank you for encouraging me in this regard. With my meager intelligence, i am humbly submitting this link.

http://catholiceducation.org/articles/civilization/cc0112.html ( Islam Will Not Be The Loser, by James V.Schall .)

Some might wonder, " What in the Hell does an essay on Islam have to do with women sleeping with men in close quarters on ships ??!!"

If you will please read it, i think you will see the deeper connections .

Thank you all again for sharing with me. God's Peace to you all.

Cordially, john

NavyDads Admin said:

It is an interesting discussion and needs to continue at high levels. I see a list of logistical issues that may be difficult to overcome considering the limited space available on subs as currently configured and with all the years of tradition. As a personal note, I'm not so sure I appreciate the implication that I may not be Christian because I'm asking to try to understand what your rather vehement statements are based on. I know women are stationed on subs for some other countries and I haven't seen much on the tube or in print about problems with that policy. On another note, during my Tiger Cruise earlier this year, I saw many women serving on my son's carrier (yeah...I have one of each flavor serving on carriers) and I didn't see anyone during those 2 1/2 days treat female sailors any different from any other sailor doing their jobs.

NavyDads Admin said:

To be blunt, my daughter completed a seven month cruise on a carrier recently and she had no issues during that little boat ride....but then again, Kat doesn't take crap from anyone............

John said:

Dear Fellow Veterans,

When i was in the army, during Carter's term as Commander in Chief, they started putting females with us males, on the "front line". ( After Vietnam - 76-79 ). I'll never forget the time during a huge LOTTS operation, there at Ft. Story, down from Little Creek - Army, Navy , Marines .... - and this one guy, a real Casanova, he started to put his tent-half together with this Chick. Well, we schlemiels were envious of him, knowing what was his ultimate goal. ( why didn't he want to share a tent-half with one of his former platoon mates ?) So, not long before they were all set to Bed Down Together, one of the NCO's, a Vietnam Vet, came up to this guy's tent and told him, " Fuhgetaboutit."

I am sorry that my old-fashioned (christian) beliefs offend so many people. I am not sorry for my old fashioned beliefs.

Let me ask you all this, as a starting point for us to understand what different World Views we may be assuming; Do you want your daughters shaking up with guys on Surface ships, not to mention Subs? ( isn't it more than 12% of the women on Skimmers are pregnant before the end of the cruise ?) Do you truly , deep down in your hearts, want you daughters sleeping and working around young , Virile , young men day and night , out at Sea ?

Oh, by the way, Bush submitted the idea to start letting young women be stationed on Subs. So Obama can't get all the credit. Forgive my poor writing skills.

Humbly Submitted,

john in Georgia

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by NavyDads Admin (Paul) on October 5, 2009 at 1:35pm

from Navy Times: 5 Oct 2009

Undersea Integration

Mabus, Roughead support ending ban on women serving aboard subs



By William H. McMichael

bmcmichael@militarytimes.com

and Andrew Scutro

ascutro@militarytimes.com

Top Navy and military leader­ship are “moving out aggressively” to end the ban on female crew members aboard submarines.

And while the motivation may be fairness in the force, it is a move fraught with controversy. Assigning women to sub duty sets a spectrum of issues squarely before the submarine community, from how and when, to cost and training, personal privacy, frater­nization, and even how sub­mariners’ spouses will react.

Rapid solutions are needed, as Navy Secretary Ray Mabus is pushing the issue hard.

“I believe women should have every opportunity to serve at sea, and that includes aboard sub­marines,” he said Sept. 24 in a statement to Navy Times. “This is something the CNO and I have been working on since I came into office [in May].” He says the Navy has been “moving out aggressive­ly” to make integration happen.

His comments came one week after Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen told congressional lawmakers that it was time to open subs to women.

Mullen’s successor, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead, said he is “very com­fortable” addressing crewing.

“There are some particular issues with integrating women into the submarine force, issues we must work through in order to achieve what is best for the Navy and our submarine force,” Roughead said in a statement. “Accommodations are a factor, but not insurmountable.” Navy Times requested responses from Mabus and Roughead after Mullen called for ending the ban, which was part of submitted answers to written questions posed by the Senate Armed Ser­vices Committee.

Mullen was responding to a question on women in combat and whether any policy changes are needed. He zeroed in on women serving aboard submarines, an issue that gained a high profile toward the end of the Clinton administration but then died out.

“As an advocate for improving the diversity of our force, I believe we should continue to broaden opportunities for women,” Mullen wrote. “One policy I would like to see changed is the one barring their service aboard submarines.” Roughead, in his statement, stopped far short of announcing any major policy changes.

“Having commanded a mixed­gender surface combatant, ... I am familiar with the issues as well as the value of diverse crews,” he said. Roughead said the Navy must “manage the community as a whole, such as force growth and retention within a small warfare community.” “The submarine force is much smaller than the surface and avia­tion forces, and personnel man­agement is more exacting,” he con­tinued. “This has had and will con­tinue to have my personal atten­tion as we work toward increasing the diversity of our Navy.” News quickly reignited the debate in the sub community.

Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy (SS/SW) Rick West said that as a former chief of the boat and a command master chief of a mixed­gender surface crew, he’d gladly serve on a mixed submarine.

“Structurally, I realize some work may be required, but cultur­ally, our men and women would adapt quickly, and this would be a seamless change,” he said.

Initial responses to Navy Times from submariners were mostly against the idea, because of the nature of submarine life.

Mullen, who became chairman two years ago, asked the subma­rine community to look at the issue during his 2½ years as CNO, said Capt. John Kirby, Mullen’s spokesman then and now.

That “look” was not complete by the time he was elevated to his present job, Kirby said, but open­ing the submarine community to women “is something he has maintained an interest in.” Women, who make up about 12 percent of the 1.2 million U.S. ser­vice members on active duty, are by policy excluded from tradition­al front-line combat jobs. But com­bat roles have become blurred during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, in which irregular war­fare marked by roadside bombs and a lack of the front lines evi­dent in traditional warfare have brought women into harm’s way.

Some young female sailors are already stepping forward.

“I am all for it. Where do I sign up?” asked Electronics Technician 1st Class (SW/AW) Shannon Hart, assigned to Tactical Training Group, Pacific, in San Diego. “It is frustrating being told I can’t do something because I am a woman and then have to listen to my peers whine about equal opportunity.” Hart isn’t the only one who jumped immediately at the news.

“If they need someone to test try this I’m more than willing to do so!” wrote Yeoman Seaman Ana Mant­zouranis at Fleet Readiness Center Western Pacific in an e-mail to Navy Times.

A hard life

Submariners live in exceptional­ly close quarters, even taking turns sleeping in the same bunks on some attack submarines. Offi­cials have said the lack of privacy and the cost of reconfiguring subs already tightly packed with gear and crew members make it diffi­cult to introduce female crew.

Mullen thinks those issues can be resolved.

“He believes that the physical barriers ... can be overcome, as they have been overcome on sur­face combatants,” Kirby said.

Yet even after integrating the surface fleet in 1993, overcoming ship designs so women can come aboard has no pat answer.

According to Navy Personnel Command, there are 140 surface ships in the Navy with women assigned, but not all can accommo­date female officers and enlisted women. New surface ships are designed to accommodate women, while older ships saw urinals replaced with toilets and were checked to “ensure male and female berthings meet Navy priva­cy requirements,” according to NPC.

The added restriction to sub­marines is the confined space inherent in the tubular hull. An estimate from 2000 put the berthing modifications needed on a Los Angeles-class attack sub at $5 million. Some facts, such as very narrow passageways that force passing bodies into contact, would remain impossible to overcome.

Even the Navy’s new Virginia­class submarines aren’t so new that redesign for female berthing could be done easily.

“That design is very mature,” said Bob Hamilton, spokesman at Electric Boat, the submarine builder in Groton, Conn. “It’s in serial production. We have con­tracts for the first 18 ships.” One solution that would not call for extensive modification could be to allow women to serve on the large Ohio-class ballistic and guid­ed missile submarines. Because of the internal volume required for 24 large-diameter missile tubes, an Ohio-class ship is relatively spacious, and berthing could be divided by gender easily.

Sources tell Navy Times that at least one internal study suggests the Ohio-class fleet as the likely starting platform for integrated crews.

Last spring, sailors aboard the boomer Maryland said that while submarine crews are men’s clubs, some allowed that women would be welcome. And though some sub­mariners think the tight bonds forged undersea would fray with a mixed crew, others look at female sailors in the fleet and know they would excel.

“We can’t hold out forever,” said Chief Missile Technician (SS) Joe Wittmer, of Maryland’s Gold Crew. “A female can do the same job I do. I have no problem with that.”

Health concerns

Gender-specific health and med­ical care issues are also top items in the debate.

In 2001, the Naval Submarine Medical Research Laboratory pro­duced a 39-page report, “The Med­ical Implications of Women on Sub­marines.” The study found that women use a given health care sys­tem more than twice as much as men “for all categories of disease.” The potential for pregnancy cre­ates a wide array of problems. For example, if a female submariner were pregnant, the medical study states that it’s unclear what effect the unique environment of a sub­merged nuclear submarine might have on a developing fetus.

Also, a submarine is supposed to remain undetected, which makes evacuating a medical emergency — such as an ectopic pregnancy — complex logistically and an event that could compromise a sub’s covert mission.

Kirby, Mullen’s spokesman, said these are still issues that need to be resolved.

“He believes the policy should change. But if you were to ask us how exactly would you execute that change, I mean, we don’t have those answers,” Kirby said.

Other navies

Female sailors in Canada, Nor­way, Sweden and Australia are allowed to serve on submarines.

A NATO report completed by a Canadian Forces Health Services officer found that studies of the transition to mixed submarine crews revealed “that there was no longer sufficient reason to exclude women from submarine service.” Further, interviews with female submariners in Canada found “all are mature, experienced sailors who simply wish to be considered one of the crew, and do not want to be singled out because they are women.” A ban on women aboard British Royal Navy subs may also be crumbling. News reports from Great Britain last winter said that policy is under review due in part to manning shortfalls and that the new generation of submarines may be designed specifically with female berthing.

Mickey Garverick, who retired as a captain after 20 years in the submarine force, now serves as the executive director of the Naval Submarine League. The organiza­tion has no official position on mixed submarine crews, but the topic is not a new one.

“I suspect it will cause some con­cern, and not necessarily from the submariners, but from the subma­rine families,” Garverick said, referring to expected resistance from submarine wives.

With future replacement for the current fleet of 14 Trident subs not yet designed, experts say there’s an opportunity to include female berthing in ship plans.

“If it will be addressed, now is the time to do it,” Garverick said. “Converting our current sub­ marines is a significant task.” Former Master Chief Petty Offi­cer of the Navy Terry Scott, also a submariner, said in early 2006 that he believed women should be allowed to serve in the sub force, but that the biggest obstacle is culture.

But Ian Dent, who served for 23 years in Trident subs and retired in 2006 as a master chief machin­ist’s mate, has a different opin­ion.

“I can tell you emphatically that placing women on submarines would destroy the tight-knit cohe­ siveness necessary for the safe and smooth operation of a submarine,” he told Navy Times. “Being in such confined quarters presents unique situations.” Ë

Staff Writer Mark D. Faram contributed to this report.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John on October 5, 2009 at 3:30pm

NavyDads Admin,

Thanks for that article, i will read it thoroughly later on, (just skimmed for now). Have you read the discussion re: women on Subs at the "The Stupid Shall Be Punished" web site ? Former and Active duty bubble heads and surface ship sailors are real honest on that web site.

Thanks again.

Cordially, john

NavyDads Admin said:

from Navy Times: 5 Oct 2009

Undersea Integration

Mabus, Roughead support ending ban on women serving aboard subs



By William H. McMichael

bmcmichael@militarytimes.com

and Andrew Scutro

ascutro@militarytimes.com

Top Navy and military leader­ship are “moving out aggressively” to end the ban on female crew members aboard submarines.

And while the motivation may be fairness in the force, it is a move fraught with controversy. Assigning women to sub duty sets a spectrum of issues squarely before the submarine community, from how and when, to cost and training, personal privacy, frater­nization, and even how sub­mariners’ spouses will react.

Rapid solutions are needed, as Navy Secretary Ray Mabus is pushing the issue hard.

“I believe women should have every opportunity to serve at sea, and that includes aboard sub­marines,” he said Sept. 24 in a statement to Navy Times. “This is something the CNO and I have been working on since I came into office [in May].” He says the Navy has been “moving out aggressive­ly” to make integration happen.

His comments came one week after Joint Chiefs Chairman Adm. Mike Mullen told congressional lawmakers that it was time to open subs to women.

Mullen’s successor, Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Gary Roughead, said he is “very com­fortable” addressing crewing.

“There are some particular issues with integrating women into the submarine force, issues we must work through in order to achieve what is best for the Navy and our submarine force,” Roughead said in a statement. “Accommodations are a factor, but not insurmountable.” Navy Times requested responses from Mabus and Roughead after Mullen called for ending the ban, which was part of submitted answers to written questions posed by the Senate Armed Ser­vices Committee.

Mullen was responding to a question on women in combat and whether any policy changes are needed. He zeroed in on women serving aboard submarines, an issue that gained a high profile toward the end of the Clinton administration but then died out.

“As an advocate for improving the diversity of our force, I believe we should continue to broaden opportunities for women,” Mullen wrote. “One policy I would like to see changed is the one barring their service aboard submarines.” Roughead, in his statement, stopped far short of announcing any major policy changes.

“Having commanded a mixed­gender surface combatant, ... I am familiar with the issues as well as the value of diverse crews,” he said. Roughead said the Navy must “manage the community as a whole, such as force growth and retention within a small warfare community.” “The submarine force is much smaller than the surface and avia­tion forces, and personnel man­agement is more exacting,” he con­tinued. “This has had and will con­tinue to have my personal atten­tion as we work toward increasing the diversity of our Navy.” News quickly reignited the debate in the sub community.

Master Chief Petty Officer of the Navy (SS/SW) Rick West said that as a former chief of the boat and a command master chief of a mixed­gender surface crew, he’d gladly serve on a mixed submarine.

“Structurally, I realize some work may be required, but cultur­ally, our men and women would adapt quickly, and this would be a seamless change,” he said.

Initial responses to Navy Times from submariners were mostly against the idea, because of the nature of submarine life.

Mullen, who became chairman two years ago, asked the subma­rine community to look at the issue during his 2½ years as CNO, said Capt. John Kirby, Mullen’s spokesman then and now.

That “look” was not complete by the time he was elevated to his present job, Kirby said, but open­ing the submarine community to women “is something he has maintained an interest in.” Women, who make up about 12 percent of the 1.2 million U.S. ser­vice members on active duty, are by policy excluded from tradition­al front-line combat jobs. But com­bat roles have become blurred during the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, in which irregular war­fare marked by roadside bombs and a lack of the front lines evi­dent in traditional warfare have brought women into harm’s way.

Some young female sailors are already stepping forward.

“I am all for it. Where do I sign up?” asked Electronics Technician 1st Class (SW/AW) Shannon Hart, assigned to Tactical Training Group, Pacific, in San Diego. “It is frustrating being told I can’t do something because I am a woman and then have to listen to my peers whine about equal opportunity.” Hart isn’t the only one who jumped immediately at the news.

“If they need someone to test try this I’m more than willing to do so!” wrote Yeoman Seaman Ana Mant­zouranis at Fleet Readiness Center Western Pacific in an e-mail to Navy Times.

A hard life

Submariners live in exceptional­ly close quarters, even taking turns sleeping in the same bunks on some attack submarines. Offi­cials have said the lack of privacy and the cost of reconfiguring subs already tightly packed with gear and crew members make it diffi­cult to introduce female crew.

Mullen thinks those issues can be resolved.

“He believes that the physical barriers ... can be overcome, as they have been overcome on sur­face combatants,” Kirby said.

Yet even after integrating the surface fleet in 1993, overcoming ship designs so women can come aboard has no pat answer.

According to Navy Personnel Command, there are 140 surface ships in the Navy with women assigned, but not all can accommo­date female officers and enlisted women. New surface ships are designed to accommodate women, while older ships saw urinals replaced with toilets and were checked to “ensure male and female berthings meet Navy priva­cy requirements,” according to NPC.

The added restriction to sub­marines is the confined space inherent in the tubular hull. An estimate from 2000 put the berthing modifications needed on a Los Angeles-class attack sub at $5 million. Some facts, such as very narrow passageways that force passing bodies into contact, would remain impossible to overcome.

Even the Navy’s new Virginia­class submarines aren’t so new that redesign for female berthing could be done easily.

“That design is very mature,” said Bob Hamilton, spokesman at Electric Boat, the submarine builder in Groton, Conn. “It’s in serial production. We have con­tracts for the first 18 ships.” One solution that would not call for extensive modification could be to allow women to serve on the large Ohio-class ballistic and guid­ed missile submarines. Because of the internal volume required for 24 large-diameter missile tubes, an Ohio-class ship is relatively spacious, and berthing could be divided by gender easily.

Sources tell Navy Times that at least one internal study suggests the Ohio-class fleet as the likely starting platform for integrated crews.

Last spring, sailors aboard the boomer Maryland said that while submarine crews are men’s clubs, some allowed that women would be welcome. And though some sub­mariners think the tight bonds forged undersea would fray with a mixed crew, others look at female sailors in the fleet and know they would excel.

“We can’t hold out forever,” said Chief Missile Technician (SS) Joe Wittmer, of Maryland’s Gold Crew. “A female can do the same job I do. I have no problem with that.”

Health concerns

Gender-specific health and med­ical care issues are also top items in the debate.

In 2001, the Naval Submarine Medical Research Laboratory pro­duced a 39-page report, “The Med­ical Implications of Women on Sub­marines.” The study found that women use a given health care sys­tem more than twice as much as men “for all categories of disease.” The potential for pregnancy cre­ates a wide array of problems. For example, if a female submariner were pregnant, the medical study states that it’s unclear what effect the unique environment of a sub­merged nuclear submarine might have on a developing fetus.

Also, a submarine is supposed to remain undetected, which makes evacuating a medical emergency — such as an ectopic pregnancy — complex logistically and an event that could compromise a sub’s covert mission.

Kirby, Mullen’s spokesman, said these are still issues that need to be resolved.

“He believes the policy should change. But if you were to ask us how exactly would you execute that change, I mean, we don’t have those answers,” Kirby said.

Other navies

Female sailors in Canada, Nor­way, Sweden and Australia are allowed to serve on submarines.

A NATO report completed by a Canadian Forces Health Services officer found that studies of the transition to mixed submarine crews revealed “that there was no longer sufficient reason to exclude women from submarine service.” Further, interviews with female submariners in Canada found “all are mature, experienced sailors who simply wish to be considered one of the crew, and do not want to be singled out because they are women.” A ban on women aboard British Royal Navy subs may also be crumbling. News reports from Great Britain last winter said that policy is under review due in part to manning shortfalls and that the new generation of submarines may be designed specifically with female berthing.

Mickey Garverick, who retired as a captain after 20 years in the submarine force, now serves as the executive director of the Naval Submarine League. The organiza­tion has no official position on mixed submarine crews, but the topic is not a new one.

“I suspect it will cause some con­cern, and not necessarily from the submariners, but from the subma­rine families,” Garverick said, referring to expected resistance from submarine wives.

With future replacement for the current fleet of 14 Trident subs not yet designed, experts say there’s an opportunity to include female berthing in ship plans.

“If it will be addressed, now is the time to do it,” Garverick said. “Converting our current sub­ marines is a significant task.” Former Master Chief Petty Offi­cer of the Navy Terry Scott, also a submariner, said in early 2006 that he believed women should be allowed to serve in the sub force, but that the biggest obstacle is culture.

But Ian Dent, who served for 23 years in Trident subs and retired in 2006 as a master chief machin­ist’s mate, has a different opin­ion.

“I can tell you emphatically that placing women on submarines would destroy the tight-knit cohe­ siveness necessary for the safe and smooth operation of a submarine,” he told Navy Times. “Being in such confined quarters presents unique situations.” Ë

Staff Writer Mark D. Faram contributed to this report.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by NavyDads Admin (Paul) on October 5, 2009 at 9:44pm

This made for interesting reading and discussion....as it has at various levels of the government and military for quite a few years....both here and abroad. I really don't have strong feeling etiher way...both my sailors are in the surface fleet and will stay that way. I do not feel that environment dictates behavior....that would discount the effects of free will and decision making. Time will tell...........

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Suzanne on October 7, 2009 at 3:19pm

Since Females go through the same training in Boot Camp, they should be able to fulfill their duties on Surface Warships just as well or maybe even better than some males. Not all women are girly and prissy, many are very capable of their job that is required. Not all men are cut out for Surface Warship duty either. Everyone should at least have the chance to try and make "it" though, no matter what their gender is!...........

I am a proud Mom of a newly PIR'd female on 11Sept.09!...I honestly think that she could make it! She rather prefers working with the guys!.....Less Drama!.....and finds the rapport pleasant and more effective!

JohnM said:

John,
How do you feel about women on surface warships?
JohnM

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John on October 7, 2009 at 6:40pm

Dear Miss Suzanne,

Thank you for your kind input into this discussion. I too am glad and proud for you and your daughter who has accomplished so much in surviving Boot Camp. I am sure she will be a great asset to our Navy.

I just came home from work, and , as you all know, my brain needs more time to formulate a cogent response to your kind words.

I will respond, though it may be my last one, because i can see we are talking past one another in so many ways, while trying to be honest and sincere. So much of what I wanted to say has been misinterpreted or misunderstood. We are coming from such different World Views .....

Stand by, and Warmly, john

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by NavyDads Admin (Paul) on October 12, 2009 at 4:26pm

From Digital version: NavyTimes.com

Female sailors could join sub crews by 2011

By Andrew Scutro and Mark D. Faram - Staff writers
Posted : Monday Oct 12, 2009 15:56:25 EDT

A handful of female seniors at the Naval Academy or in the Naval Reserve Officers’ Training Corps could very well be the first women to be assigned to a U.S. submarine.

And if initial plans fall into place, those women — joined by some seasoned supply and surface nuke lieutenants already in the fleet — will be included in four crews assigned to two Ohio-class submarines by late 2011.

In exclusive interviews with Navy Times, the heads of Fleet Forces Command and the Submarine Force laid out near-term plans for integrating women into the undersea fleet. The plans, which must be approved by senior Navy and Pentagon leadership, underscore how quickly the service is pushing the initiative.

The interviews also produced a surprising amount of detail, since the statements came less than one week after the chief of naval operations and Navy secretary told Navy Times that they wanted to end the ban on assigning women to submarines. Plans are so far along, admirals said, because they have been working this issue for years.

And after leaping one legislative hurdle, the first steps toward integration could happen fast.

The Pentagon must notify Congress of the intent to change policy to allow women on subs, then wait 30 days before moving ahead, and before spending any money. The Navy’s working on that notification right now, said Vice Adm. Jay Donnelly, head of the Submarine Force.

“I would think that would start making its way from the Navy, through the secretary of the Navy and the secretary of defense in the month or so ahead,” he said.

The first women assigned to submarines will be junior officers, said Adm. John Harvey, head of Fleet Forces Command.

“We’ll start with the officers because you can get to it soonest,” Harvey said. “I am very certain that you will start with junior officers that will come in right to the submarine force.”

Both Harvey and Donnelly said bringing female sailors aboard will be more complex due to manning requirements — and more expensive because of berthing modifications. Adding junior female officers to subs will require no money for modifications, they said.

The admirals also said that, in the near term, integration will occur only in the Navy’s Ohio-class submarines, which consist of 14 ballistic-missile subs and four guided-missile subs.

The Navy’s three classes of smaller, fast-attack subs — Los Angeles, Seawolf and Virginia — are another story.

“When you look at the one we’re building now, the Virginia class, that’s what I’d call a mature design,” Harvey said. “Now that we’re in serial production, to go back and undo things to make it viable for females in the crew, that’s a pretty tall order.

“Can it be done? I just don’t know where we are on that and at what cost, etc.,” he said. “But I know we can get at it much more rapidly with the SSGNs and SSBNs, so that’s where the focus will be.”

Choosing the first to go
Donnelly was careful to point out that he was speaking about how the sub force “might” integrate quickly and not how it “will.”

The plan to be submitted to leadership for approval will likely involve integrating four crews at first: the blue and gold crews of a ballistic sub on one coast and the blue and gold crews of a Tomahawk shooter on the other, officials said.

The first group would come from the Class of 2010. Seniors interested in surface and undersea nuclear careers are already undergoing personal interviews with Adm. Kirkland Donald, head of Naval Reactors. Right now, women being interviewed are eligible only for nuclear propulsion billets aboard aircraft carriers. The men are eligible for carriers and subs.

Donnelly said the first female officer cadre would depend on volunteers this school year.

It’s already a healthy pool. In the academy class that graduated last spring, half of the 32 ensigns headed to nuclear propulsion school were women. That bodes well for finding volunteers among this year’s crop of seniors.

“I think it would be possible to go back to that pool [of senior midshipmen] that has been accepted into the nuclear propulsion program with the intent of going into the surface community, to go back and say, ‘Are there any of you that would care to volunteer for submarine duty?’” Donnelly said.

After graduation in May 2010, they would enter the submarine officer pipeline with their male classmates.

“They’d go to six months of nuclear power school in Charleston, S.C., followed by six months of prototype training, followed by three months at the basic submarine officers’ course we teach,” he said. “That’s 15 to 16 months of training before women officers from that class get to their ships. So we’re talking some time in late 2011 at the earliest, or into early 2012.”

Big subs only
The Navy’s three classes of fast-attack subs are tightly packed, making Ohio-class subs roomy by comparison. The modifications to berthing areas to accommodate women on attack boats would be exceedingly expensive and maybe not even possible, according to experts.

On the other hand, aboard the larger Ohios, officer berthing for department heads and below makes integration simple, as it is limited to two staterooms with three bunks and three with two bunks.

The officers would share their existing head, and just use a flippable sign on the door denoting whether women or men are in the head.

“There is no modification,” Donnelly said. “There is no cost.”

As far as crew composition, Donnelly said, the surface fleet’s 16-year experience in gender integration found about 10 percent to 15 percent of officers and enlisted need to be women. The initial female cadres — in this case, as few as two to four officers per crew — need to have one member who is senior in order to mentor the junior.

“I might be able to find some women supply officers who have been to sea in a mixed-gender crew who kind of know the ropes,” he said, “and put them in that initial cadre along with some nuclear-trained ensigns coming out of sub school.”

Female surface warfare officers coming off an initial sea tour and headed into the nuclear pipeline to be nuke-SWOs might be another source of senior cadre.

Officers will be phased in.

“I think it would be probably multiple ships, not the entire force initially; we need to ramp this up. I’d look to do this on BNs and GNs, multiple crews, in both home ports, Kings Bay [Ga.] and Bangor [Wash.].”

The enlisted issue
Bringing in enlisted women is a tougher issue. It’s going to take money, modifications and careful training, both admirals said.

“We’re not going to see a young female sailor swinging her seabag on her shoulder and walking aboard the USS Maryland next month,” Harvey said. “But we will — it will be a couple of years. We have to recruit, bring them in the program.”

Having that lead time, he said, will give manpower planners a chance to move forward “in a thoughtful, very controlled, very deliberate manner.”

Probably the most critical lesson learned in the surface force, Harvey said, is the need to have strong officer and senior enlisted leadership in place before bringing in junior enlisted women.

That’s because incidents of pregnancy and fraternization are less frequent in crews with strong female leaders onboard.

“It can’t be ‘I’m the woman on the submarine’ — that’s just a terrible burden to put on everybody, particularly that young woman,” Harvey said.

He said it will take some time to build a “critical mass” of female leadership needed to seed the integrated crews.

“You’d have to get at least a small cadre of female chiefs or first-class petty officers, and those, of course, would have to come from other parts of the Navy initially,” Donnelly said. “Then they would have to have sufficient time to qualify in submarines in order to have, I think, the credibility as leaders on the ship, and that takes some time.”

Converting into the submarine community at the E-7 or above level would be difficult, according to a retired senior submariner familiar with the Navy’s plans. He asked not to be named because of his continued ties with the Navy.

“Really, to be in the chiefs’ mess on a submarine you already need to be qualified in submarines — if you’re not, you would be a burden more than an asset,” he said.

He said it would make sense to convert experienced petty officers and grow them into submarine chiefs.

But even as they’re building the enlisted leadership picture, officials also must work on the other piece — recruiting junior female submariners from the street.

For many of the nontechnical ratings such as yeoman and culinary specialist, that could be fairly easy and quick, as it would require only about six months at “A” school and the six-week submarine school in Groton, Conn., as happens today with male sailors.

Donnelly said it was too early to say which ratings will be open to women. But over time, all submarine ratings could be open, the retired sub source said.

But to truly build a proper representation of women in the submarine force, the source said, women must be recruited and trained in technical ratings, too.

Training female sailors in highly technical ratings has been a challenge on the surface side. Of the 12,845 nuclear-power-qualified sailors, just 752 are women and 241 of those are in training. Only 22 are chiefs, and two are senior chiefs; there are no female master chief nukes.

Growing female enlisted nukes will take time. It takes about 18 months once a sailor reports to nuclear power school in Charleston for that person to join a sub crew.

Enlisted modifications
The other issue, besides personnel, will be to modify enlisted berthing on the Ohios. Donnelly said the volume of that hull allows for relatively uncomplicated modifications. But fairness is key to any change.

“I would not entertain a solution that forced the men to hot-bunk on one of those ships. So we’ll do this right, and the right answer is give the women their own head,” he said, “and make sure the men aren’t inconvenienced or treated unfairly in any way.”

As they exist now, the modification plans are little more than drawings, as money can’t be committed prior to congressional notification.

“We haven’t actually gone to the ship design engineers,” Donnelly said.

The timeline is somewhat flexible for enlisted berthing modifications, which could be completed on the boomers during their refueling overhauls. The four SSGNs already completed their midlife overhaul and conversion. There are also shorter yard periods when the work might be done, depending on the complexity.

Donnelly estimates the cost of those modifications at $8 million to $10 million. But he offered a warning.

“Those prices never go down,” he said. “They always go up.”

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by NavyDads Admin (Paul) on October 13, 2009 at 3:52pm

I'm waiting....patiently...for SOMEONE to please tell me how a sub is different from a surface warship? The dimensions of a sub are not that much different from a destroyer so please tell me what makes the environment so different that we can trust the sailors that serve on surface ships and we cannot trust those that serve on subs?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rex on October 13, 2009 at 7:11pm

I don't get it either according to my sailor there is no difference , its much the same in the other branches, the Army for an example the troops pretty much do every thing together in the combat zone. sure they may have different living quarters but it gets dark at night too. so i wonder how do there spouses feel too i am sure its a mixed batch. no one said it would easy serving this great country.
A lot of it is all about trust in your fellow man - or woman . John let me tell you i too know there are differences in the sexes . there were a lot of women i was proud to stand beside and serve with, some more than the so called men during my glory days. most of them were professional soldiers ! of coarse you have a few that don't tow the line but that is not the norm. the army has been cohort for years, there has been very few problems. in my opinion i think you are getting all worked up and for what ?
I am sorry to say this is NOT the 1950s any more, there has always been change, some of it is hard to deal with i understand. so lets keep praying for all of our troops !
Rex

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tony on October 14, 2009 at 3:30pm

Good discussion. I have been torn as to whether or not to join in. I think for many jobs on a sub women should be able to perform very well. I was thinking the situtation is a bit more extreme than being part of a tank crew. The US currently does not allow females to be part of tank crews. However, Norway does. It appears that is quite successful.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2334696/posts

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by NavyDads Admin (Paul) on October 14, 2009 at 9:29pm

Believe Israel as well.......

Tony said:

Good discussion. I have been torn as to whether or not to join in. I think for many jobs on a sub women should be able to perform very well. I was thinking the situtation is a bit more extreme than being part of a tank crew. The US currently does not allow females to be part of tank crews. However, Norway does. It appears that is quite successful.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2334696/posts

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Dana Mansfield Thomas on October 27, 2009 at 6:03pm

Randy, John, Admin, etc,

As a former submariner myself, USS Dallas; '85-'88 HM3(SS), I also think it highly unfeasable for woman on Subs. The tight confines and true lack of privacy would preclude effective maning of woman to boats. The article published on Military.com said that they intend to start with woman Officers, I doubt the men will have probalems taking the orders but there will be some envy by the enlisted of the Male officers. Also mentioned in the article was the facilities would be refit to a Unisex affair meaning both sexs will be in the area at the same time. Doesn't that pose a moral or at least morale isse ? I'm hardly a prude on such matters, I am a former (?) squid after all, lol, but wives and husbands left at home might be seriously nervous as well, regardless of quality of the marriages in question. many have heard or senn of the "Boomer widows" when a boat or even surface vessels leave port, but taking them with can hardly make the loved ones full secure.
By no means do I intend to take away from any of the women serving in ANY of the services. I met my ex-wife in the Navy, she did her job well right up to the day she got out to have our son and has been a great mother even if we did not do well together. Additionally, MANY of the women I met, Officers and Enlisted have gone on to great careers.
Simply, I think it will be a logistical nightmare to refit the boats to accomedate women.
We shall see.
Fair winds and following seas to all.

Dana Thomas
Proud Father & Vet.

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• Next ›
• Page