Could the Earthquake have caused this?

  • Thread starter errorist
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Earthquake
In summary, an earthquake of this size may have caused a submarine to run aground in an area not adequately mapped. The dynamics of the Earth's crust may have caused the submarine to run aground. There may have been a lack of active sonar, which may have prevented the submarine from detecting the depth of the water.
  • #1
errorist
92
0
Earthquake tsunami in India.
Could a Earthquake of this size have caused a mountain to be thrust up in a different region of the world and cause this accident?

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/submarine-05a.html
 
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
  • #2
No, this sort of thing happens relatively often and its simply a result of not having accurate enough maps of the ocean floor. Remember, if a surface ship can run aground (and they do, a lot) a sub can too.
 
Last edited:
  • #3
Parts of the Indian Ocean have changed, and will need to be recharted, particluarly of the coast of Sumutra.

The area where the submarine was operating (some 560 kilometers (350 miles) south of Guam - at a depth of 120 meters (400 feet) ) should not have been affected by the Sumutran earthquake.

On the other hand, the Sumutran earthquake is a consequence of the dynamics of the Earth's crust. It is an extension of the Pacific Ring of Fire where volcanic activity and earthquakes are quite common.

It would appear, as Russ stated, that some areas are not adequately mapped as they perhaps should be.
 
  • #4
What about the latitudes and the longitudes of places?...
 
  • #5
A quick google turned up http://www.cdnn.info/industry/i041228c/i041228c.html article that says the sea-floor may have shifted up and down by up to 60 feet, but doesn't say if it would be permanent. It also says it may have a small, but noticeable effect on land far away. From what I understand, a powerful earthquake on the San Andreas fault involves a shift of just a few feet - rememeber though, a continent moving 5 feet requires the release of a truly massive amount of energy.

Regarding ocean-floor mapping - it has only recently become possible to have really accurate maps of the ocean floor. Typically, within a few miles of shore, you'll have a depth reading every 100 m or so. Out in the open ocean, they can be 10 km apart. It would seem to me that this sub, if operating that close to the bottom, should have had better charts, but that's a lot of land-area to chart and it shouldn't be too surprising that that's the best we have.

One of my profs at the Naval Academy was an officer onboard a sub that ran-aground for this exact same reason (uncharted seamount), which pretty much ended his career. The picture painted by the article is of a cliff - that's not generally how they work. Usually, its just a few degrees of rise over many miles. One thing that's not clear to me yet - the sub may not have had its depth-sounder turned on, which is apparently common for military subs because it makes noise.

edit: a little more - googling shows some people speculating that this was a collision, not a grounding. Apparently, the water was supposed to be much too deep for even an uncharted seamount. My prof said that his sub had dents in it that no one was allowed to talk about, but everyone was proud of...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #6
See this picture for the location of the Pacific Ring of Fire.

http://pubs.usgs.gov/publications/text/fire.html

It shows the major plate boundaries.

Guam is at the southern end of the chain of Northern Mariana Islands that border the Marianas Trench ( http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/mgg/image/marianas.html ). This area also lies north of the Bougainville trench. It is possible that the region between the Mariana and Bouganiville trenches is being pushed up. Maybe someday, a new chain of islands will popup there.

As far as I know, US subs generally run silent so as not to be detected. Therefore it would seem likely that active sonar was not in operation.
 
  • #7
Perhaps, This uderwater mountain took a few days to rise. If it took a few days to rise it may not show up as a Earthquake?
 
  • #8
errorist said:
Perhaps, This uderwater mountain took a few days to rise. If it took a few days to rise it may not show up as a Earthquake?
No, there is just far too much energy required to make a new mountain in a few days for it not to be noticeable. Even small earthquakes are measurable from thousands of miles away.
 
  • #9
Differences in temperature and salinity in water columns affect the refracting of sound waves, causing innacurate depth readings on sonar. Perhaps an over-estimation of the depth of the water was one of the factors that caused the accident.
 

1. Could the Earthquake have caused this?

Yes, earthquakes have the potential to cause a wide range of effects, including structural damage, landslides, tsunamis, and even changes in the Earth's rotation and magnetic field.

2. How does an earthquake cause damage?

An earthquake occurs when the Earth's tectonic plates shift, releasing built-up energy in the form of seismic waves. These waves can cause shaking and displacement of the ground, which can lead to structural damage and other effects.

3. Can all earthquakes cause damage?

Not all earthquakes result in damage. The severity of an earthquake's effects depends on factors such as magnitude, depth, proximity to populated areas, and local geology. Some earthquakes may be too small or too deep to cause significant damage.

4. What are some of the most common effects of earthquakes?

The most common effects of earthquakes include structural damage to buildings and infrastructure, landslides and avalanches, tsunamis, and fires caused by ruptured gas lines or damaged electrical systems. Other effects may include liquefaction (when soil behaves like a liquid), ground cracks, and changes in the Earth's surface.

5. Can earthquakes be predicted?

No, earthquakes cannot be reliably predicted. While scientists can monitor and map seismic activity, there is currently no way to accurately predict when or where an earthquake will occur. However, ongoing research and technology advancements may one day lead to more accurate earthquake forecasting.

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
635
  • Earth Sciences
Replies
1
Views
828
Replies
2
Views
701
  • Earth Sciences
Replies
5
Views
897
Replies
3
Views
773
Replies
31
Views
2K
  • Earth Sciences
Replies
5
Views
237
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
3K
Back
Top