I’m not saying subs should be at sea for 6 months, but this article did very little to say why they shouldn’t.
And the section's conclusion - that this presents an increased risk of nuclear incident over and above the personal effects of this privation on the crew - is serious enough to be given consideration, though the unnecessary human cost of those privations is already good reason to question the practice.
For reference:
> many veteran submariners agree that six months underwater is longer than humans should spend in an isolated and confined environment—especially with virtually no communication with the outside world.
> Commenting in 2022, on two Vanguards that performed 157-day-long patrols—former Royal Navy SSBN commander Rob Forsyth—noted in a blog post that the “great danger is that this unchanging routine, week after week, leads to boredom, complacency and an inevitable drop-off in standards […] personal relationships are tested to the limit.”
> For comparison, Forsyth states that his Cold War-era patrols lasted only 50-75 days (averaging two months), and were carried out in allegedly less cramped conditions than the Vanguard’s. Even then, he wrote that “major effort was still needed to keep crews stimulated and alert and not allow them to withdraw into themselves […].” Forsyth noted that he himself adopted quirky habits, like tying his scrub brush to a leash and taking it for a walk once a week.
> Regarding a 111-day patrol by the Warspite from 1982 to 1983, he wrote that he was “told that operating errors, flare ups between crew members and disciplinary problems started to be a problem after the half-way mark, around 50 days in.” He adds that long patrols led to loss of sight, weight, general fitness and spatial awareness, and that the lack of sunlight lead to Vitamin D deficiencies.
> The Telegraph interviewed a former attack submarine commander, Ryan Ramsey, who said that he would “be surprised if there aren’t mental health challenges after this because it’s extreme. The reality is they shouldn’t have to do that. Those boats were designed to go on three-month patrols.”
> Breakdowns in discipline in Royal Navy submarines have received periodic media attention in recent years, whether related to harassment and forbidden sexual relationships, the abuse of hard drugs and alcohol, or raucous partying. At one point, in 2017, such scandals culminated in 10% of the Vigiliant’s crew being discharged, investigated, or compelled to resign—including the captain and first officer.
> The Ministry of Defence’s unwillingness to discuss the length of nuclear patrols on the basis of operational security has earned the ire of critics who argue that the strain on the crew from lengthy patrols increases the risk of a mishap involving the UK’s nuclear delivery systems.