Military Review

DEPL "San Juan" destroyed an explosion of enormous power

92
The US Naval Intelligence Agency has published a report that talks about the causes of the death of the Argentine submarine San Juan. The report confirms that the death of the diesel-electric submarine was caused by an explosion. The report says that the explosion occurred at a depth of about 400 meters and amounted to almost 6 tons of TNT.


From the report:
The hull was completely destroyed in 40 milliseconds. Sailors on the submarine died instantly and without suffering, since this value is half the size that a person needs for the initial perception of the event.


DEPL "San Juan" destroyed an explosion of enormous power


It is noted that the wreckage of the submarine sank and can be at different depths. Many of them were spread across the Atlantic currents.

Recall that the diesel-electric submarine "San Juan" of the Argentine Navy stopped communicating on November 15 communications. On board were the 44 man. Earlier it was also reported about a single explosion, which was recorded in the area of ​​the disappearance of the submarine. Initially, the message came from the experts of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization. The report published by the American naval intelligence is based on their materials.

It should be noted that the Russian deep-water craft was also involved in the search for a submarine. At the moment, its use has not yielded results - not even submarine fragments have been found.
Photos used:
www.globallookpress.com
92 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. iliitchitch
    iliitchitch 12 January 2018 06: 39
    +4
    As far as I understand, 400m is a lot. 6 tons is a detonation.
    1. Alexander 3
      Alexander 3 12 January 2018 06: 42
      +2
      Ammunition explosion of one or all?
      1. BABAY22
        BABAY22 12 January 2018 06: 46
        +6
        So she has a maximum depth of 300 m. And it plummeted means 400.
      2. ver_
        ver_ 12 January 2018 06: 46
        +1
        ... it’s dark like a Negro in a .. khe stomach ..
      3. LSA57
        LSA57 12 January 2018 06: 48
        +8
        Quote: Alexander 3
        Ammunition explosion of one or all?

        where ammunition came from. she kind of went for repairs
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. Nyrobsky
          Nyrobsky 12 January 2018 10: 26
          +5
          Quote: LSA57
          where ammunition came from. she kind of went for repairs

          And this used supply came from the side. And probably those who prepared a report on the death of a submarine sent it.
      4. dvina71
        dvina71 12 January 2018 06: 55
        +3
        Quote: Alexander 3
        or all

        Even everything will not be pulled by 6t .. and 2 .. they do not detonate from a concussion, they are detonated by a fuse.
      5. Shura Perm
        Shura Perm 12 January 2018 07: 40
        +6
        Sabotage? Suspiciously a lot of 6 tons
        1. Orionvit
          Orionvit 12 January 2018 08: 23
          11
          Quote: Shura Perm
          Sabotage? Suspiciously a lot of 6 tons

          It is suspicious that the boat itself was not found, and the Americans are making such categorical statements.
          1. Mestny
            Mestny 12 January 2018 09: 04
            +4
            Given that the United States is an evil empire, without jokes, and built on total lies.
    2. Hammer
      Hammer 12 January 2018 06: 51
      14
      Quote: Alexander 3
      Ammunition explosion of one or all?

      If we take it by analogy with the Kursk nuclear submarine, then there were two smaller explosions and the second, through fractions of a second, with a capacity of about 4,5 tons of TNT. And here we are talking about one and 6 tons of fuel cells! Something does not fit ... Ie according to the American version, it turns out that the entire ammunition load (how much was) pulled all at the same time. This is possible only if it is undermined all at the same time. Those. was there a diversion on the boat? Something is wrong here ...
      The mattresses are troubled, they are trying to hide something. Could it be their tricks with San Juan ?.
      1. dvina71
        dvina71 12 January 2018 06: 56
        +1
        Quote: Hammer
        then there were two explosions, the first smaller and the second,

        There was one explosion, the second is the push of the hull of the boat to the bottom.
        1. Brylevsky
          Brylevsky 12 January 2018 07: 33
          +1
          Read the book of Vice Admiral Ryazantsev "In the wake formation after death." This man gave his entire life to the submarine fleet and knows what he is writing about.
          1. dvina71
            dvina71 12 January 2018 07: 47
            0
            Quote: Brylevsky
            Read the book of Vice Admiral Ryazantsev

            I personally know several people who served in Kursk and those who built it and especially rented it ..
          2. Galleon
            Galleon 12 January 2018 08: 54
            15
            Ryazantsev supports the official version of the explosion of a malfunctioning torpedo in the TA. But where will you get the white-green emergency buoy from a foreign submarine in the first minutes after the accident, the testimonies of the sailors who saw the bow of the Kursk and claim that the explosion was outside the hull, not from the inside, and the CIA director’s arrival in Moscow these days ?
            Where do you get Clinton’s refusal to deploy anti-ballistic missiles in Europe, a film about Soviet submariner heroes with Harrison Ford and several private US charitable foundations through which Kursk crew members received monetary compensation?
            1. Per se.
              Per se. 12 January 2018 12: 58
              +1
              Quote: Galleon
              But where can you go white-green emergency buoy with a foreign submarine in the first minutes after the accident
              In addition, there were two iconic statements of Admiral Popov, in the first he said that he would like to look into the eyes of the person who "did it", and, more recently, that he fulfilled his desire. If you recall the muddy deal with the battleship Novorossiysk, as everyone was hushed up, also accepting the official version with a bottom mine, which is surprising.
              1. Galleon
                Galleon 12 January 2018 13: 30
                +1
                You are right, Nezavisimaya Gazeta published an article by Admiral Popov with sequels in two or three of its numbers. Where he detailed and thoroughly laid out everything on the shelves. The French later in their film only confirmed what they said.
            2. Chaos
              Chaos 13 January 2018 21: 47
              +1
              It is clear that rulers hide the truth from the people. This gives me the right to hide the amount from which I have to pay taxes))
            3. Brylevsky
              Brylevsky 14 January 2018 05: 36
              +1
              I have no way to retell the contents of the book. In addition, it will be off-top. I ask you, read it yourself, everything will become clear to you. The cause of the Kursk tragedy for many of us has become a kind of “fetish”, overgrown with a mass of “conspiracy” versions, akin to the “secret” of the “Dyatlov Pass” - everyone practices riddles to the extent of their competence. As for Kursk, as I wrote on this site once, in the opinion of Vice Admiral Ryazantsev, he was ruined: criminal acts or criminal inaction of the Northern Fleet leadership; erroneous actions of the crew; design flaws of the boat and its weapons. In the book, all these points are reflected from the point of view of a specialist, not a journalist, read it, and do not build illusions.
      2. renics
        renics 12 January 2018 08: 52
        +4
        1 ton of TNT is 4,184 · 10 to the 9th degree of J; then 6 tons will be 25,104 × 10 to the 9th degree J. Question to the explosion engineers, what will the visual force of an explosion with such energy look like? I feel 6 tons is utter nonsense. Moreover, in various publications the most different figures are apparently taken from the ceiling.
      3. Orionvit
        Orionvit 12 January 2018 12: 43
        +3
        Quote: Hammer
        The mattresses are troubled, they are trying to hide something. Could it be their tricks with San Juan ?.

        in 1968, when the Soviet submarine K-129 drowned, Americans from several points in the Pacific Ocean recorded explosions from a distance of several thousand miles. That allowed them to accurately determine, and then find and even raise the bow of a sunken (depth more than 5000m.) Boat. And then everyone heard, and no one knows what.
  2. cost 75
    cost 75 12 January 2018 06: 39
    0
    What could it so have smelled of?
    1. Vadim851
      Vadim851 12 January 2018 06: 44
      +1
      Hydrogen from batteries? But really so powerfully exploded for this reason
      1. dvina71
        dvina71 12 January 2018 07: 29
        +6
        This is called a volume explosion. Creates the second most powerful blast wave after nuclear weapons.
        And this is hydrogen detonation in the volume of a tin can ..
        1. Yuyuka
          Yuyuka 12 January 2018 11: 46
          +4
          Quote: dvina71
          This is called a volume explosion. Creates the second most powerful blast wave after nuclear weapons.
          And this is hydrogen detonation in the volume of a tin can ..


          somehow not spectacular ... now, I remember, in the 6th class I conducted an experiment on the decomposition of water into hydrogen and oxygen using a diode bridge. The match burned brightly in oxygen, light cotton in hydrogen ... everything was like in a chemistry lesson. then I checked the mixture of hydrogen with air ... a little ... quite a bit ... a good "boom" turned out, I cleaned the kitchen for half a dayrepeat All the same, Soviet education was the best in the world! laughing
          1. ver_
            ver_ 12 January 2018 16: 51
            +1
            .. we have chemistry - a bottle for fragments .., the chemist was competent: she wrapped a bottle in a towel ..
          2. Dedall
            Dedall 12 January 2018 21: 55
            +2
            Yeah! What initially gave off hydrogen in this film is called the Kipp apparatus. Such were in every school, and in current prоdamned times throughout the city there is not a single one. Kids see experiences only in videos. And the Minister of Education also boasts about it. Maybe something will change under Grudinin?
      2. Orionvit
        Orionvit 12 January 2018 12: 50
        +1
        Quote: Vadim851
        Hydrogen from batteries?

        On each submarine there are gas analyzers, and even for the slightest increase in the proportion of hydrogen, appropriate measures should have been taken by the crew. Measures to counter this threat have been tested for over a hundred years. If hydrogen exploded, then this can only indicate the non-professionalism of the crew. however, until the boat is found, one can only guess.
    2. Net
      Net 12 January 2018 06: 46
      +1
      Like the Kursk, they beat the MK48 into the torpedo compartment.
      1. dvina71
        dvina71 12 January 2018 06: 50
        16
        Quote: Net
        Like the Kursk, they beat the MK48 into the torpedo compartment.

        Well, how much can you post this nonsense .. The wall thickness of the main body is 50 mm of very strong steel .. well, it’s enough to pierce it with a torpedo .. punch the wall better with your own head .. what effect can I feel.
        1. Dalailama
          Dalailama 12 January 2018 06: 58
          +1
          And what was considered nonsense here? What could a torpedo get into it?
          1. dvina71
            dvina71 12 January 2018 07: 00
            +4
            Quote: DalaiLama
            What could a torpedo get into it?

            And this is also nonsense.
            1. Dalailama
              Dalailama 12 January 2018 07: 07
              0
              Q.E.D. And which could?
              1. dvina71
                dvina71 12 January 2018 07: 12
                12
                Quote: DalaiLama
                As required.

                What have you proved? Do you understand that it is impossible to attack submarines unnoticed.? As soon as the torpedo leaves the boat, it becomes visible on board the attacked boat, an evasion maneuver is performed, lts are issued .. If any submarine attacked Kursk and destroyed it, this means that the Kursk crew was completely invisible, and surface ships .. which, according to legend the exercises were to be searched for by the pl, or they were no good and weren’t able to detect the pl .. if their crews were in the same condition as in Kursk .. Which option suits you?
                1. Dalailama
                  Dalailama 12 January 2018 08: 19
                  +1
                  I see what you want here. All about everything were in the know, it’s just that during exercises they usually exchange non-combat ones. And it happens through simulators, so it destroyed it, immediately fell to the bottom, and threw an emergency satellite buoy, and immediately the director of the American CIA flew to Moscow to negotiate.
                2. alstr
                  alstr 12 January 2018 10: 17
                  +1
                  By the way, why no one mentions the possibility of a mine explosion. Especially considering that during the war of the 80s there were a lot of them.
                3. The comment was deleted.
          2. groks
            groks 12 January 2018 08: 06
            +4
            What could a torpedo get into it?

            Modern torpedoes have a remote fuse. Even simply because getting into the boat from a few kilometers is very difficult. The guidance system and energy characteristics of the torpedo should then be incredibly high. And liquids, as you know, do not compress, so a close blast will cause the same damage as an explosion directly on the body.
            To make a hole in the submarine’s hull, and even as smoothly as in those photos, you need to shoot not with a torpedo, but with an armor-piercing shell of the appropriate caliber. Even if we assume that some kind of magical torpedo pierced the hull and exploded inside the submarine, then part of the hull will turn around exactly at the point of penetration. After all, the case in this place will be very weak. So there will be no even hole under any conditions.
            1. Brylevsky
              Brylevsky 12 January 2018 09: 07
              0
              Quote: groks
              Modern torpedoes have a remote fuse. Even simply because getting into the boat from a few kilometers is very difficult.

              I don’t know about the modern ones, but the domestic anti-submarine torpedo SET-65 (still in service) has, in addition to the non-contact, contact fuse. You are mistaken when you say that a torpedo cannot get directly into the boat. Can. Especially in a boat of domestic construction, look at the overall dimensions of the same project 949 ... The good elemental base and the software of the Mk.48 torpedoes make this possibility quite probable ... unfortunately.
              1. groks
                groks 12 January 2018 09: 28
                +3
                It would be foolish not to put a contact fuse. With a good angle, with a standing goal, .... Anything can get anywhere. For example, in WWII, one of our fighters got from a mortar (!) Into a German plane. It seems from the second shot.
                Not everything is determined by the software, the size of the goal. You need to have an advantage in speed and maneuver. Significant.
                And this does not solve the hole in the case.
            2. ver_
              ver_ 12 January 2018 16: 58
              +2
              ... in those photos - just shot round hatch in a light body ..- access to the inter-space, where there are a lot of things ..
        2. Sharky
          Sharky 12 January 2018 07: 30
          +2
          Well, how much can this nonsense post.

          And you take the trouble to answer the following questions, so that I believe you:
          1) Why didn’t the rescue operation last so long, when there were opportunities, and the boat sank at a miserable 108 meters?
          2) Why sawed off the bow compartment, and did not raise the boat as a whole, because technically it was possible? Blowing up the bow just swept over the tracks, no?
          3) Why, initially the photo of the raised stern of the boat with a round hole slipped, and then this photo was quickly removed and the boat was shown only from the other side?
          P.S. About debts written off in the amount of 20 billion. dollars I will not say anything. Maybe rumors, maybe not. The above is just the facts.
          a maneuver of evasion is made, LCs are issued .. If any submarine attacked Kursk and destroyed it, this means that the crew of Kursk was in complete lack of respect,

          What a fuck. a maneuver, there an American boat collided with the Kursk nuclear submarine, then fired (a commander scribbled, supposedly the Yaneks heard the sound of torpedo tubes opening) a torpedo, there was a distance of tens of meters. What could be done / undertaken in such a short time?
          1. dvina71
            dvina71 12 January 2018 07: 41
            +7
            Quote: Sharky
            And you take the trouble to answer the following questions, so that I believe you:

            I have already answered these questions several times ..
            1. The rescue capsule tried to dock to the rear hatch a few hours later, as Kursk was found, but could not equalize the pressure .. And they immediately turned to the helpers for help .. They have cameras capable of ensuring tightness of contact even with damage to the contact area.
            2. Because the nose was severely damaged .., in fact, it was kept only at the bottom of the body, there were serious concerns that when lifting, the falling nose could cause even more tragedy.
            3. Why are you pestering photos? Once again .. there are no torpedoes capable of leaving such an even hole in the hull of the boat .. The torpedo speed is about 70 km, h .. well, it doesn’t have such kinematics .. it's just simple physics .. The speed for such a penetration should be measured in hundreds of m / s. Divers cut a round hole .. to find out the degree of damage and find out where to cut it.
            I remind you ..Works were carried out with foreigners .. to hide something is not possible.
            The cause of the explosion was probably torpedo fuel, but the explosion was most likely hydrogen ... because the batteries in Kursk were not just old .., but from a decommissioned boat.
            This is how a hydrogen explosion in a submarine on the surface looks from the side ..

            But that one can be seen how it looks after the explosion .. It is clearly visible that the body was swollen and badly deformed ..

            This is because the boat table at the pier and the hatches were open .., under water .. a completely different effect.
          2. dvina71
            dvina71 12 January 2018 07: 57
            +5
            Quote: Sharky
            What a fuck. a maneuver, there the American boat collided with the Kursk nuclear submarine, then fired (a commander scribbled, supposedly the Yaneks heard the sound of torpedo tubes opening) a torpedo, there was a distance of tens of meters

            Hospodi .. well, where do you get this ..? What dozens * What kind of nonsense .. at this distance no one already thinks about the release of a torpedo .. we must somehow avoid a collision that is fatal for both .. Torpedo tubes in the nose .. a hole in the side .., the boats mean they are crossing in the same course .. Which dozens .. Well, what kind of nonsense .. Shoot a torpedo is not a bullet from Smithandsson’s thigh .., there is a procedure and it is not so fast .. Reports on the target, on the capture, on readiness .. And you have it like that .. how on the passenger car .. jumped out, got a pistol and let's bullet ..
            1. Sharky
              Sharky 12 January 2018 08: 18
              0
              I replied to you in PM, after all, the news here is not about Kursk.
        3. Star
          Star 12 January 2018 09: 08
          +2
          MK48 has a cumulative charge and flash 50mm for her everything is exactly like a bullet sheet of paper.
          And a lot of evidence is presented about the attack on KURSK, but there are no refutations.
          I have familiar submariners and they claim that the cause of the tragedy was a banal reprisal .... in.
          My personal opinion is that they will not tell us about either of these in the near future.
          1. groks
            groks 12 January 2018 09: 37
            0
            MK48 has a cumulative charge

            "Warhead: - high-explosive type" Source http://nevskii-bastion.ru/torpedo-mk48-usa/
            1. Star
              Star 13 January 2018 12: 03
              +1
              Sorry mixed up with MK50
              1. groks
                groks 13 January 2018 16: 24
                0
                And she combined that one. It cannot be otherwise - regardless of the presence of a cumulative funnel, a significant part of the shock wave propagates as if a conventional charge were detonated. Those. in addition to forcing the cumulative jet, there will be damage from deformation from the shock wave - the medium is then liquid. Honestly, it is not very clear how effective the cumulative charge is in the presence of anti-noise coating and lightweight submarine housing.
          2. dvina71
            dvina71 12 January 2018 12: 08
            +2
            Quote: Asterisk
            MK48 has a cumulative charge and flash 50mm for her everything is exactly like a bullet sheet of paper.

            That is ... a hole with a diameter of approx.0.5m made by a cumulative? Seriously? Do you know how this type of ammunition works?
            1. Star
              Star 13 January 2018 12: 09
              +1
              In air, I agree with a diameter of 0,5 m. I can’t make a cumulative charge, but I don’t know in liquid media.
              Can someone tell me?
          3. Monarchist
            Monarchist 12 January 2018 13: 01
            +1
            Kamrad Zvezdochka, I have a familiar submariner, cap two, he also claims that it was a drink *** in + window dressing: it was necessary for the authorities to climb up. And there are a lot of such cases. I can give an example, though from a construction site: 1988, a bricklayer hurried up and did not fix the crate with a brick, and the crane operator began to lift and ... the whole brick woke up. There, my former neighbor was disabled
        4. Galleon
          Galleon 12 January 2018 09: 40
          +1
          Dear dvina, your remark is similar to the bleating of a frightened goat: 50 mm of armor breaks through, for example, Exocet anti-ship missiles, which have a warhead weight of 165 kg. The torpedo MK-48 warhead weight 1575kg. So what about your head? Or is your steel stronger?
          1. bk316
            bk316 12 January 2018 11: 48
            +3
            50mm of armor breaks through, for example, Exozet anti-ship missiles, in which warhead weight is 165 kg. The torpedo MK-48 warhead weight 1575kg

            Have you heard anything about m * v * v?
            1. Galleon
              Galleon 12 January 2018 12: 01
              0
              Heard. And do you know that 50mm of steel of a durable case is nothing special, if we talk about one thickness? Do you think the hulls of surface ships are much thinner? 70mm on em 956pr., Steel, perhaps, another.
              Ok, let's go through m * v * v. Should I count, or will you yourself count your offer? Speed ​​rockets and torpedoes suggest? 280m / s and 20m / s, masses 700kg (165h), and 1579kg. In a previous post, I inadvertently lied with a mass of warheads - it had 294,5kg on a torpedo - weighed in pounds, then recovered. Yes, it’s not even the masses - you really can seriously think that these torpedoes do not penetrate any sides. Dvina71, it seems, may think so - and you too?
              1. bk316
                bk316 12 January 2018 12: 16
                +2
                280m / s and 20m / s, masses 700kg (165h), and 1579kg.

                We believe:
                у экзосета 700*280*280/2=27440000
                у торпеды 1500*20*20/2=300000
                Total kinetic energy of exoset is 91.5 times greater (Almost 100 times CARL !!!)

                Now, they do not pierce about punch. In an explosion with a contact fuse, yes pierce. But to make a round hole to go in and explode there. NO I DO NOT BELIEVE. As an artilleryman, I’ll tell you for sure that to make the right entrance holes (and not dents with torn edges) in the metal, you need speeds of the order of the speed of sound (and here an order of magnitude less) and the corresponding shape of the shell.
          2. dvina71
            dvina71 12 January 2018 12: 06
            +1
            Quote: Galleon
            your cue is like the scare of a scared goat:

            I don’t know what your replica looks like .. but the MK-48 warhead is not 1575kg .. this is the whole thing .. The warhead weighs about 300kg .. and the second .. are you sure what exactly the holes look like from a landmine? A hole with smooth edges, almost perfectly round, several tens of cm in diameter?
            1. Galleon
              Galleon 12 January 2018 13: 43
              +1
              I corrected about my weight error of the warhead torpedoes. Your second argument is not clear to me: what kind of "perfectly flat" hole are we talking about? What photos?
              I understand something else: no arguments will convince me that an explosion occurred due to a malfunctioning torpedo. The Kursk was drowned by the Americans: an unintentional collision and torpedoing of a second submarine. Americans just do not saw the needles of a submarine such as Sea Wolf. I am sorry for the dead unrevenged guys, on whom they blamed for their death. No matter how many temporary preferences Russia received that year, the presumptuous and snickering nation had to get a feeling of guilt for what had happened. Guilt! Maybe then there would be no bombing of Serbia and everything else.
              1. dvina71
                dvina71 12 January 2018 15: 08
                0
                Quote: Galleon
                The Kursk was drowned by the Americans: an unintentional collision and torpedoing of a second submarine.

                Okay .. the Americans sank .. One torpedo .. okay .. Question .. How after a collision and a torpedo’s defeat, the signalman’s post was reduced in size by 10 times .. given that it was jammed with equipment? Do you have a logical explanation for this .. I admit that you are right.
      2. Vadim851
        Vadim851 12 January 2018 07: 15
        +2
        6 TA 533 mm with a total stock of 22 torpedoes - this is the maximum configuration on board. It is unlikely that during the planned transition she carried such a bonus. Even if so, there should be at the same time an explosion of the whole bq, and most likely there will be not one powerful explosion, but a series with a short gap.
        1. dvina71
          dvina71 12 January 2018 07: 22
          +4
          Quote: Vadim851
          Even if so, there must be at the same time an explosion of the whole bq,

          Tolrpeda can’t just detonate like that .. you can knock on it .. In our 70s port, a combat torpedo fell at one end with a halyard, on which it was delivered by crane to the pier and just the bow .. The blow was such a force that a dent in there is still a berth, a torpedo to the scrap, responsible for the cap .. but there was no explosion. Then I had a conversation .. just with the commander of the warhead .. the torpedo is activated only when leaving the boat and only after activation the warhead is capable of detonating ..
          1. Vadim851
            Vadim851 12 January 2018 07: 32
            0
            Thank you, I imagine the reaction when we dropped it, our charge from 152mm fell to the bottom, cost fortunately.
            Then the truth should not jerk, but if directly in the compartment the emergency is associated with the action of high temperatures? A slightly different situation is simple.
            1. dvina71
              dvina71 12 January 2018 07: 50
              0
              Quote: Vadim851
              imagine the reaction when dropped

              The crane operator turned gray .. I know him .. I knew better .., peace be upon him ..
            2. bk316
              bk316 12 January 2018 12: 19
              +2
              our charge from 152mm fell to the bottom, cost fortunately.

              Haha similarly. Everyone almost managed it. And I stuttered for about 30 minutes ....
          2. Brylevsky
            Brylevsky 12 January 2018 07: 51
            +8
            Quote: dvina71
            torpedo is activated only when leaving the boat

            Exactly. The trigger leans back, the engine valve opens, and energy components begin to flow into the combustion chamber ... Well, or in the battery, a chemical reaction starts if the torpedo is electric. But even after leaving the TA, the warhead of the torpedo will not immediately explode when it hits something — there is a complex system of safety devices. The first stage of protection is removed by folding the trigger hook ... the second ... but I already forgot about the second one - twenty years have passed ... There is the last stage of protection. This is a point on the trajectory of the torpedo, in which its homing equipment is turned on. An impeller is built into the torpedo fuses. Under the pressure of the water running on it, it rotates and gives out electrical impulses to the equipment of a non-contact fuse, which "subtracts" them from the value set in it. When the difference becomes "0", the ASN torpedoes turn on. The torpedo becomes dangerous, contact and non-contact fuses come into a fighting position ... I think so, if my memory serves me right ...
            1. groks
              groks 13 January 2018 16: 42
              0
              The fact is that all explosives, with sufficiently strong heating, ignite. We have an oxygen balance close to zero, i.e. it will start to burn both in a closed volume and in any environment. If we have a closed volume, then when ignited, the pressure will begin to grow very quickly and combustion will go into detonation. And even in the open air, all explosives during combustion will go to detonation with a sufficient amount. Those. it is enough to heat the torpedo hull to the ignition temperature of the explosive and we will have a detonation of the main charge, even if there is no detonator at all.
              1. dvina71
                dvina71 13 January 2018 20: 35
                +1
                Quote: groks
                We have an oxygen balance close to zero, i.e. it will start to burn both in a closed volume and in any environment. If we have a closed volume,

                The most interesting thing is that no traces of high temperature were found in the Kursk building.
    3. Andrey Yuryevich
      Andrey Yuryevich 12 January 2018 06: 47
      +1
      Quote: kos 75
      What could it so have smelled of?

      he could gasp hydrogen, as they noted that the boat had problems with batteries.
    4. LSA57
      LSA57 12 January 2018 06: 49
      +1
      Quote: kos 75
      What could it so have smelled of?

      yes who will say ... and no one will ever know
  3. Dormidont
    Dormidont 12 January 2018 06: 51
    +3
    Well, after another 10-15 years, information will begin to leak that the British drowned it
    1. Black water
      Black water 12 January 2018 07: 10
      0
      maybe earlier ....
    2. PSih2097
      PSih2097 12 January 2018 07: 11
      +4
      Quote: Dormidont
      Well, after another 10-15 years, information will begin to leak that the British drowned it

      With the same success, it can be assumed that DEPL is now working to ensure drug trafficking from Latin America to the USA ...
  4. Herculesic
    Herculesic 12 January 2018 06: 51
    +3
    Where did they get such information, if they also didn’t find any debris close? Can’t even determine her location? Or do the Yankees know much more than others, and accidentally blurted out too much? ??
    1. Sharky
      Sharky 12 January 2018 06: 59
      +1
      The main thing is to shout louder so that everyone would hear and accept the only true version. It is always so with mattresses.
    2. LSA57
      LSA57 12 January 2018 07: 01
      +3
      Quote: Herkulesich
      Where did they get such information, if they also didn’t find any debris close?

      learn materiel
      Previously, it was also reported about a single explosion, which was recorded in the area of ​​the loss of the submarine. Initially, the message came from the specialists of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty Organization.
  5. Black water
    Black water 12 January 2018 07: 12
    0
    hi everyone, is anyone in the know, is the search still ongoing or have you already turned off?
  6. bald
    bald 12 January 2018 07: 19
    0
    The maximum immersion depth of this boat is 300m. - does not converge. But the 22nd torpedoes, on average, each has an explosive from 300 - 400 kg - here it converges, based on a 6t explosion. At depth, they couldn’t torpedo it. That is, either a mine, or some kind of technical failure of one of the torpedoes and detonation - and not all. Hydrogen from batteries is not a blast. Need a fragment of the boat - to say for sure.
  7. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 12 January 2018 07: 21
    +1
    I tried to explain, but it turned out that I confused even more. A strange story.
  8. foreman
    foreman 12 January 2018 07: 34
    0
    the Americans were silent for a long time, again they stir something up!
  9. XII Legion
    XII Legion 12 January 2018 07: 37
    15
    And even the versions as I understand it - no ...
  10. pvv113
    pvv113 12 January 2018 07: 55
    +2
    the explosion occurred at a depth of about 400 meters and amounted to almost 6 tons of TNT

    Where did the Americans get such information? Surely involved
  11. Vard
    Vard 12 January 2018 08: 16
    +1
    The sea knows how to keep secrets .... How many ships went missing ... and were found dozens of years later ... Not for nothing that the profession of a sailor is still among the ten most dangerous ...
  12. AleksPol
    AleksPol 12 January 2018 09: 07
    +2
    The US Naval Intelligence Agency has already disowned this statement by its employee, according to Russia 24 said. So again the zhurnalyugi tried to run ahead of the horse. laughing

    "The author of this report, Bruce Rule, left the department several years ago. The US Navy has nothing to do with this publication. The conclusions presented in it belong exclusively to the former analyst of the agency," a spokesman said in a statement.
  13. Maz
    Maz 12 January 2018 09: 44
    +1
    Quote: iliitch
    As far as I understand, 400m is a lot. 6 tons is a detonation.

    Americans are masters of nonsense. There are depths on the reference points of 200m. 6 tons of explosives at once - ???? And where did the firewood come from? Chtoli themselves undermined? Argentina did not seem to have an aeustic network. There's no point. So fake. An impulse of six tons was supposed to be marked on a warship in a radius of 200km500km on warships. Not to mention the wave and the fishermen and more, right down to the satellites. The Americans are lying.
  14. renics
    renics 12 January 2018 09: 50
    +1
    US Naval Intelligence (ONI) officials have denied preparing a special report on the causes of the death of the Argentinean submarine San Juan. belong exclusively to the former analyst of the department, "the intelligence spokesman said in a statement.
  15. gaura
    gaura 12 January 2018 10: 11
    +1
    Either passenger planes disappeared, then a whole submarine disappeared. "Put the ruble, put the steward, here is the Bermuda Triangle" (c)
  16. pavelty
    pavelty 12 January 2018 10: 25
    0
    On the basis of what was such a conclusion made?
    1. Monarchist
      Monarchist 12 January 2018 12: 39
      0
      Pavelntia, I think: some John Smith from the US Naval Intelligence decided to "cut cabbage" and put forward such a version
      Quote: alstr
      By the way, why no one mentions the possibility of a mine explosion. Especially considering that during the war of the 80s there were a lot of them.

      The version is quite valid
  17. The comment was deleted.
  18. unignm
    unignm 12 January 2018 11: 25
    0
    oooh. when the plane disappeared after they shot down the same in Ukraine. Now the submarine has disappeared, we are waiting for underwater surprises.
  19. Berkut24
    Berkut24 12 January 2018 11: 36
    +1
    Excuse for not looking for anything. Everything is in the dust that the current spread throughout the globe. And then the Russians with their expedition - and if we find?
  20. g1washntwn
    g1washntwn 12 January 2018 11: 36
    0
    U.S. Navy intelligence (or whatever they like to do, as if they were all independent "investigations" of former employees) sent to study the recording of an incomprehensible signal received in the area where the submarine disappeared into the organization for controlling nuclear weapons. For what purpose? Why is there such confidence that the 6-7 ton equivalent has been swept away by an ultra-strong (!) Case so that now you can’t even find small debris?
    Given that the United States has publicly announced its readiness (read - work has long been unofficial) to develop low-power nuclear charges. What will happen to the submarine, which they decided to use as a test subject, if they explode such an experimental nuclear charge of ultra-low power inside? Is it possible that the intelligence of the Navy just tested whether the nuclear nature of the explosion will be revealed or not?
    If the version of the cause of death is nuclear weapons and is taken as possible. Was such an explosion external (to the side of San Juan from the outside) or was the explosion inside? If inside - an experiment error, or was that what was intended?
  21. Monarchist
    Monarchist 12 January 2018 12: 27
    0
    Quote: Mestny
    ceased

    I need Americans as a blind mirror, but your version that the Americans were involved (read between the lines) seems tense to me.
  22. Conductor
    Conductor 13 January 2018 08: 40
    0
    But a diesel-electric submarine, even if it was German 400 meters away, how could it get away as with a thrasher, failed in a layer with a lower density?