Talk:The Bedford Incident

Merge USS Bedford (DLG-113)

Breaking out the article USS Bedford (DLG-113) from this main article makes no sense. There is not enough information to take this article beyond a stub and it could easily and more relevently be incorporated in the main article. Nv8200p talk 15:32, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Continuity error

If the Bedford sank the Soviet sub, then why does it remain as echo ping on the sonar? OK I know it's just a film but I thought that meant the attempt to abort the missile had knocked it off course or it had not acquired its target so the sub was not destroyed. The sub fired retaliatory nuclear torpedos and escaped. The single ping is replaced by the whirr of the propellers of the approaching torpedos.

Currently the plot in this article says the Russian sub was destroyed. Is that based on what is occurs in the film or the book? Needs clarification.109.158.250.107 (talk) 19:48, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

I assumed the ASROC destroyed the Soviet sub, though after it/she had launched torpedoes. Even so, the hull of the submarine would have been largely intact, certainly enough to still return Bedford's pinging.--172.190.229.3 (talk) 03:44, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

The answer as far as the Bedfords crew are concerned is largely academic - they would all have died instantly when the torpedoes struck. That's the point of the film. They all die, including everyone on board the Soviet submarine, because of two men's mistakes. The Bedfords captain's, Finlander, for being an idiot in forcing the Soviet submarine to act as if they were at war when they weren't, and the other one, Ralston, who was so keyed-up that he actually fired the missile by mistake.

Nuclear weapons make playing about at such things too dangerous for everyone. The same thing was illustrated in Dr. Strangelove. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.31.130.124 (talk) 13:27, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Just to correct the misapprehension here: Active sonar sounds consist of an outgoing signal and (if there's anything there) a return echo. In the film both are heard at different times; while the Bedford searching, the single long outgoing ping is heard; when the submarine is detected, the outgoing ping and the shorter, higher-pitched return are both present; in the scene where the Bedford runs down the submarine's snorkel, the interval between outgoing and returning pings gets shorter as the range decreases; and after the ASROC explodes, the pinging returns to the outgoing signal only, indicating the submarine has been destroyed (in reality, the gerfuffle caused by the explosion would drown out the sonar). At the end, when the submarines torpedoes are detected it is by passive sonar, ie by hearing the sound of the torpedo motors as they approach. Just to clarify...Xyl 54 (talk) 21:29, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

PS: There's a basic tutorial here, and some examples of underwater sounds here (outgoing and return sonar sounds are between 2.00 and 2.40, for the impatient). Xyl 54 (talk) 21:33, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Plot point: Finlander may indeed recognize that the torpedoes will detonate too closely for the Bedford to survive. What I took from his leaving the bridge was that he could not face the possibility that should they survive, the sub's sinking could have triggered an international incident, even a war, given his hawkish record.Dfoofnik (talk) 22:12, 9 December 2017 (UTC)

Black-and-White

The film is correctly categorized as being in black-and-white (twice), but that fact is not mentioned in either the lede or infobox. Should be both I think. --73.114.25.111 (talk) 09:17, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Filming

It is the Farragut-class destroyer that has the forward-sloping bridge windows, not the HMS Troubridge. The links in the article lead to articles with photos of the two destroyer types demonstrating this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wsulek (talk • contribs) 21:22, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Book

Doesn't the book deserve it's own separate page? Wfoj3 (talk) 14:14, 8 January 2022 (UTC)