The sinking of the kursk

[denoir 0]

Sadly, it's a tactical advantage for us that they lost the Kursk, as they aren't replacing them with anything possessing her capapbilities.

According to FAS (not the most reliable source, especially when it comes to submarines, but it will have to do) there are at least seven active ships of the same class (Oscar II): K-119 Voronezh, K-410 Smolensk, K-442 Chelyabinsk, K-456 Viliuczinsk, K-266 Orel, K-186 Omsk and K-512 St.Georgy Pobeditel.

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/russia/theater/949.htm

[FerretFangs 0]

An excellent maintained by an old friend, Mr. Andrew Topan: http://www.hazegray.org/worldnav/

Number Name Year FLT Homeport Notes

K-148 Orenburg 1986 NOR

K-132 Irkutsk 1987 PAC Reserve

K-119 Voronezh 1988 PAC

K-173 Krasnoyarsk 1988 PAC Reserve

K-410 Smolensk 1990 NOR

K-442 Chelyabinsk 1990 PAC

K-456 Vilyuchinsk 1991 PAC

K-266 Orel 1992 NOR

K-186 Omsk 1993 PAC

K-526 Tomsk 1997 PAC

The last was launched in '97. My point was, there will be no more.

[Oeil2Lynx 0]

it was cold in the submarine too

i was thinking about this

thought the russians could afford that kind of thing for their bests submarine...

And what about the emergency buoy?

hard for me to believe that koursk sunk, all emergency system disabled, when seeing the san francisco come back with quite no sequel problem :/

I dont get the tactical advantages,... US and russians still have enought nukes to blow each others..if they become as crazy as they shouldn't.Well i'm not a diplomacy or weapon specialist, i'll stop posting nuts

[FerretFangs 0]

Actually, the Oscar II class is equipped with an emergency escape pod in the aft part of the sail. According to the Russians, it couldn't be deployed by the survivors, either because it was damaged by the sinking, and/or, was not reachable by the survivors in the stern of the sub. Apparently, they weren't equipped with, or could not deploy any escape suits either.

What I meant by "tactical advantage" that they lost the Kursk, is because the mission the Kursk is meant to perform. The Oscars are meant to be "aircraft carrier killers." With the sinking of the Kursk, that's one less threat to our carrier battle groups. They represent a HUGE threat to American CVBG's, which is why they are CONSTANTLY shadowed by American ( and allied ) hunter-killer subs whose primary mission is to blow them out of the water at the first signs of provocation. We also shadow the Russian and Chinese SSBN's for the same purpose. According to many experts, no American SSBN's have ever been successfully tracked by either the Russians, or the Chinese.

[Leveler 0]

According to what I have read, corroded hydrogen peroxide containement in one torpedo caused the initial explosion that triggered the disaster. The ship then crashed head first to the bottom and that is when the entire magazine in the torpedo room blew up. A norwegian monitoring station detected about 4 richter earthquake from that!

Under the circumstances, it is really amazing that there is anything left from the sub, a proof of its solid construction. The shockwave from the blast pulverized everyone in the front compartments, the only survivors were behind the nuclear reactor where the thick shielding dampened the force of the blast.

[theavonlady 2]

Doing a search for salvaged Kursk pictures, the only thing I come up with is the Kursk's conning tower partially protruding above the water from its special dock.

The one exception I found was on this page. Scroll down and there's one picture of the entire Kursk's upper hull above the water in its dock.

Beyond that, I assume the Kursk's disection was top secret, for obvious reasons.

[soul_assassin 1750]

Quote[/b] ]What I meant by "tactical advantage" that they lost the Kursk, is because the mission the Kursk is meant to perform. The Oscars are meant to be "aircraft carrier killers." With the sinking of the Kursk, that's one less threat to our carrier battle groups. They represent a HUGE threat to American CVBG's, which is why they are CONSTANTLY shadowed by American ( and allied ) hunter-killer subs whose primary mission is to blow them out of the water at the first signs of provocation. We also shadow the Russian and Chinese SSBN's for the same purpose. According to many experts, no American SSBN's have ever been successfully tracked by either the Russians, or the Chinese.

Have some respect for the dead, we're not even at war.

Quote[/b] ]which is why they are CONSTANTLY shadowed by American ( and allied ) hunter-killer subs whose primary mission is to blow them out of the water at the first signs of provocation.

yes exactly y i lean toward the new theory. Triggerhappy. And what business do ur subs have in our exercise manouvers anyway? Checking that we don't test anything never than america has?

[theavonlady 2]

Quote[/b] ]which is why they are CONSTANTLY shadowed by American ( and allied ) hunter-killer subs whose primary mission is to blow them out of the water at the first signs of provocation.

yes exactly y i lean toward the  new theory. Triggerhappy.

Have some respect for the living.

[The_Oakster 0]

More Images:

http://www.oag.ru/images/views/kursk_3.jpg

http://www.oag.ru/images/views/kursk_4.jpg

http://www.oag.ru/images/views/kursk_2.jpg

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

http://www.oag.ru/images/views/kursk_2.jpg

Is that the hole that the article was talking about?

Btw, Oak, where you been mate!?

[The_Oakster 0]

Is that the hole that the article was talking about?

Yep.

Quote[/b] ]Btw, Oak, where you been mate!?

I have been recovering from the third operation on my ass...

cue jokes....

wait for laughter to stop....

At least I had 1 whole year off work with full pay (You gotta love the British Army)

[FerretFangs 0]

Quote[/b] ]Have some respect for the dead, we're not even at war.

yes exactly y i lean toward the new theory. Triggerhappy. And what business do ur subs have in our exercise manouvers anyway? Checking that we don't test anything never than america has?

Have some respect for reality.

I was a sailor. I have IMMENSE respect for ALL men who sail on behalf of their nation into harm's way. That said, I am a realist, and a pragmatist, and I was simply stating FACT.

It's no secret what the purpose of the Kursk was, the mission it was tasked to do. It was an asset with a mission, a mission that it cannot accomplish now. Having been a sailor aboard an American aircraft carrier, I must tell you that NOTHING gave us as much to worry about as THAT class of SSGN. Now that the Kursk is gone, thousands of sailors attached to an American battle group might sleep just a little more peacefully knowing that that particular Russian-made sea monster isn't lurking out there anymore, ready to blow them all away.

The ENTIRE WORLD would rejoice if it was a Nimitz-class super carrier on the sea floor, even though I'm sure we'd recieve some token condolences for the loss of life. As did you for your sailors. But I'm discussing the machines here, not the men who sail in them.

Finally, you must realize, that this underwater game of cat and mouse has been going on for DECADES, long before you or I were born. Your side snoops on us, and we snoop on yours. That's simply a reality of this modern age. We should probably feel thankful for it, simply because these sort of games reduce the probability of either side launching a surprise attack on the other.

WE DID NOT SINK YOUR SUB.

The questions you should be asking is to Mr. Putin, and why he wasn't willing to request, or accept foreign assistance in rescueing the survivors. We had men, and equipment ready, and so did our allies. Assistance was offered, and refused. Russian pride, and/or paranoia prevented you from asking others for help. The result is, good men died, adding insult to injury.

Anything else you wish to add?

[FerretFangs 0]

I'm willing to bet any amount of money that that hole was not caused by a MK-48. It appears to be too large for one thing, ( The MK-48 is a 21 inch weapon. ) and besides, the ADCAP torpedo detonates BEFORE it impacts, not after. The shockwave of the warhead kills the target by shaking it to pieces, or crushing it from the outside, not by imploding it from within. If a torp penetrated, and then exploded, at least some of the force of that explosion would come back out of the hole the torpedo entered through, making the hole MUCH bigger than the diameter of the torpedo body.

I believe that hole was made by divers, salvage equipment, or perhaps by the Russian government, for the purpose of blaming the sinking on a offboard-fired torpedo. The Russian government isn't publicly making any such claim though, so I'd have to surmise it was caused by one of the other two mechanisms.

They left the entire nose section forward of the sail on the seabed, so perhaps it had something to do with cutting it off.

We also know that Russian divers entered the wreck as well. They could have made this hole to reach sections of the interior that may have been impossible to access due to the damage.

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]I believe that hole was made by divers, salvage equipment,

Divers don´t penetrate the hull as pictured on the photos.

The hull is inflicted inwards around the hole. Divers can´t do that.

Even a rescue sub (which the russians didn´t have ready when the kursk sank) wouldn´t cause the deformation. Salvage equipment ? No. Makes no sense at the hole´s position, nor it is suitable for any purpose.

I don´t think the US attacked the sub. At least not intentionally. The torpedo accident seems to be the most likely possibility, while questions remain unanswered by both sides. The US and Russia.

Anyway, may the sailors rest in piece. It´s sad that some of them could have been rescued if authorities played the marbles more open.

[Apollo 0]

Quote[/b] ]The ENTIRE WORLD would rejoice if it was a Nimitz-class super carrier on the sea floor, even though I'm sure we'd recieve some token condolences for the loss of life. As did you for your sailors. But I'm discussing the machines here, not the men who sail in them.

American's to?

Seriously ,i hate this kinda remarks ,as if all non American's would defacto hate every American just because of some foreign policy's of the USA ,and if all condolences for 9/11 would have been insensere.Some people outside the USA might think that a different foreign policy in the past towards the middle east might prevented some terrorism on the USA soil ,but therefore wont automaticly see the killing of a few thousands of innocent civilians as a justified thing.

Im a humanist ,i hate war and i hate the kinda pragmatic logic of "to preserve peace one must be preppared for war" wich is sometimes perceived as an only way to solve certain issue's ,for the same reasons i obviously hate mindless kiling of innocent civilians.

Anyway back to topic then.

Personally ,i don't understand why all this sub shadowing by both Russia and USA didn't effectivly stop with the collapse of the USSR ,as if Russia is really to be considerd a threat to "democracy" still as was it the idiologicly enemy in the cold war.Or let me refresh my memmory ,i did thought the reasons for the cold war were about:

-Containing the spread of an enemy ideoligy ,basicly democracy vs comminism ,communism wich was fast spreading after WWII ,especially and Asia and to a smaller extent South america

-Containing a previously quite agressive and expansivist nation that in the period before WWII attacked many East European country's (USSR attacked Finland ,Rumania ,baltic country's ,partittioned Poland with Germany at molotov-ribbentrop pact) and occupied many "liberated" country's after WWII (most of East Europe) ,making the USSR a hughe power in terms of land mass ,population and millitary power ,powerfull enough to match West-Europe and USA combined in military power.

But then the world has changed:

- Russia becomes a "democracy" ,atleas goodbey to communism and it's danger from being spread from there

- USSR desintigrates ,Russia falls back to its "core" territory  ,becomes a country with only 60% of the USA poppulation in terms of manpower (and only 30% of EU poppulation) ,a hughe conventional metalyard for wich it hasn't got the money to keep it from rusting (nuke's and subs included)

- Russia has troubles with local insuregency groups in one of the worst terrain's for fighting

- One of Russian's assets ,it's resource righ but low poppulated Siberia ,now borders a China with 1.3 Billion people and a semi modernized army ,having historical claims for quite a part of territory North and East of the Amur river and a healthy interrest in resources to fuel its expanding economy

[sarcasm mode]

Sorry ,but whether or not how the Kursk sank ,i don't see the need for heavy traffic of nuclear-submarine in the Baltic ,given the frequency of sub accidents it's time that the UN sends Kofi Anan down there in a mini sub to regulate traffic...

But i do understand the evil ploy behind this.its not like these countrys after the cold war could say to their poppulace: Well the cold war is over ,atlast all our economical efforts over the last decades to create this hughe millitary has shown it's worthlesness so lets cut our millitary to 20% of the original.

So they decided to give the impression that this rediculously oversized millitary was actually needed ,works well with terrorism really ,just shell their possitions for days and drop some 3 dozen 500lb's bombs on a terrorist defended shanty ,works wonders to cut youre stockpile and give youre millitary industry something to work on.Even a fleet can look usefull with carriers supporting jets and if youre sending youre carriers to Iraq you afcourse have to cover them with shitloads of destroyers and cruisers.

But submarine's ,even in a very very extremely remote way ,just can't be used to contain the danger of terrorism ,wich is mostly land-based afterall.Pitty no submarine was in sight when the USS cole was attacked ,they could torpedo'd that speed boat...

[/sarcasm mode]