MovieChat Forums > On the Beach (2000) Discussion > Los Angeles class subs and nukes

Los Angeles class subs and nukes

posted 16 years ago by GoldenDragooon
10 replies | jump to latest

I am confused as to why in the begining of the film the captain is accused of luanching nukes which caused the massive fallout, and about midway through it is revealed that he ignored the orders to launch his nukes. Now from what I know of the LA class subs, they are attack subs, and carry no nukes, they can launch cruse missles either through dedicated launch tubes, or at a shallow depth through torpedo tubes. But generaly tommahawks do not carry a nuclear payload as all nuclear tomahawks are meant to have been decommisioned, so how could he have been ordered to launch missles which should not be on his boat?

Another rather pedantic point is, whith the amount of SSBN, and SSN subs out there belonging to many nations, how is it that only 1 sub not beloning to the RAN survives, surely other allied nations to Australia would have surviving subs such as the royal navy?

[–] airiklion 16 years ago

Yes you right the only US Subs that carrie a Nuclear ICBM are Ohio class SSBN's
Los Angelas Class Subs play only an attack role. I was a seaman abord the USS Alaska an Ohio Class SSBN and as far as I know there are 8 Ohios sea worthy.

[–] GoldenDragooon 16 years ago

I didn't think my friend was lying to me when he pointed out this inacuracy, he is an able seaman on HMS Vengeance, a UK SSBN and although he isn't allowed to tell me his role on the boat (official secrets act or something) he said that they all have to have a good knowledge of other nations classes of subs. He actualy said the rest of the movie to him was laughable and almost unwatchable due to this, though even working on a icbm carrying boat he agrees with the message in the film though he did said that modern nukes would not cause widespread fallout due to many design improvements from the 1940-50's era of nukes.

[–] kingg-2 15 years ago

There are 18 boats in the Ohio class, 14 are still boomers (SSBN), but four have been converted into Tomahawk (non nuclear) platforms with about 150 TLAMs.

The total screw-up on the technical issues of the submarine, can someone give me an answer to this: why would a US sub captain surrender his boat to the Australians? I mean, we're cousins and friends and all, but in a scenario such as this, I don't see any US captain giving up a ship or boat to another government, even an Allied one.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] vfrickey 16 years ago

Well, first of all, there's some personal business between the submarine skipper and the intrepid climatologist (who is hauled away from his island paradise in handcuffs by Cdr. Towers), so said climatologist would be strongly motivated to accuse Towers of anything that was even remotely plausible, including sheep abuse. Facts just get in the way of a good grudge match like that. But I didn't get that Towers ignored his orders to launch nuclear warheads - I just assumed that he didn't have any.

There are two sorts of Tomahawk cruise missiles carried by Los Angeles-class subs - TLAM-Cs which carry conventional explosive warheads, and TLAM-Ns, which carry nuclear payloads. George H.W. Bush (Bush I) had the TLAM-N force unloaded from US warships back in the late 1980s-early 1990s.

However, those TLAM-Ns remain in storage at depots - in the months leading up to a protracted possibly nuclear crisis such as the one in the beginning of the remake of "On the Beach," those weapons could have been re-loaded either at one of the strategic submarine ports in the Continental US, at an overseas depot such as Diego Garcia, or during an underway replenishment at sea.

As far as why USS Charleston is the only surviving Allied sub around, I'd guess that antisubmarine warfare on the part of both combatants might have been highly effective in destroying the remainder of the allied submarine fleets as well as their Chinese counterparts. Certainly within the limited range of the Tomahawk, Chinese attack submarines and ASW ships would have been beating the bushes trying to kill anything that wasn't supposed to be there.

[–] shakesphere1-geo 16 years ago

I thought this was a good movie but they should have gotten there facts right. I never served onboard a sub but it's common knowledge that a Los Angles sub is an attack sub and not a boomer.

They could have found out this information on the internet. Even though this was a chick flick they they could have least gotten the facts about the sub right.

[–] vfrickey 13 years ago

Late-block Los Angeles subs have vertical launch tubes for Tomahawk cruise missiles, including the TLAM-N nuclear-tipped variant. They can also launch Tomahawks from torpedo tubes.

[–] ciprianl 11 years ago

The scientist did not accuse Towers, it was meant to show him as a good guy. And the scientist found it out directly from the captain, who also explained that at the moment he decided not to launch there wasn't anyone left who could court martial him. It can be assumed that the mainland and the military bases where already blown to dust, and possibly that he was not under a direct order to attack, only under the directive to retaliate in case of nuclear attack on US soil.

[–] rtd3ws 16 years ago

Part of a warfare scenario would be that current, highly-developed anti-submarine warfare would be deployed. It's even possible that some nations might take out some of their own boats for whatever reason. If the captain of the boat in this movie decided not to launch his nukes (and yes, the Los Angeles class boat is a fast attack, not an FBM), he might have laid low and been overlooked in such a series of events.

[–] vfrickey 12 years ago

The TLAM-N nuclear Tomahawk (which has been placed in war reserve, and has not been deployed on US Navy ships since the Bush I administration) is a tactical nuclear delivery system. It might be refurbished and placed back in the Naval arsenal if theater warfare with China were seriously anticipated.

As far as the Navy using antisubmarine assets to take out its own subs, there was a very short-lived American Broadcast System (ABC) TV miniseries on just that scenario. American TV viewers voted with their remotes on that show. It's the sort of whacked-out scenario which fails to entrain the viewer's willing suspension of disbelief.

But the late-build Los Angeles class is certainly quiet enough that it can avoid anyone's antisubmarine detection technology but our SOSUS system and the Russian RORSAT deep-ocean radar sensing systems. The Chinese just aren't in that league and are unlikely to get into it without (another unlikely scenario) actually tapping into the US system or (more likely) getting time on the Russian RORSATs.

Even then, as long as the sub remained below, say, fifty meters, his chances of avoiding RORSAT detection are pretty good.