MovieChat Forums > Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea (1964) Discussion > EVERY hollywodd submarine tv show/movie ...

EVERY hollywodd submarine tv show/movie gaff!

posted 14 years ago by cinemalover24
3 replies | jump to latest

I defer to you actual US Navy vets reading this Trant...
Unless I am embarassingly mistaken..In nearly every hollywood submarine themed tv show and movie (including many times in our beloved Voyage)
Some of the subs officers and crew mistakenly refer to their own sub as a SHIP while in real life in the US Navy subs are ALWAYS referred to as a BOAT!!
This is an insanely stupid goof ...only second in absurdity to military tv and movies where low ranked enlisted army or marines salute a mere SARGENT and call him SIR!
I admit you can say the SHIP/BOAT absurd gaff when the writers never were in the navy is understandable..and when the tv show/movie is low budget like Voyage with no paid ex navy 'technical advisor' on set reading the scripts to catch such gaffs..
But amazingly this same boat/ship gaff routinely turns up even today in big budget hollywood movie features such as in CRIMSON TIDE..where both Gene Hackman and Denzel Washington make it several times! And of course this movie DID have a well paid ex navy tech adviser on set! Was he asleep every day on the set?
Talk about a sweet job..well paid for doing nothing!
Also on Voyage in many episodes whenever diving or surfacing the Seaview the orders barked out are ass backwards..often you hear 'blow ballast' when diving (ass backward..should be for surfacing) ect..

[–] leehester 14 years ago

Though I only have limited navy experience (a short time in the reserves) I used to be something of a naval history buff. My understanding is that the use of the term "ship" for a submarine is now considered acceptable. This is in part a recognition of the increasing size of the vessels. The first U.S. sub class "Plunger" displaced just over 100 tons and was just over 60 feet in length. By WW-2 the U.S. "Gato" class displaced over 1500 tons (surfaced) and was over 300 feet in length. By comparison, a typical "PT" boat of WW-2 was about 80 feet long displacing around 56 tons. Current "Ohio" class SSBN's are 560 feet long and displace over 16000 tons. By comparison the "Baltimore" class of heavy cruiser displaced about the same as the "Ohio" class and were about 670 feet long... So modern SSBN's are roughly the size of heavy cruisers, though the first subs were about the size of PT boats.

Another interesting point is the relative importance of submarines. "Janes Fighting Ships" publishes an annual book listing all the ships of the world, listed by nation and then more-or-less by relative importance in battle. At the start of WW-II the order was Battleship, Aircraft Carrier, Heavy Cruiser, Light Cruiser, Destroyer, Submarine and so on... By the end of WW-II Aircraft Carriers were listed first, but the rest was unchanged. Starting sometime after the war (beginning in the 1970's or so, I don't remember exactly) Submarines were listed FIRST, followed by Aircraft Carriers and so on. A single modern SSBN can destroy most of the major cities of a nation, while an SSN is a major menace to any fleet.

The thing that amazes me is that I have heard that the modern US navy actually allows sailors to refer to left and right instead of "port" and "starboard"... will any traditions remain???

[–] whitbj98 14 years ago

Been in for a few years serving on submarines of all size and the term boat still is used among the ranks but professionally it is called a ship.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]