
Spain builds submarine 70 tons too heavy due to wrong decimal (2013) - EndXA
https://o.canada.com/news/spain-builds-submarine-70-tons-too-heavy
======
ggcdn
I’m terrified of making one of these ‘big picture’ mistakes. I’ve long been
weary of the fact that there is a surprising amount of engineering going on
without scrutiny or peer review. And over reliance on computer modelling and
increasing complexity makes it less and less easy to grasp the big picture.

Just yesterday I made a trivial error crunching some numbers for when a
construction site could turn off their dewatering. Quite the opposite of this
submarine, my structure would be 1000s of kips too buoyant and could
potentially float up out of its excavation due to hydrostatic forces. A
mistake like going unnoticed could easily be a career-ender.

~~~
userbinator
_And over reliance on computer modelling and increasing complexity makes it
less and less easy to grasp the big picture._

More importantly, this also diminishes order-of-magnitude/approximation
thinking, which is a very important source of "common sense". I've graded
physics/electronics exam questions, and it's astonishing/amusing just how far-
off some of the wrong answers are. Some memorable examples:

\- Asked to calculate the current-limiting resistor for an LED in a low-
voltage circuit, some students gave answers in the megaohms, others in the
miliohms (correct answer was in the low kiloohms.)

\- A question about the engine power of a dragster resulted in wrong answers
of over a GW (roughly a million horsepower!) and under 1kW. (Correct answer
was around 1MW.)

~~~
bluenose69
I find that students routinely divide instead of multiplying, especially if
they are asked to solve for something and then calculate the result. For
example, $f=ma$ gets transformed to $a=fm$ instead of $f/m$, yielding a large
error unless $m$ happens to be near 1kg. Checking units is good way to check
for incorrect formulae, but I've found that students who mix up division and
multiplication are also uncomfortable with units. The use of calculators
cannot explain lack of understanding of units, so I think the problem is more
basic.

I've known school teachers, and am somewhat familiar with curriculum. Both are
basically fine, and neither explains the problems I see with students in
university.

It seems to me that the root problem is that students are never told, in
serious terms, that getting the right answers is important. The way we signal
importance is with grades. Students who have received passing grades for
incorrect work through many years of school can hardly be expected to show
attention to detail in university.

America (et al.) may be throwing away a generation of talent, by pursuing what
seems to be a policy of unconditional approval. Luckily, there is some hope:
my foreign-trained students hand in correct work, with appropriate digits and
units. Quite often, they also show how they have checked the work. I don't
think it's because their first language was French, or German, or Mandarin; I
think it is because they went to schools where learning was still the focus,
as opposed to the congratulation for simply _being_ , not _accomplishing_.

~~~
CraigJPerry
It’s interesting that it’s been common to see this exact same opinion (a lack
of conscientiousness on the part of students) expressed in Germany about
German education over the past 10+ years yet you cite German students as a
good example.

In Germany it’s commonly stated that things were better previously and that
there’s a ongoing decline.

My understanding in the German case is that it’s not supported in any measures
of student attainment - grades, earnings after 10 years etc.

~~~
radiator
It is not necessarily a contradiction, it is possible that German education is
now clearly worse than 10 or 20 years ago, but still not as bad as the current
situation in grandparent's country.

~~~
golem14
I think it’s regression to the mean. Parents with lots of education see their
kids struggling and don’t understand that they themselves were positive
outliers back then.

~~~
lonelappde
Also that rich kids think riches come for free. Boondocks to boardroom in 3
generations, and three generations back. Rags to riches to rags. Shirtsleeves
to shirtsleeves. Clogs to clogs. Rice fields to Rice fields.

------
userbinator
_Apparently somebody in the calculations made a mistake in the very beginning
and nobody paid attention to review the calculations._

This is common in projects of such scale, where everyone is so specialised
that no one has a general idea of the whole project and could thus have raised
a "something feels wrong" feeling.

~~~
MaxBarraclough
Isn't that what systems engineering is for?

~~~
Mtinie
Only if you hire them.

------
btrettel
Any good tricks for catching these sorts of errors?

I'm a theoretical fluid dynamicist. When doing math I'll typically check the
dimensions, order of magnitude, bounds, functional dependencies (anything
missing or something there that shouldn't be?), overall trends of an equation,
and limiting cases. For solutions to equations it's useful to also plug the
apparent solution back into the equation. Another check ideally comes after
waiting a while so that my mind is fresh. Sometimes what I did seems dumb by
then.

Coding up the math is useful too. I've found that I can never add too many
assertions. I might have caught the error described in the article as I often
use assertions to check bounds.

Peer review isn't as reliable as I'd like. When it comes to math, most people
seem to "rubber stamp" it. I can recall reviewing a paper that had math
problems that were fairly obvious to me. For some reason I got the reports
from the other reviewers, and I was the only one to notice...

~~~
cm2187
Intuitively, only store numbers in their natural dimension. The same thing
regularly happens in finance where interest rates (1.5% ie 0.015) is often
stored as percent (1.5) in databases. And of course you never know what
conventions people take, particularly in these days of super low interest
rates. Then you have spreads which can either be stored in basis points
(10bps), percent (0.1%) or natural (0.001). And currency of amounts, etc.

All table columns should also have unit in names, whether in charts, tables,
database or variable names.

~~~
TeMPOraL
> _All table columns should also have unit in names, whether in charts,
> tables, database or variable names._

Oh yes. That would mitigate a lot of stupidity. Imagine if math in programming
and Excel had to have both a) always visible/known units, b) unit propagation
and c) unit checks. So if A is seconds and B is kilograms, the
compiler/spreadsheet wouldn't let you write C = A + B.

~~~
selimthegrim
Blockpad ([http://www.blockpad.net](http://www.blockpad.net)) is the answer to
your prayers.

------
brmgb
The real joke is that Navantia which is building this submarine actually stole
the intellectual property from their French counterpart during a previous
joint venture [0] and then managed to fail building a submarine with it.

Having worked in the field, the idea that someone can just misplace a decimal
point is laughable. It highlights a complete lack of quality control and
engineering know-how from Naventia.

The issue here is not the calculation. Mistakes happen. The issue is
procedural. You can't hope to build submarines if you have no process in place
to systematically catch this kind of error. That's true at every level from
conception to manufacturing.

That they ended up having to go see the Americans because the French wouldn't
help them say a lot about European defense integration however.

[0]
[https://globalarbitrationreview.com/article/1029783/submarin...](https://globalarbitrationreview.com/article/1029783/submarine-
dispute-runs-aground)

~~~
iagovar
IDK why this keeps coming again and again. I'm sadly in my phone but this is
actually false. The client asked for changes mid construction phase so they
had to redesign it. S81 and following ones already include this changes.

I'm not able to read your link but it's probably part of this FUD that comes
over and over. Navantia and DCNS had a joint venture, but the requirements of
the French and Spanish clients diverged so Navantia decided to go its own way.
What you can find is that DCNS tried to sue Navantia back in 09, but AFAIK
nothing came out of it (at least yet).

Navantia didn't have experience designing submarines from scratch but they
have plenty with civil and military ships. The fact that such "laughable"
mistake was apparently just made in this project is interesting to say the
least.

Not to mention that it's not the first time that Navantia faces accusations
without proof.

IMO this looks like DCNS trying to block their competitor, that not only got
its new founded expertise in submarines from you but also knows your
commercial channels, relationships etc.

~~~
brmgb
> French and Spanish clients diverged

There are no French or Spanish clients. The Scorpene submarines were built
strictly to be exported by the joint venture. Spain was expected to buy some,
France wasn't.

As far as I know, France only uses nuclear propulsion for its submarine and
doesn't export the submarines used by its navy.

> AFAIK nothing came out of it (at least yet)

It was settled. Navantia entirely gave up the export rights of the Scorpene.
For a submarine built to be exported, that seems pretty damning to me.

> Navantia didn't have experience designing submarines from scratch but they
> have plenty with civil and military ships.

Submarines are a lot more complicated to build.

Most of the Scorpene engineering came from France. Navantia clearly wasn't
ready to be left on its own.

~~~
iagovar
> There are no French or Spanish clients. The Scorpene submarines were built
> strictly to be exported by the joint venture. Spain was expected to buy
> some, France wasn't.

Not french and spanish clients for Scorpene, but a Spanish client for Navantia
is the Spanish Navy for example, and DCNS had their own.

> It was settled. Navantia entirely gave up the export rights of the Scorpene.
> For a submarine built to be exported, that seems pretty damning to me.

Hmm, do you have any source, I've tried but didn't find anything.

> Submarines are a lot more complicated to build.

> Most of the Scorpene engineering came from France. Navantia clearly wasn't
> ready to be left on its own.

That's true, although my point is that they are not some bunch of amateurs
that misplaced a decimal. They've been designing ships for a long time, and
building submarines at least from the 60s, so the decimal displacing is
probably FUD, specially when the client changed requirements mid-construction
phase, and the source of such mistake is Rafael Bardaji, who seems that has
never been a Spanish Official but conservative and later far-right advisor,
and honestly, is quite a fishy source.

~~~
Glawen
> Hmm, do you have any source, I've tried but didn't find anything. In french
> you can find it:
> [https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.lesechos.fr/amp/444277](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.lesechos.fr/amp/444277)

~~~
pvaldes
So the spanish company was building a submarine for their own clients, they
allied with the americans Lockheed Martin for electronics, and the french
company parted ways avec le coeur brisé.

This things happen all the time, and nous aimons nous voisins du Nord plus
qu'ils le croient. We enjoy all those silly jokes about spaniards in any case.

------
keiferski
_The Isaac Peral, the first in a new class of diesel-electric submarines, was
nearly completed when engineers discovered the problem. A U.S. Navy contractor
in Connecticut, Electric Boat, has signed a deal to help the Spanish Defence
Ministry find ways to slim down the 2,200-ton submarine._

In case you were wondering (I was) - the entire sub is 2,200 tons.

~~~
DoofusOfDeath
Slightly off topic, but my dad worked on submarine engineering at that E.B.
facility, and in related subcontractor / government roles, in the 1970s -
1990s.

He had lots of stories about major oversights making it WAY farther into the
production process than you'd expect.

------
coleifer
It's like that essay about top-down vs bottom-up. It was written about
Challenger but same principles apply.

[https://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/missions/51-l/docs/roge...](https://science.ksc.nasa.gov/shuttle/missions/51-l/docs/rogers-
commission/Appendix-F.txt)

~~~
vintagedave
I get an ERR_CONNECTION_REFUSED accessing that URL. Do you have another link?

------
jcheng
For scale, the submarine is 2,200 tons total, so it’s a little over 3%
overweight.

~~~
okusername
Which is more than enough to put it out of balance, depending on where it is.

~~~
masklinn
Apparently the fear is much buoyancy issues than balance, the extra 70t means
even with empty ballasts the sub might not be positively buoyant.

That's why this could be solved by lengthening the hull, increasing
displacement and thus compensating for the extra weight.

------
jacknews
lol, does the Navantia logo look like a wavy equals sign, ie 'approximately
equal'? I think it does. It's honest anyway.

------
zzzeek
runs great in extremely dense water

~~~
pauljurczak
Dead Sea Squadron will be equipped with Spanish S-80 submarines.

------
gumby
Was this kind of error common in the slide rule era? I never heard that it
was.

~~~
metaphor
Yes. What the slide rule era didn't have was the internet.

EDIT: Here's a 1992 GAO acquisition study[1] on the AN/BSY-1 combat system
whose development started in 1980 and was an absolute clusterfuck for the Navy
in the decade that followed, as history would have it. I originally learned of
this disaster from a former sailor (and now good friend) who participated in
sea trials for one of the submarines that this system was installed in. By his
account, the submarine had had its hull recut just to get the system installed
and routed properly, and it never really worked as intended. The study vaguely
alludes to this:

> _As a result, the shipbuilder was eventually faced with rip-outs, recutting
> of hulls, and rerouting of cables._

Electric Boat was the prime and responsible for system integration. They've
had their fair share of glorious fuckups to the tune of $82.4MM in late 80s
dollars, so it's funny to read the hero part on how they've "helped other
countries with their submarine programs".

In the right professional circles, stories like these quite literally abound.
Now what's the probability of learning about them without the internet?

[1]
[https://www.gao.gov/assets/nsiad-92-50.pdf](https://www.gao.gov/assets/nsiad-92-50.pdf)

~~~
gumby
Thanks! Probably we only hear of the successes.

------
acqq
The later development is even more of ... issues:

[https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-
ships/a224737...](https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-
ships/a22473758/spains-newest-submarine-is-too-big-for-port/)

"Spain’s Newest Submarine is Too Big For Port" (July 2018)

"In 2013, ten years after the first boat was ordered, authorities detected a
critical flaw in the design: The submarines were 75 to 100 tons heavier than
anticipated. The submarines could dive but there was some question as to
whether they could reliably surface again."

"The shipbuilder, Navantia, immediately suspended construction of the subs and
called in U.S. submarine builder Electric Boat to solve the buoyancy issue. EB
recommended the shipyards lengthen the S-80s by thirty feet, stretching it
from 232 feet to 265 feet..."

"Now, fifteen years after the submarines were ordered there is a new problem:
The first submarine, Isaac Peral, is too large to fit in its port at
Cartagena. Authorities say the port will have to be enlarged and dredged to
fit the updated design. It’s odd that Spanish authorities are suddenly
discovering the problem considering the submarines were actually built in
Cartagena and everyone involved has had five years to ponder the ramifications
of enlarging the sub’s design."

------
ChrisMarshallNY
Boy, if that isn't an argument for peer review, I don't know what is...

~~~
astrodust
Would you be able to spot the mistake in a system that complex?

~~~
mtnGoat
shouldnt something be tracking the BOM and thus calculating the weight of
everything being added in. It seems like catching this could even be
automated.

~~~
astrodust
What it something was omitted from the spreadsheet by accident?

That's how these mistakes happen.

------
mwilliaams
How does this not get caught before now? The review/QA process for a program
this expensive and sensitive should be very strong.

~~~
pvaldes
Unburying this old fail just right now is really interesting. In the same week
when the minister of defense Margarita Robles is about to close several big
contracts including S80 submarines, F110 frigates and MGCS chariots with
several companies.

I would not discard that the decimal event happened either only in the mind of
the journalist or as a scapegoat history after a major change of
specifications in the middle of the project. Honestly, smells a lot like FUD

------
jacquesm
On they plus side, they won't have nearly as much trouble as they otherwise
would have had to make it go down.

On a boat like this 70 tons isn't all that much, but it is outside the margin
of error in terms of what you would correct with the ballast tanks. This will
be expensive and tricky to fix without impacting other systems.

------
timonoko
In slide-rule world this did not happen. Slide rule gave you 3 numbers, but
you were not always sure of the tailing zeros, so you checked the sanity of
the scale all the time.

~~~
masklinn
> In slide-rule world this did not happen.

Of course it did, you just didn't hear about it because either it wasn't
publicised at all, or there wasn't enough tracking to find out where the error
had originally been introduced, or nobody shifted through literal tons of
papers to find out, or if they did there was no internet and it'd only
appeared as a note on page 7 in the "journal of overweight submarines",
circulation 500 copies.

This sort of errors is pretty much why double-entry bookkeeping was invented.

------
pvaldes
The scheduled date for floating is October 2020 and it looks pretty fine. If
there was a problem it seems perfectly fixed.

[https://www.navantia.es/en/news/press-releases/navantia-
clos...](https://www.navantia.es/en/news/press-releases/navantia-closes-the-
resistant-hull-of-s81-isaac-peral-submarine/)

------
codewithcheese
As of January 2018, the intended delivery date of the first submarine is
September 2022. [0]

Can anyone comment what the current status and solution is?

[0] [https://abcblogs.abc.es/tierra-mar-aire/industria-de-
defensa...](https://abcblogs.abc.es/tierra-mar-aire/industria-de-
defensa/defensa-submarino-s80.html)

~~~
JoshuaJB
From what I understand, they just lengthened the submarine to increase its
displacement enough to counter the extra weight.

It also looks like the hull of the first submarine is now complete, [1] so
there's some possibility they'll meet their new timeline.

[1]
[https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/s-80.ht...](https://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/s-80.htm)

------
ChrisArchitect
2013

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5842281](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5842281)

------
TomK32
Yet another achievement for pacifism :-)

Seriously, in the olden days someone might have been put in jail for being a
saboteur.

~~~
stblack
Sabotage should never be discounted. Great point!

------
giant
_The Defence Ministry said technical problems are normal for projects of this
scale._

------
carapace
No one expects the Spanish Exponentiation!

------
muyuu
Ooops! there are bugs and bugs.

------
Havoc
Tie some balloons to it?

------
agrippanux
Why does Spain need subs? Seems like a waste of resources.

~~~
eb0la
Think about the Strait of Gibraltar, Ceuta, Melilla, and Canary Islands:

\- Gibraltar is a potential choke point for the mediterranean if something
happens in the Suez Canal.

\- 3 nations (UK, Morocco, and Spain) have territorial waters on the strait.
All three are NATO members, but the UK left the EU last month and cannot be
considered as an ally for it gibraltar politics anymore...

\- Marocco is claiming more territry waters both in the ocean side near canary
islands, and in small islands Ceuta and Melilla. See Perejil Island incident
([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perejil_Island](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perejil_Island)).

Also, Spain sells a lot of weapons. Submarines are a good addition to the
catalog.

~~~
iso947
Spain is so hypocritical with Gibraltar and it’s attitudes to Ceuta, Melilla
and it’s other African colonies, as well as the canaries.

~~~
bastille
I don't think this comparison is fair:

\- The nation of Morocco did not exist when Ceuta and Melilla became
Portuguese and Spanish respectively, so I assume the only claim Morocco could
have would be based on territorial integrity. They were also never part of the
Spanish protectorate in Morocco, and are not recognised by the United Nations
as colonies.

\- On the other hand, Gibraltar has been classified by the United Nations as a
Non-Self-Governing Territory subject to decolonisation. Furthermore, it
considers Gibraltarians mere "settlers" and as such does not recognise their
right to self-determination, and urges the governments of Spain and the UK to
negotiate the decolonisation process between themselves.

Whether the UN's position is correct or not is whole different matter, my
point is that given the UN's point of view, Spain's position on Gibraltar and
Ceuta/Melilla is not contradictory.

Regarding the Canary Islands and "other African colonies", I'm not sure what
you are referring to as the only inhabited territories Spain has in Africa are
Ceuta, Melilla and the Canary Islands, and as far as I know nobody is claiming
the Canary Islands.

------
varjag
A Spanish shipyard also botched up bulkhead design on Helge Ingstad frigate.
It sunk after collision in 2018 and was a total loss.

The collision itself was all on inept Norwegian crew, but the water sealing
have not held. There are 4 others of her class still in service.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HNoMS_Helge_Ingstad_(F313)#Col...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HNoMS_Helge_Ingstad_\(F313\)#Collision_with_oil_tanker)

~~~
fauria
This is not true. Norwegian investigations concluded that there were no
technical defects involved in this incident, discharging Navantia.

Quoting your source: _The watertight condition of the ship was guaranteed by
the 13 watertight bulkheads. Seven compartments were damaged as a result of
the collision but initially the ship remained afloat. No one intervened to
break the chain of errors._

See also: [https://www.aibn.no/About-us/News-archive/Status-of-the-
inve...](https://www.aibn.no/About-us/News-archive/Status-of-the-
investigation-into-the-collision-between-the-frigate-KNM-Helge-Ingstad-and-
the-oil-tanker-Sola-TS-27-February-2019)

~~~
varjag
Yes it was guaranteed by the bulkheads, and the guarantee has failed. The ship
should not have sunk with this amount of damage.

 _The vessel grounded and continued to take on water, through the propeller
shaft and stuffing boxes.[9]_

The whole point of stuffing boxes was to contain water in damage like this.

The link you posted is in no way absolves the shipbuilder. Merely states that

 _The vessel 's Spanish designer Navantia received a notification of a
critical safety issue in relation to the frigate's watertight compartments_

…and the investigation is ongoing.

~~~
alsobrsp
> The whole point of stuffing boxes was to contain water in damage like this.

That is not the point of stuffing boxes. They keep water out when the shaft is
not turning and lubricate the the shaft with sea water when it is. A grounding
can bend the shaft easily letting lots of water in.

------
epicgiga
I get the whole "home grown industry" and sovereign production of defense and
all that, but just like when Australia tried to build its own submarines,
really you're better off just buying them off the shelf from your allies
who've already been ploughing billions into design and development of the
things for decades.

~~~
Glawen
Spain has an active defense shipbuilding industry (e. Eg scorpene submarine),
why would they buy them from someone else ? And these kind of program secure a
lot of jobs, when you buy from outside you secure those jobs abroad.

By the way, how is the f35 going ?

~~~
gdy
I guess, they are still at the 'ploughing billions' stage.

