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.

http://www.navytimes.com/news/..._women_subs_101209w/

Wow.....This should be.....interesting....

Makes hot racking sound intresting.

grumble.

By 2011, I won't be in the submarine force. At that point, I probably just won't care.

What's the matter Bj? Just think of all the fun you can have with split tails on those sub's.

With a crew of about 150 "men" there are days where 25 people have to act as babysitters to 125 children. Add some girls in the mix, and now it'll be like a sibling feud.

But what a way to spend the day under water ROFLMAO

On occasion a Navy repair ship would dock at NWS Earle.
Out would roll about 2 dozen women,every other one pregnant.
That was 20 years ago.
Imagine when a sub docks.Gotta make room onboard for a maternity nurse!!

I was trying to get Bj's dander up. Years ago when I was in armor on M-60A1's the army was thinking of putting women in tanks, I can just see a female crew member asking the tank Cdr to toss her tampon out his hatch LOL

When we add extra machinery to the boats, they're called "Temporary Alterations" or TEMPALTS.

When we add females to submarines, the Navy will have to incorporate TAMPALTS.

quote:

Originally posted by Bjd392:
When we add extra machinery to the boats, they're called "Temporary Alterations" or TEMPALTS.

When we add females to submarines, the Navy will have to incorporate TAMPALTS.

*Laughing her arse off* Oh boy let's hope that no one makes a type-o!

I for one could not do a sub. I took a tour of that sub that was in the movie "Hunt for red October" in Portland back when it was open to the public, and oh man! I could not be inside one of those things for months on end. I would also really hate to be in the same station with someone that has an upset tummy. Ewwwww! No subs for me, but mass respect for the women who actually do want to go down there. I do wonder about how clean those things are? Women have to be able to shower often to keep from getting U.T.I's, and such.

quote:

Originally posted by Coachman:
I was trying to get Bj's dander up. Years ago when I was in armor on M-60A1's the army was thinking of putting women in tanks, I can just see a female crew member asking the tank Cdr to toss her tampon out his hatch LOL

How about just taking a leak on a road march or being buttoned up on watch for a few hours straight.

Hey Navy are you guys uninformed about the facts of life or is there some new Admiral who wants to make a name for himself and be mentioned in the history books at Anapolis?. How unecessary, why do this? Even my wife, who is very liberated, says that the idea is stupid, asking for trouble, creating an extra burden for the Commander. But to make a long story short: In the Norwegian Navy there are submarines (or is it just one?) commanded by a female Captain.

Could just stick anyone causeing issues in the torpedo launcher...

I've argued this on some facebook forums since I'm surrounded by military friends (and usually get the topic personally since I'm in the sub force).

Some of the "gung-ho" women (that I've deemed as the ultra-women's-lib type) still think they should be on, backing their statements up with opinions. Although they may state a fact such as: "Countries W, X, Y and Z allow women on subs," they ultimately add the naive second part to their sentence like, "therefore we should."

They don't realize that Countries W, X, Y and Z are predominantly diesel powered boats, go nowhere farther than 100 miles off the coast of their own water, and probably spend no more than a week or two at sea at a time based on their limited endurance.

They don't realize that America has a submarine endurance and a NECESSITY to stay out for MONTHS at a time off of some foreign country, sometimes with transit times of weeks in very dangerous, high contact density waters. The last thing we need is some chick to have a life-altering period and force a multi-million dollar warship to turn around and risk the other 140 members of the crew, jeopardize a mission, and waste taxpayers money.

There... that was a whiff of my dander.

Not every woman has sever periods, BJD. Mine are total easy street, and I don't go crazy. I am not fimiliar with the sub fleets of our country, but do all of our sub deploy for months? The one thing I will say about our cycle is that sometimes Aunt Flow does like to make a day early surprise, and sometimes they can be VERY heavy on the flow not just mentaly. So, sometimes we find ourselves needing to head to the rest room in a hurry to change out or fem stuff. I would say that for females it should be regulation that when a woman has Aunt Flow on deck she mush always have two ways on her to deal with the flow for at the least the first 3 or 4 days after she arives, and one day before she is expected. I will also say that cleanleness is an issue that is very seriouse, and valid. We would have to be able to shower.

Just an opinion of a woman...

Bjd392, I read alot, seen the documentries and such, but never been in a sub personnally. I seen the size , at least on the TV and they don't seem so small.
Females have been serving on surface ships for a while, my own daughter served on the USS George Washington as a catapult operator, they never seemed to have to go out of their way for the monthly cycle problems, or at least it was dealt with. She never had down time as I remember. What makes the submarine service different? After all they aren't the small diesel boats from 50 years agao.

Come on Mech.
You cannot compare a sub with a crew of 160 to an aircraft carrier with a crew of 6,000.Are you saying there is the same amount of space to have females on?Much tighter quarters on subs,less personal space.
Women should not be allowed to serve in subs.
IMHO
Elizabeth...that was way too much personal info
TMPI
TMPI

Just remarking what I saw on the carrier and other ships that I seen women serve on when I went to visit my daughter. I also know of a few female coasteies gunners mates work smaller ships than a carrier.
But what the hell do I know, I'm just an old tanker.

Mech,you know a helluva lot more than me,that's for sure.
Just saying,women are a valuable part of the military,but sometimes they do not belong.Subs is the only place I can think of where they do not belong.
IMHO.

I'll let the experts decided that, I don't know enough to sat either yea or nay. You really wouldn't really get me into one those things anyway. When they break, you go down.
I deal thru the VFW, American Legion alot of vets, and active duty service personnel in my daily life. I know quite a few females that would love to take up this arguement.