Should a submarine really be a tourist attraction?

Submarines typically travel in the water. Usually below the surface of the water. So really, an average person doesn't get to see a submarine that often.

But when they run aground and then the tide goes further out... well, that's an event.

In Scotland right now there is a nuclear submarine which has just been towed back out to see by tugboats after running aground off the Isle of Skye. There is a good picture of the submarine - I think after it was saved - in the Guardian news.

The report says many people were on the shoreline watching the event. Stealthy. Well, I live beside an ocean as well, and I would be on the beach taking photos if a submarine started coming up on our shore. It would be thrilling. But should a working submarine really be a tourist attraction?

Are these water craft really that hard to steer? If they are that hard to steer, should they really be nuclear powered? The news article said they ran aground while doing an exercise in familiar waters. Does this mean the driver got a reckless driving ticket? Is the driver a rookie just learning how to aim that thing? Isn't that just a bit more than bloody dangerous?

Back in February 2009 I posted the question "What will collide next?" when two submarines crashed in the ocean and then two satellites crashed in outer space. I am once again struck by how badly these very expensive bits of technology are aimed or driven. Do the drivers just need some more sleep?

What will collide next?

Submarines colliding in the ocean. Satellites colliding in space. What will be next?

Early in February 2 submarines - one French, one British - collided somewhere in the Atlantic Ocean. One of them was 150 metres long, the other was 138 metres long. The Atlantic Ocean is somewhere around 76 million square kilometres. On a comparative basis, that's 6 1/2 times the size of the US. Getting 2 little boats to hit each other in that much water would seem to be a wild shot, but France and the U.K. have begrudgingly admitted it happened. It seems the boats are so quiet, they didn't sense each other - that's a design point of a submarine, isn't it?

Also early in February 2 satellites orbiting the Earth - one Soviet, one American - collided about 270 miles above the International Space Station. There is some due concern that the debris will hit that expensive little jewel of international co-operation. The Soviet satellite was apparently not in working order, just space junk, but the American one was owned and used by a phone company.

To quote Douglas Adams "Space is big. Really Big. You just won't believe how mindbogglingly big it is." (The Hitch-hikers Guide to the Galaxy, Chapter 8)

If human-made objects that are tiny in comparison to where humans put them - either in the water or in outer space - are colliding with each other... what's next? Both the Americans and the European Space Agency have sent human-made objects to roam about on the surface of Mars. The American ones have made it, but the European one - named Beagle 2 - disappeared without a trace. Is it possible there was another collision of human-made objects, or did it just collide with Mars? (Hmm, that was in February as well, a few years back but... is that a coincidence?)

Should humans really be sending these extremely expensive objects into space? Unless it's the same country sending all of the objects, will different countries give enough information to each other about where their objects are to avoid collisions?

Alien 1: "Oh look, they're sending more bits up! Oh look! Those ones collided too! What a mess!"
Alien 2: "No need to contact that planet, if we did they'd probably send junk up to collide with our ships."

References:
Submarine sizes

Ocean size

Submarines hitting each other

Satellites hitting each other

European Space Agency looses contact with Beagle