The City of Rome was held at fault for not reducing her speed when in doubt as to the movement of the S-51. The City of Rome was also held at fault for not signaling her change of course. However, both the district court and the Circuit Court of Appeals found the S-51 at fault for having improper lights:
"The S-51 was 240 feet 6 inches long; her beam 25 feet; her surface displacement upwards of 1,000 tons;her forward white light was not 20 feet above the hull [as required by the laws then in effect - Editor], but was only 11 feet 6 inches above the deck. The side lights were fixed in a recess on the chariot bridge 7 1/2 feet above the hull; they were not fitted with inboard screens projecting at least 3 feet forward from the lights" [Again, this was required - Ed.]
There was also testimony that the red side light was constructed such, and was so close to the white masthead light that the visibility of the smaller and dimmer red side light was greatly reduced by the intensity of the white masthead light. This is what created the false impression aboard the City of Rome that they were approached a vessel from behind, rather than from the side.
The Navy argued that it was not practicable to have submarines of this class comply with the literal provisions of the law in regards to lights. The Navy also argued that, as a special type of warship, the S-51 was not under legal compulsion to comply with the law. The court responded by saying:
"I cannot accept the view that that submarines running on the surface through traffic lanes are immune from the usual requirements regarding lights. . . .The obvious answer. . .is that if this be so, then they [the submarines - Ed.] should confine their operation to waters not being traversed by other ships."
The court further held that her status as a warship did not grant the S-51 any special privledges. Furthermore, the court held that it was not impossible for the S-51 to have complied with all the provisions of the law concerning lights, merely difficult. As such, the greater fault was placed on the S-51 for not making the extra effort to comply: "The testimony conclusively shows not only that the failure of the S-51 to show proper side lights might have contributed, but that it was a principal cause of the disaster." [ emphasis added - Ed.]
Thus, even though this accident was a tragedy, and many men lost their lives on the S-51, I feel that the record shows that the greatest blame for the accident must lay with the Navy, for allowing an manifestly unsafe submarine to be operated. While the City of Rome shares some blame, the design of the S-class was, in many respects, an accident waiting to happen.
For an alternate view of the S-51 accident, you are invited to visit The S-51 Accident Website, an in-depth site, maintained by the grand-daughter of one of the men killed that fateful night.
After the accident, S-51 was salvaged. The gripping tale of her salvage, On the Bottom, was written by the officer in charge, then CDR Edward Ellsberg. An updated version was recently published. In addition to the original story, it contains a CD with an oral history of Rear Admiral Ellsberg and a DVD with period newsreel footage. Additional information about Rear Admiral Ellsberg can be found at a website maintained by his grandson.
Return to The Inter-War Years
Return to Peacetime Submarine Accidents