The death of "Kursk" - no more secrets?

359


12 August marks the anniversary of the death of the nuclear submarine Kursk, which perished in the Barents Sea in 2000. It was one of the newest and most reliable submarine cruisers. However, 118 crew members died.

Around this catastrophe, so many plausible, and not very plausible versions of what happened, that many citizens of the country did not know the truth were accounted for. The main versions of the tragedy were considered a collision with another submarine, an explosion of a rocket in one of the compartments, an explosion on a mine left over from World War II.

The official version was about the explosion of a torpedo. The government commission that conducted the investigation dwelled on this scenario, since it can most easily be mislead by ordinary people who are not familiar with the intricacies fleet.

But this version does not quite correspond to reality. The fact is that in the nose compartment, where, following the results of the investigation, an explosion of training torpedoes occurred, there were also rack torpedoes (they are just fighting ones). So what could explode if there was no combat torpedo stuffing? According to the official version, the explosion occurred as a result of leakage of hydrogen peroxide. But in order to accept it, it is necessary at the same time to admit that either completely illiterate people or suicides served on the Kursk. But since it is well known to all that the entire crew was highly qualified, then, accordingly, nothing like this could happen. Thus, this version is untenable.

Another version that does not stand up to scrutiny is the version about a blast on a mine of times of war. This can be very easily refuted. Firstly, the damage that remains from such ammunition has a characteristic shape, which is simply impossible to confuse with something else. And if it really happened, then no other versions simply would not have arisen. Secondly, the mine of those times could not cause so serious damage to the boat to cause its immediate death. In addition, the training grounds on which the exercises were carried out have been used for similar purposes for more than a decade, they have been repeatedly tested, so it’s impossible to say that a mine can still be found here. Moreover, the Kursk itself is equipped with a “mine detection path”. Thus, this version is not true.

The death of "Kursk" - no more secrets?


The third version is the most prosperous and even more proven - the assumption that the Kursk was killed in a collision with another submarine (or, to be precise, as a result of torpedoing). Most of the relatives of the dead sailors are confident that their loved ones died because the nuclear submarine Kursk was torpedoed by the American submarine Memphis. In addition, among them there are rumors that after the tragedy, the Americans wrote off a large debt to the Russians.

At the same time, the President of the Russian Federation V.Putin, speaking in one of the interviews, answering the question about what actually happened to the submarine, answered that she drowned ... By the way, the death of the Kursk was the first big accident in time finding Putin at the head of state.



The reasons for the death of the Kursk are explained by the presence of a hole in the side of the boat, as well as evidence that during the Russian exercises in the same area were American and British submarines. In addition, on the part of the ship that we managed to lift from the bottom of the sea, you can clearly see a flat round hole, and even more, the edges of this hole are bent inwards, which indicates an external impact. And some American experts even claim that such a hole is a kind of trademark of the American torpedo MK-48, which is able to pass through the steel lining thanks to a special mechanism that is on the nose and is capable of melting copper.



According to this version, the attack on the "Kursk" was carried out while tracking the US submarines "Memphis" and "Toledo" of the Russian ship.

Moreover, during the search and rescue operation until the moment when the situation was not yet controlled by the authorities, information was leaked to the media that light green rescue buoys were found near the site of the death of the Kursk, although Russians only use white and red. Another evidence of the plausibility of this version is the reception of signals for help, which took the cruiser "Peter the Great" 13-14 August. And if initially the rescuers hoped that these signals were sent from the Kursk, then later, after decoding them, it became clear that they came from a foreign submarine (they were fed by a mechanical radiator, and they are not used on Russian submarines). And the posthumous note of the captain of the submarine cruiser clearly indicates that at that time there was no one left on the ship who could ask for help.



It should also be noted that at the time when the anti-submarine squadron planes were alarmed in search of the submarine, the pilots found oil spots left by another submarine. It is clear that suspicion immediately fell on the British and Americans, whose submarines were there. But if the British zealously defended their innocence, demanding evidence from the Russians, the Americans behaved more restrained, as if they had something to hide. But the truth was that: on the seabed, rescuers found the fencing of the conning tower, which is usually installed on American submarines. Thus, from the very beginning everything was very clear, until the authorities tried to mislead the civilian population as much as possible.

A few days after the tragedy, a conversation took place between the presidents of the two states, and, obviously, they managed to come to an agreement. After a very short time, Clinton announced that the United States of America was refusing to launch a missile defense program. In addition, Russia forgave a large debt and even gave a loan of 10 billion. In addition, there are rumors that ships from America also came to carry out the operation to lift the bodies of the dead crew members and the ship's hull itself. And why were all of them awarded orders of Courage, and the captain - the Hero of Russia before the official end of the investigation? Why did not the Minister of Defense and Commander-in-Chief of the Navy resign? And in the end, why no one called the names of those responsible for the tragedy?


Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

359 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +4
    10 May 2012
    put a plus article, but no plus ... either does not immediately appear

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ASRZDNstXEI
    1. Aleksey67
      +10
      10 May 2012
      As it "got" already ... How much can you be like "logs" with their Katyn and the Jews with their Holocaust? It is not typical for Russian people to "PR" on the bones of their compatriots. We remember our heroes. Prove that the amers are to blame, let them answer, and you don't need to throw shit on the fan
      1. +10
        10 May 2012
        Quote: Aleksey67
        Somehow "got" already


        offer to understand and forgive? ... maybe on May 9 you can stop celebrating? ... burn all history books? .. do you even think before writing something? ....
        1. Aleksey67
          +3
          10 May 2012
          Quote: Krilion
          offer to understand and forgive ?.

          No, you need to remember, but without "versions"
          Quote: Krilion
          maybe stop celebrating May 9? ... burn all history books?

          I leave these calls on your conscience, I did not offer this
          Quote: Krilion
          Do you even think before writing something? ....

          I think, yes. I am writing consciously
          1. +15
            10 May 2012
            A friend of the submariner voiced this version immediately after the death of the boat. Who is who and the submariners know all the best about us better than us. But the insidiousness of amers is known to all.
          2. +9
            11 May 2012
            I fully support the author Krilion! And you Aleksey67, you really need to THINK! before you say anything! I remember how you "closed" the mouths of all Russians who live on the territory of the same RUSSIA, which is temporarily called "Ukraine"! I recommend that you think carefully about these ...
        2. Odinplys
          +26
          10 May 2012
          Quote: Krilion
          offer to understand and forgive? ... maybe on May 9 you can stop celebrating? ... burn all history books? .. do you even think before writing something? ....

          Suppose this is true ... by malice or not ... it doesn’t matter ...
          And what do you propose to do then ... ???
          To start a war from the USA in the conditions of utter ruin ... dooming yourself to losing in advance ... To strike a retaliation strike at nuclear weapons ... What are the options ..
          There is only one option ... to extract the maximum benefit from the current situation and, most importantly, to gain time ... for getting on your feet and re-equipping Russia ....
          Therefore, I believe, as if there weren’t ... our submarines who died ... as befits the Warriors ... provided the country ... with the necessary time ... So it is not in vain ...
          And the answer ... in case of proof ... of this version ... Do not hesitate ... will
          Memory of the dead submariners ...
          1. kasha
            +16
            10 May 2012
            Dear OdinPlys! I completely agree with your point of view on this aspect !! At that moment, Putin had a choice to recognize torpedoing and start a nuclear fire! Or leave it like that, somehow! He is certainly well done! I did everything correctly! Saved the world from nuclear confrontation, got the maximum for the country, all the same it is the year 2000, remember !! And then, who doesn’t ask how he felt? I’m sure his finger was reaching for the red button !! Well done man !! And every swamp like a swamp kindles a quagmire! They want us again in the face !!! It is not clear how I would behave in his place !!! It’s a pity for the guys, the sailors, their eternal memory !!! But only here they are, and RUSSIAN soldiers to give their lives for the homeland! After all, soldiers do not die but turn into white cranes !!!!
            1. postman
              +6
              11 May 2012
              Quote: kasha
              Putin had a choice to recognize torpedoing and start a nuclear fire!

              Nonsense, no "Nuclear Fire" would have started.
              you try to convey it
              Quote: kasha
              He is certainly well done! I did everything correctly!
              to the relatives of the victims?
              If the fault of the Americans were recognized, then they would then receive decent compensation for lost relatives. from the same Americans.
              And Americans would look like a clown. Talk about an "evil empire" would disappear right away.
              And "licking" what has already been licked, there is no practical sense, for 12 years everything shines.
              1. kasha
                -1
                11 May 2012
                Dear Postman !! In this case, you reason like a child !!! You do not take into account public opinion when recognizing torpedoing at the state level! This led to the collapse of the government, the institution of the president, the leveling of confidence in him, if he did not take radical measures !! The coming to power of radical politicians, in the wake of a belligerent people !! The consequences of such a scenario are highly predictable !!! This is a confrontation with the United States economically, politically, and subsequently the military aspect !!! As for the United States, it would be naive to assume that they would acknowledge the fact of a submarine clash! Since this led to significant advances in their highest team who made such a dangerous incident !!! This would lead to the loss of US authority in the world as a democratic state and pushed the world to a new arms race !! In connection with the foregoing, it makes no sense to talk about compensation to relatives on the part of the culprit's power !!! I repeat the man who decided to connect his fate with the army, the police must understand that in this profession you can die prematurely and give your life with dignity !! Otherwise, you need to go to the office for example !! And relatives understand this too! The army is not a ski trip! Your answer is extremely incomprehensible to me! And perhaps you wrote this to mislead others !!!
                1. postman
                  +14
                  11 May 2012
                  Quote: kasha
                  you reason like a child!

                  Well, you bent ...... in my year.
                  Public opinion ... in 2000?
                  A few facts:
                  -Blockade CCCP around West Berlin
                  -After the war, the Americans bombed our airfields in the Far East, shot down planes.
                  -1950 - 1953 Korean War
                  - 1962 Caribbean crisis
                  -VIETNAM WAR:
                  there were separate episodes of a direct clash between the USA and the USSR, as well as the deaths of civilians from the USSR.

                  The first battles in the skies of North Vietnam using surface-to-air missiles against US aircraft that bombed without declaring war were conducted by Soviet military specialists.

                  In 1966, the Pentagon with the approval of the President of the United States and Congress allowed commanders of aircraft carrier-strike groups (AUG) to destroy in peacetime Soviet submarinesfound within a radius of one hundred miles.
                  In 1968 year Soviet nuclear submarine K-10 in the South China Sea off the coast of Vietnam for 13 hours unnoticed at a depth of 50 meters followed under the bottom of the aircraft carrier "Enterprise" and fulfilled conditional attacks on it with torpedoes and cruise missilesat risk of destruction.

                  During the war, radio-technical intelligence ships of the USSR Pacific Fleet were actively working in the South China Sea. There were two incidents with them. In 1969, in the area south of Saigon, the "Hydrophone" ship was fired upon by South Vietnamese (US ally) patrol boats. A fire broke out, part of the equipment was out of order.
                  In another episode, the Peleng ship was attacked by American bombers. Bombs were dropped along the bow and stern of the ship.

                  On June 2, 1967, American aircraft fired at the "Turkestan" motor ship of the Far Eastern Shipping Company in the port of Kamfa. 7 people were injured, two of them died.
                  As a result of the competent actions of the Soviet representatives of the merchant fleet in Vietnam and the employees of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Americans were proved their guilt in the death of civilians. The US government has appointed families of deceased sailors a lifetime benefit payment.
                  There have been cases of damage to other merchant ships.

                  Retaliation nuclear strikes?
                  Public opinion?
                  The rise to power of radical politicians?


                  This will not lead to ordinary punches of retaliation!
                  On March 18, 1945, eight groups of American Flying Fortress bombers, accompanied by Mustang fighters, headed north from 13 to 15 above the Soviet troops on the eastern bank of the Oder River, north of the town of Kustrin. American aircraft were pursued by German Me 13 and FV 30 fighters.
                  When a group of American aircraft approached Maureen (35 km northwest of Kyustrin), at that time 6 Soviet Yak 3 fighters were in the air over the Morin area. Soviet pilots, having noticed German fighters chasing the Americans, attacked the Germans, but in turn they were attacked American fighters.
                  Soviet pilots, clearly distinguishing between American planes, evaded air combat with them, but despite this, American fighters continued to pursue Soviet planes.
                  As a result, American fighter attacks six Soviet aircraft were shot down, And two Soviet pilots died and one was seriously injured.

                  I hardly
                  Quote: kasha
                  like a child
                  reasoning.
                  Even the death of a submarine with a crew, even if it is proved that the Americans did it, is not a reason for declaring war and launching a nuclear strike.
                  But the fact that the Americans did it (if it really is), really led to 100% compensation for damage, a life pension to the relatives of the victims (by American standards), would relieve tension in society and the relatives of the victims would be calm.

                  But behind the backs of their people, behind the backs of the mothers (wives, children) of the victims, they QUIETLY agree on some sort of barter (standings) with murderers- IT IS Vile, and not far-sighted political wisdom.


                  Quote: kasha
                  Your answer is extremely incomprehensible to me! And perhaps you wrote this to mislead others !!!

                  Listen, stop carrying the blizzard and don't play their secret motivations in public, transfer to others.
                  1. kasha
                    -3
                    11 May 2012
                    I am immensely grateful for the interesting facts you cited, but you, as a convinced democrat, Westerner, and Putin's hater! (Although it’s interesting to me who exactly in your place did you want to see ??) You contradict yourself, it’s called DANGEROUS CONFRONTATION !!! In 2000, Russia and the Russian people could not allow this to happen !! Because of one eyeliner! The leader, and not only he is sober, assessed the situation, and did the right thing in this aspect !! And as for years and mind, there is folk wisdom !! And then your hints are not appropriate until you have accurate evidence! And so the urine of God's dew !!!
                    1. postman
                      +5
                      12 May 2012
                      I'm definitely not
                      Quote: kasha
                      Democrat, Westerner, and Putin Hater
                      .
                      Theoretically, I am more impressed by the works of Prince PA Kropotkin (intelligence officer, prisoner, fugitive, emigrant and "good-natured" anarchist).
                      In practice (political structure), I am inclined to model implemented in Schweizerische Eidgenossenschaft.

                      Quote: kasha
                      Although I'm interestedтbut whom
                      -no such people at the present stage, unfortunately. But certainly not from .....
                      It would be better if the military.

                      Quote: kasha
                      Contradict yourself
                      There is no contradiction. The above list (by no means complete) shows that DANGEROUS CONFRONTATION did not lead to armed conflict and the exchange of attacks. Yes, and could not bring.
                      Both here and there, by no means fools ruled and understood what the blow of retaliation could lead to.

                      Quote: kasha
                      The leader and not only he is sober, appreciated

                      Yeah. Sober, almost 5 days of stupor.
                      KING: "... You tell me. What happened with the submarine?
                      (Tell me. What happened to the submarine? ")
                      PUTIN: "she drowned" (TRANSLATOR: "It sunk" - she sank)

                      Quote: kasha
                      And about the years and the mind is folk wisdom

                      I do not quite understand, you want to compete with me "mind"?

                      Quote: kasha
                      And then your hints are not appropriate until you have accurate evidence!

                      Let me draw your attention to the fact that "hints" (blizzard) YOU USED:
                      Quote: kasha
                      maybe you wrote this to mislead others !!!

                      But not me.

                      Quote: kasha
                      until you have accurate
                      ....And do you have?

                      Quote: kasha
                      And so the urine of God's dew !!!
                      - It is nice that you know the folklore. Only this is out of place.

                      "Urinate in the eyes - all God's dew"
                      In ancient Egypt, human urine was actively used as a medicine ... the son of an Egyptian pharaoh suffered from blindness for 10 years, which no local healer could cure. In the city of Buto, the oracle once predicted to him that the woman’s eyes should be washed with urine, never previously not cheating on her husband. And ....
                      His wife’s urine didn’t help! As, incidentally, the urine is still a good hundred ladies.
                      Sass.v in this way he achieved his recovery (most likely a placebo effect, but nonetheless). As a result, the son of the pharaoh drove out his unfaithful wife, and married the one who cured him.


                      Or are you an admirer of urinoterrapia?
                      1. kasha
                        -1
                        12 May 2012
                        Well, at the expense of competing with your mind! Where am I to you, the world-wide recognized scientific genius ?? SELF-ASSESSMENT is clearly overpriced (also an academician to me !!) No urine unfortunately I flush into the toilet! Your point of view, if you would, or maybe there wouldn’t be, they say so in the markets, and in the kitchen with your wife or with a drunk friend! But when you have YARSA behind you, and Peshinga and Tridene have been instructed before you, such arguments as yours are just an anecdote! I see you just bang everything and everything! It’s just that they’re not doing everything right, if only everything is correct, paradise !! Go google find me more arguments! Professor
                      2. postman
                        0
                        12 May 2012
                        Quote: kasha
                        kasha

                        What a slippery you are.
                      3. zol1
                        -3
                        12 May 2012
                        Porridge, do not brew porridge, otherwise you will have to sip later! And the "postman" is right in all respects! So keep licking redfin!
                      4. Docker76
                        +2
                        14 May 2012
                        Quote: zol1
                        So keep licking

                        anyone that hurts speaks about that tongue tongue tongue
                      5. Docker76
                        +1
                        14 May 2012
                        Theoretically, I am more impressed by the works of Prince PA Kropotkin (intelligence officer, prisoner, fugitive, emigrant and "good-natured" anarchist)

                        I think this is the future of the swamps)))
                        PS I am also a Pioneer !!!! Yes
                  2. DERWISH
                    0
                    12 May 2012
                    POSSIBLE THIS IS REALLY CORRECT !!!! YOU +
                  3. Reader
                    +5
                    15 May 2012
                    I absolutely agree with the Postman! The situation had to be used to the maximum benefit for the country. To openly admit the fact of torpedoing our submarine by the Americans and demand an international (so that we are not condemned later in bias) investigation (I would also demand that the captain of the American boat be handed over for trial in our country). It would be fair in relation to their people, to the victims and their relatives, in the end. And I would not have to say with a crooked grin to the whole world that "... she drowned." Bastard, when I remember this vile face ... angry And the people would be completely for the President, such unanimous support to the first person would be for the first time in many, many years. And the fish-eyed could remain in the memory of the people as a true patriot, and not a traitor, as now. Shame! Pain! And a shame! And for our sailors - the land rest in peace!
                2. Pessimist
                  +2
                  13 May 2012
                  Quote: kasha
                  This would lead to the loss of US authority in the world as a democratic state and pushed the world to a new arms race !! In connection with the foregoing, it makes no sense to talk about compensation to relatives on the part of the culprit's power !!!

                  Funny comments! How old are you, friend ??? Has the arms race (from the US side) stopped ??? Is there fewer American military bases in the world? A direct "hit" on the United States would have brought Russia good political results at that moment, especially if there was an evidence base in the form of material evidence! Our government just turned out to be "liquid", and this is sad ... Blessed memory of the guys ...
              2. DERWISH
                +2
                12 May 2012
                And Americans would look like a clown. Talk about an "evil empire" would disappear right away.
                And to "lick" what has already been licked, there is no practical sense, for 12 years everything would be flattering VV PUTIN I THINK I MADE THE RIGHT CHOICE !!! !!! although from my point of view, ONCE AMERA HAVE BEEN BELIEVED YOURSELF IT WOULD BE MORE SERIOUS TO PRESENT !!!! ETERNAL MEMORY TO THE DEAD !!!
          2. +5
            11 May 2012
            Quote: OdinPlys
            Suppose this is true ... by malice or not ... it doesn’t matter ... And what do you propose to do then ... ??? Start a war from the USA in the conditions of utter ruin ... dooming yourself to losing beforehand .. . Strike a retaliation strike at nuclear weapons ... What are the options ... There is only one option ... to extract the maximum benefit from the current situation and, most importantly, to gain time ... for getting on your feet and re-equipping Russia ....


            no one calls for war, because even in the American submarine version there was only a local incident and not an action. aimed at the beginning of full-scale hostilities .. this is time ... secondly, the perpetrators of the incident should be clearly identified regardless of the person ... thirdly, money should be stripped from the Americans for the lost submarines, as well as funds collected for payment of pensions and benefits to all relatives of the deceased ... and this is the minimum ...
          3. 0
            11 May 2012
            Yes, then he did the right thing, but now you need to open the whole truth to the whole world. We want to know this, and for many we would be a good example of who and what America is, otherwise this meanness will always be covered by them. And even so, missile defense is beginning to advance.
          4. ytqnhfk
            0
            12 May 2012
            I want to say that a bright memory for sailors would not happen to officers; they died for their family homeland and a peaceful sky above our heads! REMEMBER ETERNAL! Was at the monument very beautiful, I remembered!
      2. Dimon
        -19
        10 May 2012
        Quote: Aleksey67
        How long can you be like "logs" with their Katyn and Jews with their Holocaust?

        So do not be likened, ruslim, but no one is likened to you ...
        1. Aleksey67
          +11
          10 May 2012
          Quote: Dimon
          do not be likened, ruslim

          And for this you fag festering, however the Internet ... but I will try to figure you out and drive to Israel
          1. Dimon
            -18
            10 May 2012
            hear pidril epan, Dimon Andreenko my name is, come and sew up your throat will slam ...
            1. azgard
              +17
              10 May 2012
              Dimon,
              if you don’t see Russia, then what kind of uya you are sitting here on a Russian site and writing in Russian ??? do you live in Israel ?? so sit there and keep quiet and we will deal with our problems here !!!
              1. Dimon
                -3
                10 May 2012
                Russia has nothing to do with Magadan itself, it’s just that some residents ** are. would pass by, but saw a collision ...
            2. 11Goor11
              +7
              10 May 2012
              You're so brave that you’re already hiding under a proxy ...
      3. +9
        10 May 2012
        Take it. Read the book.V.D Ryazantsev

        "In the wake of death."
        The book of Vice Admiral VD Ryazantsev, Deputy Chief of the Main Staff of the Russian Navy for Combat Training, a member of the Government Commission for Investigating the Causes and Circumstances of the Kursk Submarine Disaster, is dedicated to the history of the service and the death of this submarine. Rich factual material, unknown or incomprehensible to non-specialists, is presented in detail, consistently and in an easily accessible form.
        This study provides comprehensive explanations for the chain of fatal events that led to the death of the K-2000 Kursk submarine in August 141. The author lists all those whose negligence and neglect of official duties caused this heavy loss for the entire fleet. The author especially dwells on the analysis of the incompetent and incompetent actions of the rescue forces of the Northern Fleet in the course of an inept and belated operation to assist a boat in disaster.
        The author also pays due attention to debunking the vile myth of the "American torpedo attack", as well as the entire mountains of deliberate lies accompanying this myth that were born by the command of the Northern Fleet in order to conceal their own guilt in the death of the newest submarine missile carrier. Apparently, this is why the book, inconvenient for the influential military elite, written by the author back in 2005, has not yet been published in print and therefore is little known in the homeland.
        Leave the guys at rest!
        http://www.murders.ru/Kyrs-s-s-sk.html
        1. nickel
          +3
          10 May 2012
          Thanks for the link.
          1. +3
            11 May 2012
            I join: downloaded and read with pleasure = respect! smile
        2. +2
          11 May 2012
          I have a question about this hole: it’s in a lightweight case, but what’s strong? After all, if there was an explosion, then only inside.
          1. +6
            11 May 2012
            Read the book. Spend a little time. Questions will disappear immediately. To the holes. Questions to people with big stars on uniform will appear.
            At that time I served on the ships of the SF. And I remember all the window dressing and tyranny of command.
            For example. Collect all the crews of the ships of the 2 divisions of anti-submarine ships, and 7 operational squadrons on the parade ground adjacent to the quays. Leaving only the guard on the ladder. And the ship attendant. Having removed the special watch БЧ5 for survivability and the duty officer on БЧ5. And 2 hours to talk about how he will deal with hazing.
            The question is why?
            The ship is alive while people are on it!
        3. postman
          +1
          12 May 2012
          Quote: komTMG
          Take it. Read the book.V.D Ryazantsev

          thanks, read.
          Gorshkov, he clearly does not like
          But the cause (s) of the death of the submarine remained unconfirmed.
          "It is quite obvious that the death of the K-141" Kursk "occurred as a result of miscalculations in the design of the nuclear submarine 949 A of the project, its combat systems and weapons, as a result of the low professional training of the officers of the headquarters, directorates of the Navy and the seafarers of the fleets
          These are only his assumptions, not confirmed either by calculations or by investigative experiments.

          The dead on the submarine, anyway. But alive click to be sure that they will not quit, as then.
          And relatives want to know the truth.

          In the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, no one canceled the honor courts of officers.
        4. DERWISH
          +1
          12 May 2012
          SO THAT SAME THEN AMERA THROUGH AFTER THIS ???? DO NOT SEE KURSK SEA AND THE TEAM TO ACCUSE THE NEGLIGENCE !!!! ALL THIS IT ON THE APPLES NEVER HAS BEEN AND WILL NOT BE !!!!!
        5. Pessimist
          +2
          13 May 2012
          Thank! Good link!
      4. George IV
        +6
        11 May 2012
        It is not typical for the Russian people to show disrespect to other nations, calling the Poles "logs", the faiths - the Jews, and the Americans - the Amers.
        1. Vadim555
          +3
          11 May 2012
          Quote: Georg iv

          Foreman avatar
          Offline
          Georg iv UA Today, 01:13
          - 0 +
          It is not typical for the Russian people to show disrespect to other nations, calling the Poles "logs", the faiths - the Jews, and the Americans - the Amers.
          О


          During the war the Germans were called dismissive-Hans and Fritz.
          The war ended in victory and the Germans again became Germans for us.
          Now there is a war against us again, so, order them to click officially?
          This war will end again with our Victory, then we will think about how to call the rest.
          And now, alas.
          1. George IV
            +1
            11 May 2012
            With such reasoning, the "war" will never end for you.
            And I do not advise you to consider demagoguery on the "Internet fronts" as active hostilities.
            And to compare that war with what you call "war" is somehow blasphemous in relation to veterans. For them, the war was definitely not a reason to offend the nation. We are not Anglo-Saxons, this is not our method.
            1. Vadim555
              +3
              11 May 2012
              Quote: Georg iv
              And to compare that war with what you call "war" is somehow blasphemous in relation to veterans


              No one compares the Second World War with the war that is being waged against us now.
              Now there is a "civilized" war.
              The result of any war is a reduction in the population in the first place.
              How much has the population of the former USSR been reduced over the past 25 years?
              Put yourself the right question and try to answer it yourself and many questions will disappear.
        2. DERWISH
          +3
          12 May 2012
          AMERICA LET'S HAPPY THAT THEY ARE NAMED AFTER ALL OF THEIR WORLD TRANSACTIONS AT HITLER'S DIFFERENCES AND THEN THE EASY WERE !!!!!!! AND THE RUSSIANS ARE NOT CALLED ANYTHING BECAUSE RUSSIAN ALWAYS !!!!! AND THE WORLD LIVING HAS NEVER APPLYED BECAUSE EVER ALWAYS RECOGNIZED WITH ANY NATION AND ANY PEOPLE !!!! ONLY M MAYERS CAN REWRITE THE HISTORY AND ONE TWO 1 PLACE ONLY TO WAIT ONE LONG TIME. ? OR I AM NOT RIGHT ?????:
    2. +11
      10 May 2012
      Thank you Valery Boval for the article! We must not forget about this. And do not pay attention if such articles are called "PR on the bones"
      1. 755962
        +12
        10 May 2012
        2 weeks after the disaster, despite initial denials, the American special services admit in the NY Times that one of their submarines, Memphis, was indeed in the zone to observe the Kursk exercises. At the same time, it becomes known that the CIA director, George Tenett, secretly arrived in Moscow 3 days after the death of Kursk.
        A few days later, America cancels its Russian debt, while it provides a loan of 10 billion dollars. Someday all the secret will come true! Eternal memory to the dead sailors!
        1. -3
          10 May 2012
          Well, it was. And yes, arrived. AND? which of this?
          1. teves
            -3
            10 May 2012
            I read the article and comments of smart and not quite people and still did not understand - why should the Americans torpedo a Russian boat? Maybe they did "make friends"? And the most important thing: everyone somehow elegantly bypasses the question of Putin in this hard-hitting story! Well, everyone was silent about him? Maybe Vladimir Vladimirovich will eventually tell the truth to his people? ...
            1. +1
              10 May 2012
              and what do you think is true? if it was not torpedoed
        2. veryalone
          -4
          11 May 2012
          Delirium from beginning to end
          1. US intelligence agencies cannot influence the press in any way
          2. The United States did not forgive any debt of the Russian Federation
          3. What is this SECRET visit. that everyone knows about?
    3. number1
      -3
      11 May 2012
      The biggest minus is that the bombers did not understand why the explosion occurred. request
      1. -1
        11 May 2012
        this is where you got that you didn’t understand why the explosion occurred? the explosion occurred in a torpedo. And they found a torpedo launcher, which was spoiled, which made it possible to draw a definite conclusion - its own torpedo
        1. number1
          0
          11 May 2012
          This is understandable.
          Found the place of the explosion
          Restored the sequence of events
          But they could not determine "what caused the torpedo to explode improperly"
          As I understand it from the film - an official investigation into the book of the former gene. Ustinov’s prosecutor, a link to which was given by a respected Murano, realized that a torpedo had exploded, but could not understand why.
          If you know why the explosion occurred, tell us.
          1. +11
            11 May 2012
            I already told you here, obviously you have not seen. Of course, no one can say this with 100% accuracy, however, taking into account all the circumstances, the features of the peroxide torpedo, the design features of the Antey project and the level of training of the crew for handling the peroxide torpedo, we can conclude that the torpedo exploded due to an accident removing the safety stopper (faucet), which must be unambiguously closed when loading the torpedo into the torpedo tube. This conclusion can be calculated using the following data:
            1. The first explosion occurred, in which the torpedo tube collapsed and the training torpedo exploded (not the warhead, which it does not have, exploded, but the torpedo fuel mixed with an oxidizing agent). In the first explosion, everyone who was in the first compartment died, because pressure on the human body more than 2 kg / cm2 is fatal. A torpedo in a confined space created a pressure of up to 10 kg per cm2.
            2. Everything would be fine and the boat would come up with the flooded first compartment (the buoyancy margin allowed quite), but there is one BUT here - the design of this boat is such that the gearbox is in the second compartment. And again, everything would be fine, but the designers recommended that the fleet depressurize 1 and 2 compartments during torpedo fire, i.e. make them temporarily adjacent (so that the pressure during torpedo fire would not be detrimental to submariners in the first compartment), thus putting the boat on the brink of death initially, because anything could happen during torpedo fire. As we recall, the CP in the second compartment and there everyone was shell-shocked (even if not deadly) by the blast wave that passed through the ventilation mains. Therefore, no one steered the boat. It is easy to calculate (albeit approximately) for those 2 minutes that separated the first explosion from the second how much the boat absorbed water through the destroyed torpedo tube. These are hundreds of tons of water, from which the boat went to the bottom, with an angle of incidence of up to 40 degrees, which caused the contact of the torpedo tubes with combat torpedoes with the ground, their crushing and subsequent explosion. It was possible to purge from the 9th compartment, there is such an opportunity, but for this a team from the 2nd should have gone, which did not happen. If the angle of incidence of the boat was 20-30 degrees, things would not have come to the torpedo tubes and it would have simply laid down without an explosion.

            As you know, the official version says that the first explosion caused a fire, which is why the rest of the torpedoes on the racks warmed up. BUT at the same time it is noted that there are no traces of fire on the remaining intact and on the destroyed torpedoes. Hence the conclusion that she collided with the ground, and not due to a fire, detonation occurred
            1. a_lex
              +2
              11 May 2012
              Thank you. Briefly and to the point.
            2. number1
              0
              11 May 2012
              Got it.
              Thank you.
            3. Sermyaga
              +4
              11 May 2012
              According to claim 1, the destruction of a torpedo in a torpedo tube could not lead to disaster because the fuel components are already in the torpedo tanks and thus reduce the force of the explosion on the tube itself, which, by the way, is comparable to the strong submarine body, and this is a very strong steel. Thus, the reason for the powerful explosive effect on the shelving torpedoes and the emergence of a catastrophic volumetric fire in the compartment could be only one thing - a direct, almost head-on-head collision with an American submarine, which could cause instant destruction of both the submarine’s hull and the ill-fated torpedo tubes and of course the torpedoes and possibly the nearest shelving (this is the second explosion). Consider the displacement of both submarines and you will understand that the force of impact at a speed of even 7-8 knots is just hellish. The issue of survival of the adversary in this case is a separate conversation - at least his parking in the Norwegian fjords was clearly recorded and satellite images were embossed in newspapers.

              According to claim 2, that the bulkhead door opened is complete nonsense. And why actually it was necessary to open it? This boat, what - the period of the Second World War or what? Take the existing combat documents on the use of submarine weapons and you will understand, this could not be. Otherwise, the crew of the submarine is not professional. No one has canceled the technical task for the construction of images of military equipment, and therefore no supposedly advice from the military-industrial complex can take place after construction. Or can the plant make its own changes to the TTZ at its discretion? It’s ridiculous.
              And one more thing from history. In the fall of 1986, a catastrophe occurred in the Atlantic waters, relatively close to the shores of North America, from the Soviet apl K-219. Several submariners died, the rest were rescued, but the boat sank. The reason is the same, a clash with the American. True, it’s slippery, but the rocket in the mine exploded, and its mass is much larger than the torpedo. After long fires in the 4th compartment, the boat began to take water uncontrollably and lose buoyancy. It must be said that in this case, the Merikos also quickly agreed with the Gorbachevs and then also sent behind the scenes to the Union of the most gallant prince.
              In general, the facts of collisions of striped stars are numerous.
              And there was no k-141 torpedo - these are idle inventions of French journalists.
              In general, it is necessary to use the terminology more carefully, dear, otherwise it seems that you are a one-sided person aware.
              1. +1
                11 May 2012
                "fuel components in torpedo containers" - translate. And where should they be, actually?)))

                Collision “Los Angeles” head-on with “Antaeus” - death for the first. So it was with the "Grayling" and "Baton Rouge", which were not subject to restoration. At the same time, our "Kostroma" and "Borisoglebsk" continued their service .. How so?

                where was Memphis? in the fjords? .................

                item 2 and complete nonsense. I tell you what is prescribed by the boat's designer, and you about your own conclusions and your own logic. This is exactly how it is prescribed to conduct torpedo firing on the Antaeus - making compartments 1 and 2 communicable. Have you served on a boat for this project? in which warhead?

                About K-219: where is the evidence of the collision? American film Hostile Waters? yes, serious proof))) What Britanov said about the collision version, you know? so do not mold your own wishful thinking. At the same time, you again do not want to remember that it was with this rocket that there were problems throughout the entire campaign. By the way, K-219 had the same accident with a rocket explosion a couple of years before its death, then one person died. The missile shaft was simply welded up there and then it went out to sea with 15 missiles.

                About terminology: caught in illiteracy? Where? especially after the fuel components are "already" in the containers of the torpedo)))
                1. Sermyaga
                  +4
                  12 May 2012
                  I served on the TK-20 in the first crew under the command of the captain Tisetskiy A.S. (Peace be upon him) in warhead-2.
                  The bulkhead door was still constipated, but the inter-compartment flaps of the ship's ventilation system between the 1st and 2nd were open. However, that was enough to cut down the CPU.
                  In addition to Memphis, Toledo was still spinning. For example, Memphis in Bergen depicted a sufferer to avert his eyes, and Toledo was strenuously hiding where it was not clear.
                  There was no forehead in the forehead, I thickened it. But just like on K-219 (the mine with that rocket was not brewed there, one of KSU my classmate, almost assigned there to BS-2, told me this was all in Gadzhievo, and I was in Estonia at that time, simply abnormally, but regularly drained from the vapors from the current tanks of the rocket - since the Britons, being cool at reprisal, could not fail, and not going to sea for technical reasons then equaled a crime, and they dried up the mine, fearing reprisal of the KRLF. -2 I wasn’t from ballistics but from krylatchik. One clever uncle from the members of the state commission k-219 - caperanga Drobot - spoke out to us in the spirit that psychologically he was not ready for abnormal things, like that if he were ballistic to the bone, he could personally technically decide everything and so relied on the foreman of the start team on midshipman, that is, the materiel himself did not know well. Well, these are the old man’s maxims, you can smile at him, but still ...) and so .. like on k-219 there was a collision, then collapse and explosion. Doesn't it seem strange that a 30-ton rocket detonating did not destroy the mine? But it pierced all the holes in it and part of the CT with sea water, once in the compartment, caused a fire in the 4th. On the network you can find a photo of k-219 in the surface and see a dent and gap in the hull. The mine cover is the same, ay ... completely.
                  Cap. 1st rank Drobot in recent years served as a teacher in the CA in Paldiski (well, back in those years before the collapse of the USSR), in his track record in the Navy, was the post of submarine commander of project 667-a and of course in Gadzhievo, a graduate of Lenkom. So he returned after working in this commission and shared his thoughts with us, we then studied at the sixth building of the Shark in Paldiski. They were shown to them in Moscow close-up shots of the damaged side, and his associates believed that the light traces of external influence were a scraping, so to speak, of the material of the fairings of the GAS of the American square. In small pictures and from a different angle to the K-219 on the network, this is difficult to notice. And cases of collisions earlier before K-219 were available and even documented. You yourself agreed with this and even gave examples.
                  About the prescription ... I would not argue like you. An unwritten recommendation, even for salvo firing. Do you understand the difference? Then this is a big question for "Rubin" and for the state military acceptance. And it is they who bear their share of the responsibility. By the way, where is their answer for everything? The Prosecutor General retouched.
                  In general, the network has a number of serious materials analyzing that tragedy with K-141. I do not pretend to be anything. Only my opinion. I hope you do not provide anyone with a personal opinion? Although we all have the right to give estimates. If my epithets hurt you so much, then I apologize for the excessive emotionality - I myself am a submariner in the past and take it to heart.
                  All to you.
                  1. Sermyaga
                    +1
                    12 May 2012
                    The depth of immersion of strategists on the patrol route is 40 plus or minus 5 meters. The shtatnik walked from above - having lost ours, and when tracking it often — he tried to find k-219, hooked it on the bottom, there was a slight blow there, so that the missile tanks were depressurized and the CT burst mixed. In the lower, so to speak, hemisphere in the bow of the submarine there is a fairing GAS. Like that.
                    What am I doing? The possibility of collision is very great. bearing in mind the impudence and shamelessness of the Merikos. But ... for the sake of the dead guys it is worth saying that an incredible and tragic set of circumstances led to the death. They can be put together in a heap - it’s easy, they are all expressed. I attribute the latter to K-141.
                    1. Sermyaga
                      +1
                      12 May 2012
                      By the way. True, you know that submarine cases are rubber coated on the outside to reduce noise. I remember in the 80s when I started in Gremikha, I had to see returning boats from the campaigns with spots of paint in the cutting area. These are traces from the discovery of their state pl. They threw our special signaling devices with a dye, like what we had under the name of PCB, a cloud of paint covering a decent space covered the rksn and methyl. This could only happen after we discovered ours with the help of a series of RPGs dropped from Orions during an anti-submarine search.
                      So this rubber absorbed great and traces of collisions easily remained on it. It turns out that the noise of the 667-A and 667-B projects was not up to par since they were found.
                      Not always, fortunately. I propose to refresh your memory and recall the information about Operation Atrina. Its implementation could lay in the motivation of the Merikos to infiltrate our thrones for the purpose of tracking, new reasons, because the 945s have better stealth.
                    2. 0
                      12 May 2012
                      nevertheless, I do not consider the opinion about the collision to be true even if only because those depths initially did not give the American a chance for close contact. I would have stood in his place for twenty miles
                    3. stjrm
                      0
                      January 22 2013
                      2. A depth of 40 meters, for a ship like Kursk, this is considered a safe depth from the point of view of a collision with a surface object, so the BS is not carried at such depths. Maybe mixed up with a start depth of 45 plus / minus 5 meters. Therefore, when surfacing under the periscope, they always try to reduce the ascent time from this depth to the periscope. I don’t know how on Shark, I didn’t serve, but there is also a memo for the VO and the Watch Commander on the BDR on the Civil Defense Commission in this regard. Even when they get into a session near Parvan, the depth is more than 45 meters, but close to the atom, in case you can quickly swim up a bit when you receive a signal to use weapons.

                      I read you brothers and I wonder right away ... Either you all forgot what you were taught, or you didn’t learn at all, but judging by your mistakes and not knowing some order of things, you never stood on the go ....)
                  2. 0
                    12 May 2012
                    "Shark" and "Antey" are two fundamentally different projects, don't you think?
                    I did not talk about the bulkhead doors, but if you yourself admit that the ventilation was open, could this be the reason for the penetration of the blast wave from the first explosion into the second compartment and cause, if not death, then severe concussion of the personnel of the second compartment and cause its exit from the side? in my opinion quite. Why "Toledo" was "hidden in an unknown place"? and it should have been revealed to the whole world ??? why? why the hell would our submarines be suddenly shown to the whole world for viewing ??? and American. The submarine was conceived as a hidden vessel (in my opinion, Peter the Great called it that way). Of course, I admit that there are many cases of collisions. But does this mean that any accident should be attributed to a collision? How much does the Los Angeles GUS track our submarines?

                    About design features: questions were addressed to Rubin because Rubinovs were in the state commission. Like naval commanders (in quotation marks). Will Popov make himself guilty if he was on the commission?

                    I do not deprive you of the right to an opinion, especially since they expressed it unlike many here professionally and without unnecessary fabrication.
                  3. stjrm
                    0
                    January 22 2013
                    1. R-27 rocket, the one that at the "basics" it weighs about 14,5 tons ..... (in the kit U)
                    You forgot a lot from what you were taught .....)
              2. DERWISH
                0
                12 May 2012
                YOU + SOBERLY DISCUSS good
            4. DERWISH
              0
              12 May 2012
              Nonsense !!!! YOU CAN THINK THE KURSK FIRST-ORDERS MANAGED !!!! IN SUCH A TEAM MORE THAN ON THE APL 100 EVERYTHING CHECKED EVERYONE !!! WHAT ARE YOU DADY ???
              1. 0
                12 May 2012
                yes, everywhere we have everything double-checked and continuous accidents
    4. +1
      11 May 2012
      In vain +, but oh well. Nothing new, no facts, no versions. That torpedo Mark-48, then the wreckage of someone else's cabin. There is a hole, but the Mark-48 is a homing torpedo, in front of it is a matrix of GUS hydrophones and they are in a soft compound. There is no "armor-piercing" head, and the torpedo itself is undermined by diving under the keel of the target, so it is more effective.
      1. +1
        11 May 2012
        P.S. But this version is more thorough: http://zavtra.ru/cgi/veil/data/zavtra/01/400/31.html
        1. Pessimist
          0
          13 May 2012
          Iron version!
  2. Sarus
    +14
    10 May 2012
    Memory to our guys ..
    I really would not want to know after 30-50 that Kursk was really torpedoed by a foreign submarine ...
    PS
    It will be even sadder to feel that our government did not respond at that time ...
    1. dan-frya
      +9
      10 May 2012
      or maybe we’ll find out what answered ... because otherwise we would have already been erased by shopping mall any unrequited provocation tends to repeat and intensify. but it wasn’t.
      1. +1
        10 May 2012
        Quote: dan-frya

        or maybe we’ll find out what answered ...

        I haven't heard of the drowned "dishes" of the Yakindos, or their hangers-on (which is a pity) request
    2. Vito
      +3
      10 May 2012
      Sarus Greetings. Speaking of the version with a torpedo attack. I watched the pre-election television debates of VV Zhirinovsky with an opponent from Edra. SO there Zhirinovsky publicly stated that KURSK received a direct hit by a torpedo (I quote verbatim). Of course, I understand that V.V.ZH is still the same interlocutor, but you must admit that such statements are not thrown, especially people with such DUTIES!
      1. Jabara
        +1
        10 May 2012
        Quote: Vito
        but you must admit, such statements are not thrown, especially people with such DUTIES!

        The Russian bureaucrats NEVER answered for their words, why would they not blurt out! am And Zhirik is still that clown - everything is allowed to him! fellow

        Delusional vyser Valera Boval is definitely a MINUS! To stupid comments of would-be potsriots - MINUS-MINUS-MINUS !!!! As much as you all would not like that the death of the Kursk was on the conscience of the United States or Britain, but the fact remains that the boat died due to the negligence of the command of the fleet and its crew. And do not refer to pretentious statements like:
        But since everyone knows that the entire crew was highly qualified,

        You can declare anything you want, justifying your inconsistency, stupidity, tyranny. fool

        In the magazine "Morskoy Sbornik" at the very beginning of the 2000s, there was a very competent article with a TRUE version of the death of "Kursk", without this anti-American, stupid, hysterical schizophrenia. And the version is this:
        A hydrogen explosion occurred in the first compartment, in which the entire personnel of the compartment died instantly. The explosion caused a fire, which after 135 seconds raised the temperature in the compartment so that it detonated the entire ammunition. Where did hydrogen come from? The fact is that, on this project, just in the first compartment there is a large battery. During operation, the battery produces hydrogen, which is automatically removed from the compartment. Manual removal is also provided. This process is called battery ventilation. Regardless of whether the automation was turned on or not (what if it breaks down?), There is a watch of the 1st compartment, which is obliged to check the hydrogen content of the accumulator well every 30 minutes. And if the hydrogen content is approaching a critical point, it must manually turn on the system.
        Hydrogen gives an explosive mixture at a concentration of 4 to 78 percent, that is, if the concentration is above 78 percent, there will be no explosion, below 4 percent, the same will not happen. And for a set of 4 percent - to make the so-called explosive gas - at least 12 hours of intensive operation of the battery without ventilation should pass. That is, from the moment the boat entered the sea, most likely no one was watching the ventilation. So much for the pure guilt of personnel.


        As you can see, the version is believable. And the fact speaks in her favor, it was this one compartment that was cut off and left at the bottom of the sea. I see no other reasons.
        1. +3
          10 May 2012
          garbage article and your comment is the same. I can say one thing about the article. What does it mean that the guilty are not punished? How will you punish them? If it's Americans. And how will you tell the people about this in the president's place? Kursk was sunk by an American submarine, and we will not do anything, so what? Or "Ama's starred them for this now"? that's how wars start. The sailors are immensely sorry for their families, children, parents, but what can the country's leadership do if they know for certain what happened? So I don’t have to drive it.
          As for you, dear Jabara. With what fright the crest drives Russian sailors. it is there in the steppes of Ukraine that maybe non-professionals in the Navy serve you. But we don’t need to insult our people. And you don’t need to quote any nonsense from magazines either. At that time, everyone wrote who was in a big deal, and the leadership only did what supported all sorts of versions, even delusional ones, if only someone would not seriously dig up the truth. And the whole trouble is that this time the truth really could become a detonator of something really scary. Neither Putin nor the pro-government nor the Navy commander is to blame for the fact that this happened. and precisely because the leadership of the fleet and the country immediately knew that what had happened it acted exactly as it acted.
          1. Jabara
            +3
            10 May 2012
            Quote: volkan
            As for you, dear Jabara. With what fright the crest drives Russian sailors. it is there in the steppes of Ukraine that maybe non-professionals in the Navy serve you. But we don’t need to insult our people. And you don’t need to quote any nonsense from magazines either. At that time, everyone wrote who was in a big deal, and the leadership only did what supported all sorts of versions, even delusional ones, if only someone would not seriously dig up the truth. And the whole trouble is that this time the truth really could become a detonator of something really scary. Neither Putin nor the pro-government nor the Navy commander is to blame for the fact that this happened. and precisely because the leadership of the fleet and the country immediately knew that what had happened it acted exactly as it acted.

            In short! There’s nothing to comment on! Dumb idiotic schizophrenism !!!! fool fool fool fool fool fool
            1. Taz
              Taz
              0
              11 May 2012
              Quote: Jabara
              In short! There’s nothing to comment on! Dumb idiotic schizophrenism !!!!

              +1
          2. +1
            10 May 2012
            Well, since you are so wise, and everything is clear to you (in vain you got a plus), you should know the reason for the attack of the American nuclear submarine. Surprise us with your awareness.
            1. Jabara
              +1
              11 May 2012
              Quote: Pilgrim
              you must know the cause of the attack of the American nuclear submarine

              THERE WAS NO ATTACK !!!!! It doesn't even make sense to discuss! Also THERE WAS NO COLLISION !!!!
              These stupidly propaganda versions do not stand up to any criticism.
              The perpetrators of this tragedy are exclusively and only within the country. And all sorts of "links" to "fellow submariners" like:
              Quote: Sandov
              A friend of the submariner voiced this version immediately after the death of the boat. Who is who and the submariners know all the best about us better than us. But the insidiousness of amers is known to all.


              This is nothing but a stupid excuse for their blind, paranoid anti-Americanism. fool
              1. Poplar
                +1
                11 May 2012
                But the French, who cannot be ranked among our best friends, think like this http://video.mail.ru/mail/anmmb1/684/666.html
          3. +3
            11 May 2012
            So what is Putin to blame? The fact that he destroyed the whole army and navy? Remember how the liberals said that we do not need such an army. Remember how the soldiers died of hunger on the Russky Island, how the soldiers froze to death in Siberia. Those who came before him are to blame. Now Putin is doing everything to make the army strong. If the army is strong, then the state is strong
        2. +2
          11 May 2012
          I don’t know the question, is AB used on a submarine constantly as the main power source for part of the load, or does it still play the role of a ballast smoothing peak loads and is an emergency power source? If the second, then where does the intensive use of AB come from, and hydrogen begins to be released intensively only in the process of battery charging. And besides, are there really old ABs with free breathing and coverslips on the most modern submarine of the Russian Federation ???? and indeed there are batteries in general airtight with gel filling which do not emit gases into the environment at all.
          1. Sermyaga
            0
            11 May 2012
            Atomic AB is used in exceptional cases. A constant source of e-energy is a generator spinning with steam from a nuclear power plant.
            1. 0
              12 May 2012
              Yes, I didn’t really doubt that it was just that I couldn’t know for sure. This confirms the delusional version of the explosion of hydrogen.
        3. postman
          +1
          11 May 2012
          Quote: Jabara

          Jabara

          It is not very clear what you wanted to say with your comment?
          Valera Boval was doused with mud "passing by", other commentators were identified as "stupid". etc.
          The poor fellows did not ask permission and did not agree with the "great" point of view.
          That is not the task.
          Your version - essno is veritas est adaequatio rei et intellectus.
          And the point!
      2. +5
        10 May 2012
        Quote: Vito
        Such statements are not rushed, especially people with such DUTIES!

        Zhirik is a clown and his statements, it is populism and a clowning (he is so wet that Zadornov nervously smokes in the corner laughing ) And Zhirik doesn’t care about the POSITION & I don’t care (he “put” on everything, but from what “height” he don’t care)
        1. +4
          10 May 2012
          I agree, Zhirik is a cheap selling skin, and the party is the same. The latest vote for Medvedev’s election as prime minister is clear evidence. He stuck to power and money, and would go to any conspiracy with anyone, if only to continue to sit and walk his ryah in the deputy chair and his Maybach.
      3. Pessimist
        0
        13 May 2012
        V.V. Zhirinovsky is far from stupid, as they expose him in the media!
        1. ICT
          0
          15 May 2012
          he put himself in a series of clowns (the media just cling to it), although in fact a competent man
    3. Beetle-a
      +18
      10 May 2012
      Do you remember well the beginning of the 2000s? The state of the army and navy and the country itself after Yeltsin? What are you going to answer? Nuclear weapons? Would nuclear war be arranged? There was infa about the automatic response of the American submarine's computer to our training torpedo, launched from Kursk (accidentally hitting an American), who was spying on ours, and who was in the way of the training torpedo. Now, after several years of rebuilding the army, we are not able to compete on equal terms with the amers, and do you propose Putin to swing rights and start the bull-calf then? Or did Putin do the right thing, that he knocked out all the bonuses possible in that situation without publicity?
      1. -9
        10 May 2012
        We should not defend our homeland but enter into negotiations
      2. Timonf
        -1
        10 May 2012
        Quote: Beetle-A
        Or did Putin do the right thing, that he knocked out all the bonuses possible in that situation without publicity?
        In this, tell the faces of the Mothers of the deceased submariners!
        1. Odinplys
          +5
          10 May 2012
          Quote: Timonf
          In this tell the faces of the mothers of the dead submariners


          They understand us more ... and there is no need to breed hysteria ...
          If this is true, then the death of the submariners is all the more in vain ... Russia got time for rearmament ...Beetle-a... right ...
          1. speedy
            +4
            10 May 2012
            On the Kursk nuclear submarine, the son of a friend of my father died, and the heart of the father of the deceased submariner could not stand it - the only son, officer ... they still lie in the same fence next to me - father and son. It was the best fleet crew and no need to blame the guys. There is much to say that there was a collision and there was a torpedo attack, but what is the answer - a war? It’s better not to caress this topic, you won’t help the guys anymore, but it was after this tragedy that the restoration of the fleet began. boats began to finish building with quiet glanders, which stood on the slipways from the collapse of the Union, and how difficult it was ... But sometimes it’s better not to know the truth - more nerves, a healthier heart ...
            1. veryalone
              +2
              11 May 2012
              There is just NONE fact - neither in favor of the collision, nor in favor of the torpedo attack.
              Strictly speaking, in the French film itself, the only factual evidence of its credibility is a still image that captures the hole in the light body on the starboard side. However, this hole is located in close proximity to the cut line of the nasal compartment, but there are no clear signs of the origin of this defect from the impact of a torpedo, and the solid case in this area is intact. American torpedoes Mk-48, referred to in the film, explode outside the hull and do not leave such holes. As a result of this, it can be assumed that the hole could have been formed as a result of lifting and towing operations, when placing the boat in the dock, etc. Another strong counterargument against the torpedo version is the mismatch between the capacities of the 1st and 2nd explosions on the Kursk, recorded by seismologists, and the power of the American torpedo
      3. +1
        10 May 2012
        / There was infa /, / computer automatic response / - dear, are you in kindergarten ???
        / who spied on ours / well, what is it ...
      4. +4
        10 May 2012
        Now, after several years of rebuilding the army, we are not able to compete on equal terms with the amers,

        on our territory, that in 2000, that we can compete with anyone, as long as there are people (soldiers and officers) who served in the USSR and in the first decade of the Russian Federation, but what will happen in ten years from now, the missing generation of the 90s - 2000s. ..
        And yes, it was worth to roll out (at least make to surface) the American and British boats just because one of them was the cause of the Kursk's death ... IMHO
    4. +3
      10 May 2012
      Admiral Popov also said that the submarine suffered external damage on TV, that there was no doubt that Kursk torpedoed, it was outraged that the Democrats had betrayed 118 lives of our sailors, as they had betrayed others, including allies. They never have forgiveness
      1. guessed
        +4
        10 May 2012
        Such a submarine cannot be drowned by a single torpedo. She can even shoot back after one hit. If only this torpedo had no tyaz ... then the nose compartment would not have to be sawed off. Actually in the article there is a photo that directly indicates that an explosive wave of enormous force passed through the boat, even the transverse partitions broke. And this is definitely not an explosion of torpedoes, First of all, it’s almost impossible to blow them up on board, and they don’t have such an explosive wave.
        You can look at the reference book ... but without it I will say by the power of the blast wave the rating looks like this
        1. nuclear weapons
        2. volumetric explosion
        3. it doesn’t matter .... many times weaker than the second.
        1. snek
          +1
          11 May 2012
          Quote: dvina
          1. NAO2. volume explosion

          If you know how the thermobaric munition (the one of a volumetric explosion) works, then you should understand that under water it cannot work in principle. The use of nuclear weapons leaves a clear mark in the form of radiation contamination.
          1. guessed
            0
            14 May 2012
            And what about the thermobaric charge? The atmosphere on the boat is generally a subtle topic. excess of oxygen concentration by a couple of percent is fraught with fire.
            And imagine that the concentration of hydrogen in the nasal compartment is more than 4%. So much for the volumetric explosion.
            I spoke with the guys from the submission team, just those who passed Kursk. So he was received by order from above. Almost by shout. Batteries already mercilessly gassed.
            And to activate such a charge a lot is not necessary, just one spark ....
            In the 50s, a feed and flour factory was wiped off the face of the earth by an explosion of suspensions of the same flour. The explosion occurred due to a spark from a truck silencer. Since then, when entering such plants, it is necessary to cross a pond and attach a spark arrester to the silencer .... Always, even in rainy weather.
            This is me so for example and to represent the power of such an explosion.
      2. +5
        11 May 2012
        Quote: valokordin
        outraged how the democrats betrayed 118 lives of our sailors


        I support it, and maybe it will sound blasphemous, but, in my deep conviction, if the Kursk died as a result of torpedoing, and the country's leadership knew this, then in any case none of the sailors would be saved - they would be the witnesses, which could not be silenced! That is why we were told that at first they could not find the exact coordinates of the boat, then the rescue bell could not "stick" to the hull, and then it was too late - everyone died ...
    5. +1
      10 May 2012
      Oh, it's hard to look for a black cat in a dark room, especially if she is not there!
  3. snek
    +14
    10 May 2012
    The death of Kursk is forever associated with the areola of myths and speculation.
    As for the version with torpedoing, I will make a few comments:
    1. The hole shown on the case has only a part of the circle, and in the lower right corner you can see a sharp edge. Especially
    2. after breaking through the hull, logically, this torpedo exploded and, again logically, the inlet should have become an "outlet" for the blast wave and, therefore, just turned out, which is not.
    3. What did the Americans smoke, that all of a sudden they decided to fire a torpedo at a nuclear submarine? There was no such thing in the Cold War.
    1. Ataturk
      +14
      10 May 2012
      One thing I know for sure, submarines of this class themselves do not sink and do not explode. there each system is duplicated 5 times.
      1. snek
        +8
        10 May 2012
        I am folding to the version of the explosion of a torpedo from the ammunition of Kursk itself. I note that I do not consider this true in the last resort, but simply the most plausible theory. Unfortunately, we may never know the truth.
        1. Transbeton
          -1
          10 May 2012
          Totally agree with you.
          Here, respected Murano has repeatedly laid out a link to the investigation movie
          The torpedo exploded - this is an established fact!
          But why it exploded, there is no answer ...
      2. +3
        10 May 2012
        about duplication of systems: from the 9th compartment, you can turn on the purge of the command stock of the Air Force and the boat would float. This is after the first explosion of one torpedo. This was not done, only because someone from the command of the ship should give a command to this. Here is the duplication. Itself did not explode, of course. There is a human factor to everything
        1. Transbeton
          -1
          10 May 2012
          Let's hope that the correct conclusions are made.
          Tea is not cut on "aquabikes".
      3. Vingetor
        +3
        10 May 2012
        Of course, I apologize. Maybe you know more than me, but the K-278 Komsomolets submarine sank due to a fire.
        1. +3
          10 May 2012
          Quote: Vingetor
          Of course, I apologize. Maybe you know more than me, but the K-278 Komsomolets submarine sank due to a fire.

          That's right. I recommend the book of a real submariner, Hero of the Soviet Union - Vice Admiral Chernova E.D "Secrets of underwater disasters" Why do I recommend? Chernov is the former commander of the 1st FAPL of the Northern Fleet, a boat from our base in Zapadnaya Litsa. In the book, the testimony of survivors from the "Komsomolets" I myself personally knew some warrant officers and officers, unfortunately they are all on the lists of the victims. Eternal memory to them, as well as to the brothers from "Kursk"
      4. 0
        10 May 2012
        And Komsomolets?
        Also someone else's torpedo?
        And I do not believe that from one tarpeda (and why did it fly right in the nose ??? it seems like it should go to the screws!) It can break through the vaunted double case and do such business.
        1. +1
          10 May 2012
          at least someone thought
        2. lukaviy
          -2
          11 May 2012
          Pound garbage, citizen!
          You can trivially search for information about the MK48 torpedo:

          Gould Mark 48 torpedoes are designed to destroy surface targets and high-speed submarines. Uses an active and passive homing system. Also, these torpedoes are equipped with a multiple attack system, which is used when losing a target. A torpedo independently searches for, captures and attacks the target. The torpedo electronics is configured to hit the boat at the end of the torpedo compartment, in the area of ​​the command post.
          Taken from here: http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark-48

          And I also recommend watching a movie about the death of the Kursk nuclear submarine, which the French shot: http://video.google.ru/videoplay?docid=-3890444558362410672#
          1. 0
            11 May 2012
            Once again, I personally recommend that you go to the same Wikipedia, only in the English version. And there you will not see such a heresy. And besides, if you are far from the topic, I’ll tell you that the command post is far from all boats in the 2nd compartment. Or developed a MK 48 torpedo specifically for Anteyev?)))))
            1. lukaviy
              -1
              11 May 2012
              Indeed, in the English-language wiki there is nothing about the torpedo compartment and command post, and I have not found anything about this on other resources either.
              And if there is no confirmation, then I take my words back.
              Wiki, of course, is not a resource that is worth 100% trust. :)
              1. +2
                11 May 2012
                nice to talk with someone who is able to admit their mistake.
          2. 0
            11 May 2012
            Do you yourself realize that you wrote nonsense, or foolishly!)
    2. dan-frya
      +4
      10 May 2012
      just decided to test their strength, the more they did not expect problems ...

      I don't know why all of a sudden, but I remembered a "strange" hole in the Pentagon building on September 11.09.2001, XNUMX ... not very reminiscent of an airplane, but very suitable for a cruise missile (as some commentators noticed) ... like a coincidence ...;)

      PS The last statement does not mean that we were planning terrorist attacks, but could deliver a noise and our "parcel" to the return address ...
      1. radikdan79
        +5
        10 May 2012
        interesting version about the Russian Kyrgyz Republic in the Pentagon laughing
        but I think such an attack would not go unnoticed request
      2. +1
        10 May 2012
        Haha laughed !!! +100! A drop dead version in the spirit of some paronoid forum users.
    3. +3
      10 May 2012
      It is doubtful that the submarine itself drowned! The version of torpedoing her American is more believable. Investigation of the French is glamorous. Americans torpedoed to hide the traces of the attack! One of the submarines stood in front of Kursk and Kursk took it to the ram, both submarines were damaged, serious American. Captain Memphis decided to shoot new torpedoes to hide the traces of the attack. Putin decided not to pull out the crew, but the Norwegians could help, the crew would chat, and Russia was weak to demand something! The Americans offered money, very the country’s chief! The head of NATO, the US Secretary of Defense, immediately flew to us. Our Minister of Defense and several military men were then removed because they did not agree with this. S. Ivanov became the new Minister of Defense. By the way, Commander Memphis was later awarded for the sinking of a class missile carrier Antey! Whether Putin did the right thing or not, time will tell. Our sailors are submariners on one side of the scale and the countries safe on the other. I think he was not the only one who made such a decision! The decision was political, the military, led by the Ministry of Defense, were against it, forgiving the Americans forgiven. .... I hope with Oro avenge them!
      1. +11
        10 May 2012
        why talk about what you do not know? I do not understand. What are the "new torpedoes"? What could the crew be talking about from the end compartments? what could they know? which head of NATO and which minister of defense flew to us? The head of the CIA flew to Russia on a visit. For what was awarded the commander of "Memphis" ???? your imagination is off scale, as a writer and nothing else.
        1. +2
          10 May 2012
          Ask our military what kind of torpedoes it is! It is known that Captain Kursk found 2 notes, 1 relatives, another command. How many people initially survived in the first minutes of the disaster. You were not there with a candle and the commander of Kursk you did not communicate! And I was gone! Mark-48 (Mk-48) is a universal long-range remote-controlled torpedo. Designed to replace the Mk-37 torpedo series. Gould Mark 48 torpedoes are designed to destroy surface targets and high-speed submarines. Uses an active and passive homing system. Also, these torpedoes are equipped with a multiple attack system, which is used when losing a target. A torpedo independently searches for, captures and attacks the target. The torpedo electronics is configured to hit the boat at the end of the torpedo compartment, in the vicinity of the command post! As soon as the head of the CIA flew in, the head of the defense ministry, the head of Nato, ran a lot of people to Moscow. You are in the Course that Moscow demanded as compensation. What kind of concessions did you make? USA. Commander Memphis was awarded a secret decree. Everything went quietly. What class was Kursk! I have no imagination on such topics. You better think yourself with your head and don't write to writers! You’re self-confident, go talk to military submariners and try it rub, we’ll see what they’ll answer to you! And don’t just breed demagogy ridiculously. We won’t completely find out the truth. The most indisputable fact, ours and we all swept it carefully. If the Americans themselves believe in the version of their governments, then we have people cleverer!
          1. +2
            10 May 2012
            "The electronics of the torpedo are tuned to hit the boat at the end of the torpedo compartment, in the command post area."

            delirium of the gray mare, invented by the apologists of torpedoing the Kursk after its death. Go to the English version of Wikipedia and you will see a similar heresy for me. It says that this torpedo (like all others) explodes next to the ship.

            Give a reference to the award of the commander of Memphis?))))

            I am not stating anything out of my own self-confidence, but on the basis of research by the same "military submariners" (are there civilians?), but what your statements about secret awards for the murder of our sailors are based on is a secret. About the amount of compensation (for which it is not clear) and that someone demanded them. This is from the "one grandma said"
          2. 0
            10 May 2012
            "The electronics of the torpedo are tuned to hit the boat at the end of the torpedo compartment, in the command post area."

            about this nonsense, would you even think about the fact that not all submarines are designed so that the command compartment is in the second. It is rather a feature of Antei. But reason is hard work for you
          3. 0
            10 May 2012
            Quote: Esso

            Esso EN

            Do you imagine an explosion in a pipe sealed at both ends, filled with a mixture with a high content of pure oxygen? The same effect in the hull.
            1. 0
              11 May 2012
              olegyurjewitch, have mercy: is there something extra from where? Explain, please! crying
          4. veryalone
            0
            11 May 2012
            Listen up Well end the nonsense then carry .....
      2. -2
        10 May 2012
        Well, God forgive me! It’s necessary to come up with something like that !!! At the competition, who would think up a ridiculous story about a tragedy getting ready?
      3. loc.bejenari
        -2
        11 May 2012
        what did you smoke, dear?
      4. Odinplys
        0
        11 May 2012
        Quote: Esso
        Putin decided not to pull out the crew, but the Norwegians could help, the crew would chat,


        Putin decided ... not to pull out ... Sorry ... but this is just nonsense ...
        Yes, and there were no talkers .....
      5. Jabara
        +3
        11 May 2012
        Quote: Esso
        It is doubtful that the submarine itself drowned!

        Without any doubts! In addition to the Kursk, five more nuclear submarines DROWNED BY THEMSELVES, and one of them sank twice, and several more (I don’t remember the exact number) diesel boats.
        Quote: Esso
        The version about torpedoing her American is more believable. French investigation look.

        Oh my God! The Frenchman idiot version is the ultimate truth! laughing
    4. +4
      10 May 2012
      snek
      Dear Nikolai!
      Quote: snek
      The hole shown on the case has only a part of the circle, and in the lower right corner you can see a sharp edge.

      Honestly, the photos posted in the article on quality are called the letter G ..... with a capital letter, and then the torpedo does not have to hit the target at right angles, right ???!
      Quote: snek
      after breaking through the hull, logically, this torpedo exploded and, again logically, the inlet should have become an "outlet" for the blast wave and, therefore, just turned out, which is not.

      Firstly, detonation depends on the time installed on the fuse and the detonating substance with which the ammunition is filled, and not as it happens in the movies - once and immediately an explosion. And secondly, do a simple experiment - drill or punch a hole in a metal plate and hit the burr with a hammer! You will be surprised that he will not bend in the opposite direction, but either fall off or die tightly, so to speak, on the back of the part. So in your statement there is absolutely no logic!
      Quote: snek
      What did the Americans smoke, that they suddenly decided to shoot a torpedo at a nuclear submarine for nothing? There was no such thing in the Cold War.

      The psycho-neurological state of soldiers and sailors of the us army has recently left much to be desired, there are many examples and it is not known what kind of popuas they were sitting at the remote control!
      So I'm more inclined towards the torpedo version.
      1. +9
        10 May 2012
        Quote: Sibiryak
        Firstly, the detonation depends on the time installed on the fuse and the detonating substance with which the ammunition is filled, and not as it happens in the movies - once an explosion


        Torpedoes do not pierce the board with their kinetic energy, but do explode, and must explode at the moment of contact.
        The penetration is hindered by the low speed and shape of the warhead - there were cases of jamming of unexploded torpedoes in the hull --- but there were 10-15 mm metal sheets and even with that, penetration into the depths was out of the question.
        1. +1
          10 May 2012
          Quote: Kars
          Torpedoes do not pierce the board with their kinetic energy, but do explode, and must explode at the moment of contact.

          You are mistaken, dear, torpedoes as well as ammunition for artillery, both barreled and reactive, differ in their purpose. It's just that special ammunition of kinetic action does not do in huge quantities, and it is for a specific purpose that they are not for large-sized actions, so to speak, and more expensive in production!
          Quote: Kars
          I break through penetration low speed and the shape of the head

          The shape of the head part does not have to be the same as in the photo in the article, it happens different actually, and then you know the speed of the torpedo in the water ??? In my opinion, it is even very causative.
          1. +8
            10 May 2012
            Quote: Sibiryak
            You are mistaken dear,

            Give classification
            Quote: Sibiryak
            Kinetic special ammunition is simply not made in large quantities.

            How is it? What do you think of the speed of the MK 46?
            Quote: Sibiryak
            parts do not have to be the same as in the photo in the article, it can be different actually

            Can I have a photo?
            Quote: Sibiryak
            and then you know the speed of a torpedo in the water ???

            To 60 nodes, translate in meters per second?
            1. -4
              10 May 2012
              Kars
              You think that well-known, so to speak, public classifications describe the whole range of invented torpedo ammunition, I think not. So it makes no sense to bring it.
              About the torpedo MK 46 is just your guess and official publications in the press and nothing more!
              On account of the photo, you can find a photo of the Russian torpedo "SHKVAL", for example what is known publicly! The shape of the head is conical! And you can think of the rest yourself.
              At the expense of meters / second, I think this is superfluous, I will say one thing, if I'm not mistaken, 60 knots is approximately 100 km / h. If you make a mistake correct!
              1. +6
                10 May 2012
                Quote: Sibiryak
                So it makes no sense to bring it.

                Super secret?
                Quote: Sibiryak
                About the torpedo MK 46 is just your guess and official publications in the press and nothing more!

                Yes, and it surpasses only YOUR assumptions and does not go beyond logic and physics
                Quote: Sibiryak
                Russian torpedo "SHKVAL",

                A flurry is unique and, as they say, is one-of-a-kind, but even they do not ascribe a penetrating warhead to it.
                Type of warhead - high explosive

                Quote: Sibiryak
                60 knots it is approximately 100 km / h

                Take the Wikipedia data for 55 nodes. This is 27,5 meters per second, do you know the speed of a legal air bullet?
                Quote: Sibiryak
                And you can think of the rest yourself.

                It’s not necessary to think over anything, I almost burst out laughing when the version about the armor-piercing torpedo was voiced by the French in .. Kursk in troubled waters ..
                Nevertheless, questions about the photo and classification remain.
                1. 0
                  10 May 2012
                  Andrei, you don’t have to snatch certain phrases from the text, so you can get to the point of absurdity!
                  The classification classification has absolutely nothing to do with it!
                  Quote: Kars
                  A flurry is unique and, as the saying goes, is one of a kind, but they do not ascribe even a penetrating warhead to it.

                  And you are absolutely sure of that, the only one. How the complex as a whole may be yes, but in certain parts I am not sure. The submarine is, of course, made of iron, but not to the same degree, to shoot at it with armor-piercing torpedoes, it is enough to change the form-geometric characteristics. By the way, the form of ammunition plays an important role, for example, in artillery there are ammunition of a certain caliber, and sub-caliber. The content is the same, but their effect varies significantly. I do not think that in the manufacture of torpedoes this characteristic is thrown aside.
                  The speed of the topeda at 27,5 m / s is very decent to break through the hull of a submarine, kinetically!
                  1. +4
                    10 May 2012
                    Quote: Sibiryak
                    no need to pull certain phrases from text

                    so it gets.
                    Quote: Sibiryak
                    The classification classification has absolutely nothing to do with it!

                    It was a torpedo --- super-duper armor-piercing.
                    Quote: Sibiryak
                    And you are absolutely sure of that, the only one.

                    There is still a German Baracuda and what?
                    Quote: Sibiryak
                    The submarine is, of course, made of iron, but not to the same degree, to shoot at it with armor-piercing torpedoes, it is enough to change the form-geometric characteristics.

                    It is made of steel capable of withstanding water pressures at depths of hundreds of meters.
                    Quote: Sibiryak
                    By the way, the form of ammunition plays an important role, for example, in artillery there are ammunition of a certain caliber, and sub-caliber

                    So here it is the shape that affects, namely the diameter and lateral load.
                    Quote: Sibiryak
                    The content is the same, but their effect varies significantly.
                    And precisely because of the speed and the fact that the diameter of the warhead is small, do not forget about the strength of the ammunition itself.
                    Quote: Sibiryak
                    The speed of the topeda at 27,5 m / s is very decent to break through the hull of a submarine, kinetically!

                    No, he can leave a dent, but there is no question of penetration, and even penetration of a solid building afterwards.
                2. 0
                  11 May 2012
                  Quote: Sibiryak
                  60 knots it is approximately 100 km / h

                  Quote: Kars
                  Take the Wikipedia data for 55 nodes. This is 27,5 meters per second, do you know the speed of a legal air bullet?

                  Respected. 60 knots, the same 100 km / h. And do not blindly trust Wikipedia. And the speed of the bullet in the air depends on the air itself and range from 130 to 450 m / s
                  1. +2
                    11 May 2012
                    Quote: limmor
                    60 knots, same 100 km / h.

                    Not 108?
                    Quote: limmor
                    And don’t blindly trust Wikipedia

                    And who blindly trusts her? They brought her as an open source, if you have an instruction manual for MK 48, share it with the public.
                    Quote: Kars
                    55 nodes is 27,5 meters

                    Quote: limmor
                    And the speed of a bullet in an air gun depends on the air itself and range from 130 to 450 m / s

                    So is the speed of an air bullet greater or less than the speed of a torpedo in water?


                    And even suppose that the breakdown in Kursk is a trace of a torpedo, then the diameter does not converge this time, and it did not explode this two, otherwise the configuration of the edges would be different.

                    I in principle do not exclude a collision with another submarine as an option, all the same, there were rumors of damage to Memphis, but categorically against .. armor-piercing .. torpedoes.
                    And in a collision, for some reason, the Kursk torpedoes exploded, or when they hit the bottom, but not from torpedoing.
          2. -2
            10 May 2012
            Clumsy excuses - not accepted!
            I would like to look at such ammunition, which, moving in the water column, could break through the double hull of neither a surface minesweeper, but a nuclear submarine!
          3. +1
            10 May 2012
            Quote: Sibiryak
            and then you know the speed of a torpedo in the water ??? In my opinion, it is even very causative.

            A torpedo will make a hole on board some destroyer, but I think it will be problematic to damage a solid submarine hull of this type, do not forget that the light hull is covered with rubber plates, now I don’t remember the exact size of the plates, and this reduces impact to some extent.
      2. +3
        10 May 2012
        You listen, it’s possible to decide that the American submariners are underwater hooligans who have no government. So they think - to whom to stick a torpedo. Some psychotherapists on the site. Did you check their mental state? Do you know how many degrees of protection weapons systems have against accidental launches? sure - you don’t even suspect about it
        1. +2
          10 May 2012
          Delta
          But listen to you, it turns out that our sailors are complete ignoramuses, but the American ones simply never make mistakes and their technology is just on the verge of fantasy. I think you can answer most of your questions yourself, and not ask, in life, not everything happens like in a book!
          Quote: Delta
          Do you know how many degrees of protection weapons systems have against accidental launches?

          This is just a man-made product that can fail respected, and very unpredictable, because of such moments, it’s not that torpedo tubes fire, submarines drown, you know!
          1. +2
            10 May 2012
            I understand this is offensive to hear, but this is not my invention. These are researched documents confirming that the readiness to fire such a torpedo was zero. That the crew hasn't fired in three years. That there was at least one significant flaw in the ship's design that put it at risk. As for complex products, there is no product in the world that suddenly goes crazy on its own initiative. There are factors that influence his behavior. And these are the people who created and exploited it. And there was always a mess in the navy, in the army. Even in the Soviet Union, which is why the boats were killed. And now even more so. So in the Union they went under water for at least 3 months, but now it's good if for a week. About Americans - I know their value and I remember that their "Greenville" drowned a Japanese fishing schooner, surfacing right under it. Anything and they happen. BUT! Their submarines have not drowned since the 68th year. Conclusions suggest themselves
            1. +2
              10 May 2012
              Delta
              Dear Vyacheslav! Life, of course, is a complicated thing, but the human factor does not always determine the emergency situation.
              You know what an attack on a warship of an independent state is and what the consequences may be. Especially on the scale of the confrontation between the United States and Russia ??? !!! This incident qualifies as a declaration of war, and what do you think, after hostile actions taken, they will tell the whole truth to society, it can end very sadly, given the attitude of our citizens to this country! In the end, this incident could and had certain political motives and consequences!
              1. -1
                10 May 2012
                let's make it easier - do you have evidence of torpedoing? or at least collisions
                1. +4
                  10 May 2012
                  Why ask a similar question if you absolutely have no evidence! Meaning??? You, like everyone involved in the discussion, have only assumptions based on public data!
                  Look at the first photo, which is not so hot of course, but it can be clearly seen from the deformation of the metal around the hole that the impact on the boat was from the outside, not from the inside !!!
                  1. 0
                    10 May 2012
                    proof of which I have not? I'm not trying to prove that she was torpedoed! Therefore, I do not need proof. There is an official version about the explosion of a torpedo in a torpedo tube. She's correct. There are studies by Admiral Ryazantsev. They show that the version is correct, but the reasons are different. The substantiations are technical, and not speculation a la "could be so." How much can you say that the torpedo does not go inside the ship, but explodes nearby? look at least the Internet sources (not Russian) about the torpedo.
        2. +1
          10 May 2012
          For some reason it seems to me that there (in the Premier League) not a single button needs to be pressed so that the torpedo goes ...
          Well, why do you think that this is easier than the machine that you need: 1) remove from the fuse, 2) cock, 3) aim, 4) pull the trigger. And that 4 actions!
          And in the Premier League, how many do you think ???
        3. DERWISH
          0
          12 May 2012
          MORE THAN I AM SURE THAT AMERUS WILL SO CHECK OUR NERVES AS HAPPENED IN YUGOSLAVIA IN GEORGIA IN IRAQ IRAN TO CONTINUE FURTHER ???
      3. +3
        10 May 2012
        Quote: Sibiryak
        The psycho-neurological state of soldiers and sailors of the us army has recently left much to be desired, there are many examples and it is not known what kind of popuas they were sitting at the remote control!

        exactly, exactly !!! An armed American is a MONKEY WITH A Grenade !!! It will certainly explode when it is a matter of time wassat
    5. +4
      10 May 2012
      Dear snek. As for the torpedo, experts say that this is some kind of cunning torpedo, which itself aims at the first compartment of the boat, and besides, that there is just something wrong with the blast wave. I don't remember exactly, but it seems to go exactly inside the boat (such as a cumulative jet) and the task of the torpedo is to detonate the ammunition compartment of 1 compartment. about why I suddenly fired, I can say that with fright. If you believe, of course, French journalists. That is, at first there was an uncritical collision with an American submarine, after which the Kursk continued to fulfill the assigned task (firing the Shkval missile-torpedo). and here the amers got scared, when their acoustician determined the opening of torpedo tubes on the Kursk, these cretins decided that it was for their souls and were the first to sniff. cowboys. Something like that.
      And in conclusion, I want to tell you that the submariners and Vidyaevo and Gadzhievo still unanimously declare that it was a torpedo of amers. and they say this not in cameras or in interviews, defending the "honor of the uniform", but as professionals in their field with their own point of view.
      And finally, for all those who are gundos about the unprofessionalism of our sailors, gouging, etc., I will say one thing. Our submariners are great people. Monuments should be put to them during their lifetime. And with professionalism, training, everything is fine with them.
      1. -1
        10 May 2012
        a cunning torpedo aiming at the first compartment))))))))) peshuizpatstala. No, well, really, when will you yourself learn to think, and not breed stupid rumors? By the way, about this torpedo (not at all tricky, but ordinary) in the Russian version of Wiki it is said that it aims itself at the end of the torpedo compartment and falls into the second - the command one. I didn't want to comment on this, but, as you can see, I have to. Firstly, this nonsense was written by ours (in Wiki anyone can pour their "thoughts"), those who want to think that way. At the same time, they did not even look at the technical description of the torpedo, which says that it explodes next to the ship. By the way, such an action of torpedoes started from the war. Yes, by the way - about gospel, "a shot with a fright" (this is generally a pearl, although there may be age ....) and training: if you take the trouble to study the works on the submarine fleet, besides the victorious reports, you will understand that not everything is good. Rather the opposite. Then everything will become clear about how our torpedo could explode inside the torpedo tube.
        1. +1
          11 May 2012
          Dear Delta. About age you are clearly mistaken. The age is the same. About reading, but why should I read if I SEEN for 8 years at the Federation Council how these people serve? Well, you yourself have taken an interesting position. What you learned on this issue is your ultimate truth, what others say is pearls, nonsense, etc. There are, after all, the rules of the game, we all take information from open sources. Right? Then why are yours more correct than mine? Plus, let's turn on the logic. Why didn't they rush to save right away? At least you yourself understand that when accepting the version of the accident (it doesn't matter the torpedo detonated, "they didn't shoot for three years, as you say"), the leadership of the fleet and the country only had to portray the tireless activity of sending rescuers, divers and take a bunch of other rescue measures. even agree to the help of the West, which he so sharply "suddenly for no reason at all offered" (by the way, in my opinion, this is the only case of this kind of proposal ..... why would?), but we were distracted, so what prevented it to do everything, and then with a sense of accomplishment to look into the eyes of relatives, society, the world. Well, they could not, lost the battle with the sea, the elements are her mother. Who would have condemned them after that? Yes, probably no one. SO WHY DID THEY NOT DO THIS? I hope you do not consider the country's leadership and the Navy to be completely brutes and idlers? There can be only one answer. THERE WASN'T AN ACCIDENT, there was something else. And the last thing about Americans in general. Of course, you can say that this is all nonsense, but there is no smoke without fire:
          1. The United States enters World War I after torpedoing a passenger ship with a German submarine (subsequently there were too many facts that made it very strong to assume that it was an Amer submarine. They torpedoed specifically to give themselves a reason to enter the war.
          2. The United States enters World War II after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor (again, there is research that allows us to conclude that the amers knew about the attack and deliberately did not react, again to give themselves a reason to enter the war, which in general did not concern them. Let me remind you that after World War I, the American people swore to fight and Roosevelt won the elections largely due to the fact that he promised not to send American soldiers to the war anywhere except the United States.So Pearl Harbor should have become such an insult that the American people themselves said “we are all going to fight.” Which is what happened.
          3. The notorious twin towers in the year 11. Well, here I think, and I don’t need to clarify. An enemy is needed for the country, but is it still there and not? get international terrorism. USA SO SOLVES ALL ITS PROBLEMS. I’m not saying that they wanted the KURSK attack to start a war with Russia, I’m saying that their head is not all right. Such could and have frowned with fright.
          1. 0
            11 May 2012
            well then let's take it in order:
            1. If you were on the Northern Fleet, what kind of "cunning torpedoes" did you see, which themselves "aim at the first compartment"? I ask for information for me, such a scoundrel that does not tolerate objections. It is information, and not speculation like "it could have been" or "there is such, but it is so classified that only I know." So that there were no conjectures about the fact that they did not rush to save on purpose, to finish off someone in the boat.
            2. About the fact that they didn’t shoot for 3 years - this is not I say, these are official data. Moreover, in the 97th they shot an electric torpedo, and they never shot a peroxide, and nobody knew how to properly operate it on board. I had to connect to the system a contract sailor from another boat.
            3. For help, the West and so on are not even indirect evidence. I'm not talking about the arrival of the head of the CIA at a meeting that had been planned long before those events. Do you have at least some evidence in favor of the torpedo version, or will we try to attach any events to the version?
            4. About Pearl Harbor and the passenger liner - do you have evidence, not fiction? the same about the towers. Were you pleased when some began to say that the explosions of residential buildings in Russia were organized by the FSB? Evidence, of course, no one brought, but there were those who believed. And what - the logic can be traced. So it is with you with Pearl Harbor, the Twin Towers and "Kursk".

            By the way, it’s not clear to me why the Americans were “scared”? why should they be afraid?
          2. veryalone
            +1
            11 May 2012
            In addition to speculation and obvious nonsense, is there at least one FACT?
      2. ISO
        ISO
        +1
        11 May 2012
        I apologize for the tone, but do you personally know any of the submariners? I don’t want to blame anyone indiscriminately, but in order to make such statements, you either have to cook it yourself or be close to the people who do it. I myself work in an enterprise that used to be engaged in full cycle U&P for nuclear weapons. So, we had quite a lot of cases when our professionals in a sober mind and healthy memory persistently and purposefully chopped a branch on which they actually sat, this is documented by the relevant acts with the appropriate form of admission. I can’t say anything about the submariners, but a student who subsequently distributed to the nuclear-powered icebreaker went through practical training. In a couple of flights I went spitting on the ice near the pole and wrote off ashore. Not only did they assemble this unit so that the pipe assemblies go like veins in a twisted cable and you’ll find hell from the beginning to the end of the pipe of one system, so the team is not quite sober too ... So the guy fell out ... Therefore, who he knows what was really there on Kursk.
      3. +1
        11 May 2012
        .... that submariners and Vidyaevo and Hajiyevo still unanimously declare that it was a torpedo of amers. and they say this not in cameras or in interviews, defending the "honor of the uniform", but as professionals in their field with their own point of view.
        ...... Exactly ...... almost from the first day everyone knew (Gadzhiev’s submariners) that you couldn’t drown project 949a just like that .... even if you really wanted to ......... ..and no one will convince us that there were no external influences ......
        ETERNAL MEMORY OF THE BROTHER !!!
        1. veryalone
          0
          11 May 2012
          But we must not persuade, but just think.
          Strictly speaking, in the French film itself, the only factual evidence of its credibility is a still image that captures the hole in the light body on the starboard side. However, this hole is located in close proximity to the cut line of the nasal compartment, but there are no clear signs of the origin of this defect from the impact of a torpedo, and the solid case in this area is intact. American torpedoes Mk-48, referred to in the film, explode outside the hull and do not leave such holes. As a result of this, it can be assumed that the hole could have been formed as a result of lifting and towing operations, when placing the boat in the dock, etc. Another strong counterargument against the torpedo version is the mismatch between the capacities of the 1st and 2nd explosions on the Kursk, recorded by seismologists, and the power of the American torpedo
      4. snv-sh
        0
        April 16 2013
        Apparently, the side of the Kursk was pierced by a high-speed training torpedo (without explosives) SHKVAL (or similar), fired by one of the surface or submarine ships located in that area, or by the Kursk itself, which, due to a system failure guidance, returned back. 3 tons of torpedo multiplied by 100 meters / second pierced the light hull and slightly damaged the durable one, which led to flooding, fire, possibly an explosion in the battery compartment and detonation of ammunition.

        Of course, there are some questions, but I think, in principle, everything was exactly like that. A distinctive dent, starting immediately from the hole, confirms that a violent collision took place. The version of "collapse" inward does not hold water. This dent could not also have been caused by hitting the ground. this would result in extensive damage to the starboard side, which is not observed. And the ballast of the Kursk would hardly have allowed such a strong roll. The hole diameter is about 70-80 cm, which approximately coincides with the caliber of the SHKVAL. At the same time, it is possible that the edges of the hole could be "trimmed" to hide the rough traces of a collision with a torpedo. It is argued that the inner (strong) hull of the boat, opposite the hole, remained intact. However, I was unable to find a single video or photograph (which, by the way, can be faked) at close range, which would confirm this. Arguments such as “they don’t shoot in that place”, “there is a practice shooting regulations” “torpedoes have a self-destruction system” are, for obvious reasons, unreliable. In theory, there could be anything that is not prohibited by the laws of physics. Another important question is why the hole was not cut off along with the nose during the lifting operation? I think the answer is very simple - we failed for technical reasons. The hole is located almost along the line of the wheelhouse and in order to cut it it was necessary either to touch the wheelhouse, which, for obvious reasons, no one wanted, or to cut it obliquely. Perhaps, in the beginning, they tried to do so, but frequent breakdowns of the saw forced them to abandon this. In the Barents Sea, the season of storms was approaching and in order to finish the lifting operation, the hull had to be sawed in the usual transverse way.
        Of course, what I have outlined is just a version of the Kursk's death, but I think it is quite serious.
    6. +2
      10 May 2012
      Quote: snek
      1. The hole shown on the case has only a part of the circle, and in the lower right corner you can see a sharp edge.

      A hole in the hull of the wheelhouse. And yet. If there was a torpedo hit, then after the explosion, hardly any traces remained in the place of impact, the place itself simply would not have remained. The torpedo, which was prepared for disposal by shooting during exercises, the so-called thick code 56-76.
      1. 0
        10 May 2012
        65-76. Not for disposal. On a simple shot from a torpedo tube
  4. Ataturk
    +14
    10 May 2012
    The kingdom of heaven is for those who died in this eyeliner. I will not wish such an excruciating death to the enemy. And how sorry for the mothers and fathers who lost their sons, I’m even afraid to imagine.

    My sincere condolences to the families of those who died in this terrible disaster.


    Culprits, if not in this world, then before God they will answer for everything.
  5. shipbuilder
    +6
    10 May 2012
    In the circles of informed divers, I heard confirmation of part of the official version, with few exceptions, the fire was caused by a collision with an American submarine, which, by coincidence, hit the TA cover with a prepared torpedo.
  6. +11
    10 May 2012
    I am not a specialist, but the Mk48 torpedo has a caliber of 533 mm, and the hole is not less than 1,5 m, in addition, the skin towards the stern is practically intact, if there was an explosion, there would be at least some trace of it. stay, so the origin of this particular hole is clearly not torpedo.
    1. +1
      10 May 2012
      naturally not torpedo
    2. veryalone
      +1
      11 May 2012
      Needless to say: Strictly speaking, in the French film itself, the only factual evidence of its credibility is a still image that captures the hole in the light body on the starboard side. However, this hole is located in close proximity to the cut line of the nasal compartment, but there are no clear signs of the origin of this defect from the impact of a torpedo, and the solid case in this area is intact. American torpedoes Mk-48, referred to in the film, explode outside the hull and do not leave such holes. As a result of this, it can be assumed that the hole could have been formed as a result of lifting and towing operations, when placing the boat in the dock, etc. Another strong counterargument against the torpedo version is the mismatch between the capacities of the 1st and 2nd explosions on the Kursk, recorded by seismologists, and the power of the American torpedo
  7. 443190
    +11
    10 May 2012
    Great article !!! For URA PATRIOTISM it is impossible to forget history. It is necessary to draw conclusions from such tragic events and prevent their recurrence.
    TO THE HEROIC CREW ETERNAL MEMORY !!!
    All the same, they will not tell us anyway.
  8. +6
    10 May 2012
    Since politics is involved here, they will not tell us the truth. It remains to remember the heroes.
  9. +5
    10 May 2012
    It is unlikely that the Americans are to blame, although many would prefer this version, it’s a shame to admit that they themselves are to blame. Most likely there was either spontaneous detonation of an explosive of one of the combat torpedoes or a factory marriage of electric and electronic filling, which is not surprising, considering what kind of mess was in the nineties , and the marriage was hidden and it could not be found either at the manufacturer's factory, or with mandatory testing in the arsenal before loading onto the submarine, but when testing on board the submarine during exercises, it exploded.
    1. +1
      10 May 2012
      torpedoes on board are not "tested". They are prepared, loaded into a torpedo tube and fired. But only
    2. shipbuilder
      +4
      10 May 2012
      Why did the Americans start to fuss? There would be no evidence that they had a snout in the gun, to hell would we have snatched it. But the truth is known to sailors - there are a lot of cases of collision and rapprochement in the areas of exercises, which would happen sooner or later, since there were no and no underwater law. It was necessary to raise such noise in the mind in order to force the bourgeoisie to create a legal field for underwater navigation, and not to the informal agreements that are now taking place.
      1. 0
        10 May 2012
        Do you have evidence of collision or torpedoing? NO. Nobody has them. Memphis was examined by a Norwegian journalist. Found no damage. I am generally silent about the torpedo attack - from the realm of fantasy. And what is the fussiness of the Americans? as they were silent about their actions and are silent. And don't fuss
        1. shipbuilder
          +3
          10 May 2012
          My wife would also not have found signs of a collision. In addition, in that area there were three boats Memphis, Toledo and British. And which one ran straight into the states dashed off. Was the journalist probably in Norway?
          PS Who likes pictures of warships - navy mil.com website, photo gallery. Unfortunately only yusovskie.
          1. -3
            10 May 2012
            Do you really want the tracks to be?
            1. shipbuilder
              +4
              10 May 2012
              What are you minus? I haven’t written anything bad. The traces will be removed by speculation on the topic of poor crew training (which went through a military campaign in the Balkan conflict area) and poor-quality weapons.
              1. -2
                10 May 2012
                and we are already on "you"? how quickly))) I did not minus, by the way. That's how they got used to - to make statements without reason. I will not write about that trip, but the fact that there are documents confirming the unpreparedness of the crew to handle peroxide torpedoes is a fact. And the fact that since the 97th year "Kursk" has not performed torpedo firing is a fact. Here is the preparation. Doesn't it seem strange to you that the best always die?
                1. shipbuilder
                  +2
                  10 May 2012
                  In order to whitewash themselves, not such documents are concocted, although given the attitude of the then leadership towards our armed forces, this is possible. Regarding the death of the best, then in vain irony. Of course they are the best. I used to be afraid even to ride in the elevator, and they spent months at the reactors, with weapons for a beggarly salary, thinking whether there would be enough money for families to eat. In addition, the ship is a collective weapon, the mistake of one can lead to the death of all.
                  PS Sorry, got excited, I was just given the next rank, the commander’s disease started, I admired my epaulettes and here they again lowered me.)))
                  1. -2
                    10 May 2012
                    You did not understand the main thing - in order to whitewash themselves the "naval commanders" invented a version of the collision. And even about torpedoing. It is important to them. And they have invented a crack in the coaming area. That is why the British rescue boat was then not allowed to board the Kursk, because it could dock and pump out water from the docking lock. The documents I spoke about were signed long before the disaster and reflect the real situation in the fleet, and in particular about the combat training of that crew. Are you talking about irony. Of course, irony (maybe it is inappropriate) - how can only the best die all the time, while the worst remain alive or what? by the way, the Kursk was not considered the best in the 1st flotilla. He was somewhere in the middle
                    1. shipbuilder
                      +4
                      10 May 2012
                      And the Americans didn’t give 10 billion, but our admirals.
                      As far as I remember, the admirals did not invent, but kept quiet. And their "punishment" indirectly confirms the American trace. Studying the disaster in the media is a thankless job, and combat training is a relative concept, an unprepared crew will not leave the sea.
                      1. +6
                        10 May 2012
                        And for what they gave 10 billion? Have you read Cherkashin? so he is still a seascape-dreamer, like Pikul. Have you seen how Popov on the RTR channel staged a performance with "Allegedly accidentally hitting the frame of his brooding turnip and discussing where did the hole come from?" Have you studied this disaster in the media? me not. In particular, on the study of Vice Admiral Ryazantsev, who was a member of the commission to investigate the disaster. Based on his report, and not because of the mythical Americans, the admirals were fired. Otherwise, they would have remained in their places. So at least formally, justice prevailed, because violations in combat training, technical shortcomings and negligence were evident. Can you list them? Will you believe the facts or do you have one version - "your own-correct"?

                        An untrained crew at sea will not leave? Are you already openly mocking or just far from this topic as from the moon? give you examples when ONLY the actions of crews (in Soviet times) were the cause of the death of the nuclear submarines?
                      2. shipbuilder
                        0
                        10 May 2012
                        I really am not a submariner, far from this topic. Therefore, we will wait on the site of divers. I understand you about the death of Komsomolets and the disaster off the east coast of the United States? This is a topic for discourse. I am not strong in them.
                      3. +3
                        10 May 2012
                        besides Komsomolets and K-219, there was also K-429, when 50% of the crew were from other boats and simply did not know how to do what was needed, lost their “linearity”. There was also a S-80, where a sailor attached from another boat, when the water rushed through the RDP shaft, instead of turning the handle to the right, turned to the left, because it was like that on his own boat. There was also a K-56, when they just decided to take a break and did not observe the situation, for which they received a bow (on the surface !!!). And there are plenty of such examples. So much for preparedness.
                      4. shipbuilder
                        +1
                        10 May 2012
                        I wanted to finish on this, but still answer. It seems that in spite of your awareness, it seems that you are also far from the fleet. I myself am a techie and I know how the transport management was built, be it the Navy, aviation or steam locomotives.
                        1. Often raw equipment is supplied, which requires safety violations during operation, which has a low resource and reliability.
                        2. Also, it happens that overly sophisticated equipment is supplied, requiring large maintenance costs than was stated.
                        3. Shortcomings during installation and design, which leads to the impossibility and / or significant difficulties with those. maintenance, repair and daily operation.
                        4. Often the coastal manager (headquarters, etc.) creates conditions when violations are inevitable. (forcing with a "ruble", or lack of the necessary spare parts or repairs.) And everyone knows everything, but for discussion it is taboo.
                        Moreover, the transport / armed forces have a guilty plea, that is, you have to prove that you are not to blame, but with the current management system this is not possible. + Of course, the human factor as a catalyst.
                        As an example, the latest aircraft catastrophes: (why exactly are they? They cannot be hidden because they are often catastrophic.) They were not treated with an anti-icing fluid - it seems that the pilots are to blame, but the pilot will never give up safety without pressure from above in the form of "briefings" and conversations, and if will object and may lose work, or they will not give bonuses, or the second will fly all his life, and such examples are countless.
                        PS You yourself said the nuclear submarines, but gave all the examples. On the S-80 there would be a competently designed zadrovaniya system that does not allow errors, nothing would have happened. There are rarely accidents and disasters where a purely human factor has worked. It is always a complex of errors, starting with design. When they hang noodles, according to statistics 80% of accidents due to the human factor always remember this. When working for a large company / ministry, they often push off the responsibility for operation / person (except for the insured equipment, then vice versa) to minimize damage and preserve their seats.
                      5. shipbuilder
                        +2
                        10 May 2012
                        I have not yet mentioned the psycho-physical factor, which is the main cause of personnel error. When they say they say that Ivan did something wrong, I have several questions:
                        1. When was the last time Ivanov rested and how much.
                        2. Duties of Ivanov.
                        3. When was the briefing given and by whom.
                        4. This someone had time to spend in fact or not.
                        5. How many Ivanovs are at work (swimming).
                        By the way, I don’t know if we have complete submarine simulators for working out emergency situations? Indeed, on a real object, training is problematic due to the fact that many actions are done conditionally.
                        I agree with many of your comments, but so far I do not agree about the unavailability of the crew.
                      6. -2
                        10 May 2012
                        study

                        http://lib.rus.ec/b/214731/read#t1

                        much will become clear
                      7. +1
                        11 May 2012
                        Quote: Delta
                        when 50% of the crew were from other boats and just

                        When replacing more than 30% of the full-time personnel, the division commander is obliged to stop the crew’s voyage and begin training with task L-! with the preparation and delivery of KAPL tasks in full.
                        In this case, 47 specialists from different crews were seconded aboard, which amounted to 54% of the staff.
                        The boat went out to sea with a malfunction and a very serious leakage of the ventilation system in 4 compartments. Malfunction, not compatible with diving (from the book of Chernov E.D. "Secrets of underwater disasters"
                      8. 0
                        11 May 2012
                        olegyurjewitch, about the "division", however, you got excited, do you agree? = Best regards ...
                      9. 0
                        11 May 2012
                        Quote: Bear52
                        olegyurjewitch, about the "division", however, you got excited, do you agree? = Best regards ...

                        That is what Chernov wrote.
                    2. -1
                      11 May 2012
                      Damn Delta Well, you yourself hear that? What version of torpedoing did the naval commanders make? Just no one has officially considered this version. Because there probably was a taboo that can indirectly confirm the version of torpedoing. You are interesting to ask questions. You yourself read one admiral, and that's it for you, the question is closed. Strange you come to a discussion. I thought you were a submariner yourself.
                      By the way, to your other comment about the first flotilla. The nuclear submarine "Kursk" was part of the 11th squadron of nuclear submarines of the Northern Fleet, specifically in the 7th division stationed in Vidyaevo. The squadron was 2. 11 with bases in the Western face (I don't remember the division number) and Vidyaevo (7th division) and 12 squadron of the Northern Fleet submarine (With a base in Gadzhievo, if my memory serves me 24 and 31 divisions. And about the first flotilla, I have something not I heard.
                      1. +2
                        11 May 2012
                        so you probably didn’t watch TV when you picked up the Kursk. One of the photos in this thread is just that report. When the officials staged a show, allegedly accidentally falling under the camera, they reasoned - maybe it could be a torpedo or not. And about the taboo - this is purely your speculation. Have you seen at least somewhere the statement of at least one professional submariner that this is torpedoing? Please give me such a statement, I read it with interest.
                        I did not read ONE admiral, as you deigned to put it. I studied this question for a long time. Well, then - THIS admiral was in the commission of inquiry, was not interested in a lie, because now in stock.

                        I am asking interesting questions, but do you have answers or just emotions? that's how everything goes on emotions.

                        Regarding the flotilla: The order of the fleet commander to enroll the atomic submarine in the 1st flotilla was issued in mid-February 1995 (the nuclear submarine arrived in Vidyaevo in mid-January 1995), the order of the 1st flotilla commander to enroll in the flotilla was issued in mid March 1995 What are you trying to catch me with? I may be mistaken in such data. Does this change the essence? The 7th division has been part of the 1994st submarine flotilla since 1
                      2. -1
                        11 May 2012
                        the trouble is that many have studied this question for a long time and everyone has different versions. As for the state commission, see point one. In your opinion, could the state commission conclude that Kursk died due to an American torpedo? Personally, I am sure that we would have quickly recognized his death from alien weapons, so in any case, we will not know the truth. I just don’t like it when people evaluate other people based on statements from third parties. Normal guys are our submariners. This is not their fault. And as for the flotillas, I too, of course, may not be entirely accurate. I talked about them as of 2002, when I actually arrived at ..... in general, there
                      3. +1
                        11 May 2012
                        guys are normal, I do not argue. Yes, only the preparation is weak. And this is not what I came up with, I stress again. You just feel offended to read and admit it is difficult. Not from the statements of housewives, I made my conclusions. In the state commission, as it turned out, there were also different people. There were also those who opposed the existing system and directly spoke about the flaws in the fleet. About what could lead to disaster, all the details are painted, the heap of which, coupled with certain circumstances, led to the death.

                        I repeat - there is no 100% correct version. But the fact that this hole is not from a torpedo is exactly 100%. And the subsequent statements about tricky torpedoes and unambiguous conclusions from the arrival of the head of the CIA are all the more nonsense.

                        As for the flotillas: what, isn’t there already a 7th division now? and she is not in the first flotilla? I'm not ironic, it's just a question
              2. Aleksey67
                +2
                10 May 2012
                Quote: shipbuilder
                What are you minus?

                I set the cons.
                1. shipbuilder
                  +3
                  10 May 2012
                  Tell me what you disagree with
                  1. Aleksey67
                    +5
                    10 May 2012
                    Damn, the site is buggy already answered, but did not pass, okay on a new smile
                    Quote: shipbuilder
                    Why did the Americans start to fuss? There would be no evidence that they had a snout in the gun, to hell would we have snatched it. But the truth is known to sailors - there are a lot of cases of collision and rapprochement in the areas of exercises, that sooner or later this would have happened, since there was no underwater law

                    Amer and did not fuss, but ours were supposed to ensure the protection of the test area.
                    Quote: shipbuilder
                    My wife would also not have found signs of a collision.

                    A very good argument, further in your comments delve into laziness
        2. +1
          10 May 2012
          Quote: Delta
          Memphis was examined by a Norwegian journalist. Found no damage.

          Here is a true expert in the field of military forensics !!! HIGHLY PROFESSIONAL AND INCORRECT ESTIMATION (Is Norway Norway not a member of NATO?) fool
          1. 0
            10 May 2012
            Well, of course, the only incorruptible expert is you. And the Russian admirals thought so, as if to show their guilt to everyone, and not mythical torpedoing. Or have you seen an American torpedo? own inventions - that’s all you have. And then - based on likes and dislikes, and not on technical assumptions
        3. +2
          10 May 2012
          Memphis was examined by a Norwegian journalist! I was laughing. You trust us with a purely journalistic investigation. We now have an expert journalist. You think and don’t go crazy. Any military object is prepared for the arrival of journalists, anyone! And they only give what you can shoot! Memorize it!
          1. +2
            10 May 2012
            I will definitely take your note into account))))))

            I am laughing at your statements about Memphis, monetary compensation, and more. Well, when they started about the torpedoes - he was completely dead)))) It seems that you didn’t even learn physics, what kind of underwater thing is there ...
            1. +3
              11 May 2012
              Quote: Delta
              what an underwater affair.

              Guys, these are all tales with torpedoes, believe me, I myself served on a boat, and by the way on the 1st flotilla. If this happened, even if we were weak at that time, it would end in hostilities, with unpredictable consequences. So this is nonsense sucked from one hypothetical version of what happened. Explosion of a torpedo proved, followed by detonation of ammunition. Eternal memory to sailors!
          2. veryalone
            +1
            11 May 2012
            Nevertheless, even a journalist would see all significant damage. And judging by her videos, she just climbed everywhere - and she would still have discovered putty fools ... But they weren’t.
      2. +3
        10 May 2012
        Quote: shipbuilder
        Why did the Americans start to fuss?

        Well, firstly, when practicing training firing, as well as during exercises, a warning is given to all vessels that such squares with coordinates such as these are declared closed to shipping, secondly, being in the area of ​​military exercises of foreign ships is fraught with consequences, well, in the third AWACS in such cases, both surface and submarine ships, of course, established the presence of other targets that are not indicated in the exercise regulations, but this is not necessary in the exercise zone, nearby but not in the zone. If the ship is in contact, it means outside, there is no secrecy, for it is on the head not gladyat.Vosstanovit secrecy is not easy, it requires a certain maneuvers, and the Barents Sea is not the best place on the scale.
        1. 0
          10 May 2012
          backward segments of the population simply do not understand that Los Angeles can be watched from 50 miles away. And that will be enough for her. and this will also be "near"
  10. +4
    10 May 2012
    All this is sad only.
    In this regard, for some reason, the phrase is recalled:
    "There is a truth that is unpleasantly similar to a lie and there is a lie that is very similar to the truth."
  11. Vito
    +4
    10 May 2012
    Most likely, we most likely will not find out. Personally, I have questions about the actions of our authorities to save the KURSK crew. How much time was lost, well, maybe at least someone would be saved? Why haven’t they tried so professionally for so long? And did anyone from the higher management want anyone to survive on the submarine and give true testimonies! ETERNAL MEMORY OF OUR Sailors!
    1. +4
      10 May 2012
      there was already no one to save, for the last 23 sailors of the 12th were killed. It showed a forensic examination. Another thing is that they could not know this then and could save more professionally. When saving, the devices could not dock for coaming for a long time. But at the docking they couldn’t pump out the water and the lock could not happen. There is only one reason - the old sealing rubber of rescue vehicles, which had long had to be replaced and the report about which was given by the commander of the AC-34. And they called the crack of the hatch the cause. After raising the submarine, no cracks were found, but it is not beneficial for anyone to talk about it
      1. Aleksey67
        +6
        10 May 2012
        Quote: Delta
        One reason - the old sealing rubber rescue vehicles

        For the sloppiness of some, others must become heroes ...
        Quote: Delta
        and what the commander of the AC-34 was reporting.

        Is it worth the prosecutor’s office to start a business, because the nits are still alive?
      2. Vito
        +5
        10 May 2012
        Delta Maybe you're right, I do not argue. At least all this fuss with search and rescue looked somehow strange!
  12. nnnnnnnnn
    0
    10 May 2012
    Minus the article, the author either copied, or a complete nerd doing PR for the memory of the dead, the article is written for housewives and pimple youths or for shit and liberals. I read his pearls such as:
    And some American experts even argue that such a hole is a kind of brand name of the American torpedo MK-48, which is able to pass through the steel casing thanks to a special mechanism that is located on the nose and is capable of to melt copper.
    moreover, copper is light and the robust submarine cases are made of steel or titanium.
    Yes, and a posthumous note captain of a submarine cruiser clearly indicates that at that time there was no one left on board who could ask for help.
    the note on the photographs is a leaf from the logbook of the 9th compartment by Captain-Lieutenant Kolesnikov, commander of the turbine group, movement division БЧ-5.
    Moreover, during the search and rescue operation, until the moment when the situation was still not controlled by the authorities, information appeared in the media that light green rescue buoys were found near the place of the Kursk’s death, although the Russians use only white and red. Another evidence of the plausibility of this version is the reception of signals for help, which the cruiser Peter the Great received on August 13-14. And if initially the rescuers hoped that these signals were sent from Kursk, then later, after decoding them, it became clear that they came from a foreign submarine (they were supplied by a mechanical emitter, but they are not used on Russian submarines).
    The submarine has two emergency buoys, on the bow and in the stern, these buoys are no different from the buoys used by the Americans and others, mechanical emitter is that what the author means a black man sitting on a buoy and beating a bell?
    perished crew eternal memory and low bow.
  13. +2
    10 May 2012
    It would seem, well, what else can be added, because everything is clearly shown.
    In the first TV story and a lie detector, you don’t need to see that the creature opposite King is impudently lying. Particularly outraged by the attitude of this creature to the dead people. It does not express a single drop of sympathy for the victims and condolences to their families and friends. It says that he had "offers" in connection with the tragedy to stop his vacation in Sochi, BUT IT WAS CONTINUED TO RELAX ...
    In the second television story, Dorenko after each (!!!) sentence of this creature showed that he was lying.
    But as it turned out, some even this is not enough to understand the TRUTH ABOUT THE DEATH OF THE KURSK CREW. Or pretend?
  14. Spartak
    +4
    10 May 2012
    Eternal memory to the guys. Unfortunately, if we find out the truth, it will not be soon. And if this truth turns out to be bitter, then may God punish those who deceived the relatives of the victims, deceived their fellow citizens.

    "There is no rest for those who have done evil.
    These people are so unlucky.
    There is no peace for those who indulge
    To those who knew and still were silent "
    1. +2
      11 May 2012
      Quote: Spartak
      Unfortunately, if we find out the truth, it will not be soon.

      Not soon and not what it is, but a convenient excuse by then. We are supposed to know what is supposed to be about others, and to others it is mutually only supposed to know about us.
  15. +5
    10 May 2012
    Whatever the real reasons for the tragedy, the perpetrators are still not punished. When the rustic village was on Red Square, shoulder straps fell off from many military ranks. And after the destruction of the Kursk, only awards were handed out. Here they are - the new realities of Russia.
    1. 703-s
      +7
      10 May 2012
      nothing new is said.
      they wanted to sink an American boat. but Putin was scared
      to give an order !
      and sold the boys for 10 billion.
      I happened to be at a meeting of graduates of the Sevastopol "galoshes".
      and no one believes in official tales.
      I’ll be in Sevastopol in the summer and take pictures from the monument to one of the submariners. there such correct verses are written, for which this site mercilessly minus.

      and nothing has changed about the awards.
      The last awarded: Makarov, Gorbach, Churov!
  16. nnnnnnnnn
    +4
    10 May 2012
    Article minus copy-paste poor translation? or the author does not understand what the pearl is for example:And some American experts even argue that such a hole is a kind of brand name of the American torpedo MK-48, which is able to pass through the steel casing thanks to a special mechanism that is located on the nose and is capable of to melt copper. hulls of submarines are made of steel or titanium, and where does the copper?
    Moreover, during the search and rescue operation until the moment when the situation was not yet controlled by the authorities, information leaked to the media that light green rescue buoys were found near the place of the Kursk’s death, although the Russians only use white and red. Another evidence of the credibility of this version is the reception of signals for help, which the cruiser Peter the Great received on August 13-14. And if initially the rescuers hoped that these signals were sent from Kursk, then later, after decoding them, it became clear that they came from a foreign submarine (Moreover, during the search and rescue operation until the moment when the situation was not yet controlled by the authorities, information leaked to the media that light green rescue buoys were found near the place of the Kursk’s death, although Russians use only white and red buoys. Russia is receiving signals of help received by the cruiser Peter the Great on August 13-14, and if the rescuers initially hoped that these signals were sent from Kursk, then later, after decoding them, it became clear that they came from a foreign submarine (they were supplied by a mechanical emitter, but they are not used on Russian submarines).
    On a submarine there are two buoys, one on the bow and the other on the stern, the device of these buoys is no different from each other, and this opus is like you mechanical emitter, is this how an American sailor sits on a buoy and hits the market or a tambourine?
    And the posthumous note of the captain of the submarine cruiser clearly indicates that at that time there was no one left on the ship who could ask for help.
    Commander "Kursk" Captain 1st Rank G. Lyachin the photograph of the note is from the logbook of the 9th compartment written by captain-lieutenant Dmitry Kolesnikov, commander of the turbine group of the movement division БЧ-5.
  17. Indigo
    +3
    10 May 2012
    And some American experts even argue that such a hole is a kind of trademark of the American MK-48 torpedo, which is able to pass through steel plating bthanks to a special mechanism that is located on the nose and is able to melt copper.

    However, American specialists, such specialists, or the author smoked something heavy ... or I am tormented by doubts that Kursk was made of copper and luminium ...
    Lyachin was an experienced commander and such a colossus as Kursk; in fact, he could not extort himself at a depth of about 100m.
    There must have been trouble in the dash itself, as in Bulava, where something is wrong and crooked, and trouble, it crawled out sideways ...
    Eternal Glory and Memory to the crew of Kursk !!!
  18. +3
    10 May 2012
    Spartak,
    Quote: "There is no rest for those who have done evil.
    These people are so unlucky.
    There is no peace for those who indulge
    Those who knew and still were silent "...


    If it were so ....
  19. +12
    10 May 2012
    The article is complete nonsense. The clash version is beneficial to everyone, especially the former and current fleet command. About a hole in the body - chickens to laugh. Modern torpedoes explode without breaking through a light body (and only light in this case, given the fact that the solid body remained intact in that place), but exploding in the vicinity of the propellers, making noise.
    Vice-Admiral Valery Ryazantsev, a member of the commission of inquiry, described the reasons for the explosion in his report with sufficient skill and truth. At the same time, the version of the same Spassky does not stand up to criticism. Now he declares that after the first explosion there was a fire in the first compartment, which caused the explosion of the rest of the torpedoes, then he admits that there are no traces of fire on the torpedoes themselves. We must not forget that the crew was not the best (may the dead forgive me, although they are not to blame for the preparation). Their flotation was 12-14 days a year !! Apart from the Mediterranean campaign. There, half of the officers did not have admission to independent management. Nobody knew how to handle peroxide torpedoes; a sailor from another boat connected these torpedoes to the system. A torpedo officer assigned from another Kursk firing boat brought documents on these torpedoes from a boat of another project !!! And they blamed everything on a non-existent enterprise in Alma-Ata and some already non-existent welder who welded something wrong in 1990. Very comfortably. Do not forget about the design features (I would even say - shortcomings) of this ship. In particular, when firing torpedoes in salvo, the designers recommended the crew to depressurize the first and second compartments, i.e. make them adjacent by opening the ventilation ducts. This makes the ship incredibly vulnerable in emergency situations. This is exactly what happened after the explosion of the first torpedo - in the first compartment everyone was dead, because the explosion of even a practical (training) torpedo causes lethal pressure on a person. In the second compartment, everyone was wounded by the explosion and did not control the situation. The ship, through a destroyed torpedo tube, took hundreds of tons of water in two minutes, going to a depth, uncontrollable, collided with the ground at a speed of about 3 knots. At the same time, the angle of incidence became such that the torpedo tubes were crushed, the combat torpedoes in them detonated. The crew in other compartments could do nothing. Like this. And no figs to chat about some foreign buoys - there were none. The official chronicle speaks of a buoy-like jellyfish. And no one caught him. By the way, the perpetrators were named. 14 admirals lost their posts. BUT!! As it is customary for us - almost all those who lost their positions went to the promotion. And Popov is generally a deputy.
    1. Vito
      +4
      10 May 2012
      Delta Greetings. It's a shame that they were so "punished" so severely. This causes impunity and indifference!
    2. Aleksey67
      +8
      10 May 2012
      DeltaThank you for the objective and reasoned comment. It can be seen that they are not familiar with the underwater service from literature. good It's nice that there are such forum users drinks
    3. controller
      +2
      11 May 2012
      One submariner spoke about his friend decommissioned from Kursk. So, if I don’t confuse, about a year before the death of the boat he was instructed to get these hydrogen torpedoes for training firing. He refused, because they need constant maintenance that no one conducts and does not know how to conduct, and shooting them in this state is similar to Russian roulette. In general, this submariner was fired quietly and in his place they put a young man who waved his saber and received these unfortunate torpedoes.
      I retell it may not quite exactly as they told me, but I hope the meaning is clear.
      So, probably, we also have ammunition in warehouses torn. For example, you can take a tank shell, which at the first push (shot) becomes a platoon, and at the second (hit an obstacle) explodes. For the first push, it is enough to drop it from two meters high somewhere in the warehouse during loading, the second will be when fired in the gun itself. With hydrogen torpedoes, I think everything is much more complicated.
  20. +7
    10 May 2012
    And some American experts even claim that such a hole is a kind of brand name of the American torpedo MK-48, which is able to pass through the steel sheathing thanks to a special mechanism that is located on the nose and is able to melt copper.

    Read more: http://topwar.ru/14155-gibel-kurska-tayny-bolshe-net.html

    Armor-piercing torpedoes are nonsense.
    1. 0
      10 May 2012
      [quote = Kars] And some American experts even argue that such a hole is a kind of brand name for the American MK-48 torpedo, which is able to pass through steel plating thanks to a special mechanism that is located on the nose and is able to melt copper.

      the statement is really absurd, but I think it's the difficulties of technical translation or the journalists got it wrong, the film talks about the uranium core and copper rim which enters into some kind of reaction in the explosion to raise the temperature

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XwBMKwRAVmw&feature=related
  21. +7
    10 May 2012
    Moreover, during the search and rescue operation until the moment when the situation was not yet controlled by the authorities, information appeared in the media that light green rescue buoys were found near the place of the Kursk’s death, although the Russians only use white and red.

    But if the British zealously defended their innocence, demanding proof from the Russians, then the Americans acted more restrainedly, as if they had something to hide. But the truth was that: on the seabed, rescuers discovered a conning tower fence, which is usually installed on American submarines
    It turns out that the American boat torpedoed ours, and then it began to fall apart: threw buoys, oil stains, dropped the guard from the conning tower))) - some strange torpedo attack, do not you think?

    Read more: http://topwar.ru/14155-gibel-kurska-tayny-bolshe-net.html
    1. +2
      10 May 2012
      yeah, strange - this is at least.
  22. 0
    10 May 2012
    I myself am not a submariner, but the father of the submariner said that no one was alive immediately after the explosion.
    It was based on the fact that there was a crack in the hatch of the last compartment.
    1. +6
      10 May 2012
      talk of a crack was not confirmed after lifting the boat. Father submariner did not watch the news? there were at least three notes — Kolesnikov, Sadilenko, and another officer. Moreover, Sadilenko’s note was written in even handwriting, which means that there was still light at that time. The notes confirm that approximately 10 hours after the explosion occurred in the boat, 23 sailors survived - in the 9th compartment. Submariners found there were almost all burned, Kolesnikov was burned at the top to the bone. This suggests that when equipping the plates that regenerate oxygen, a fire occurred, which was not possible to extinguish (these plates are not quenched by water or sand, because they themselves produce oxygen). The fire burned out the last oxygen, everyone died from suffocation, and not from drowning (these are the results of forensic examination).
  23. +5
    10 May 2012
    Forgive us guys! .. Peace be with you Heaven and everlasting peace! .. And we will still know the truth! For God is with us!
  24. +8
    10 May 2012
    "Copper smelting torpedoes" amers ... it's cool. I don’t want to touch upon the reasons for the death of the Kursk - there are too many questions and indistinct answers ... some versions. And if some "Memphis" or "Toledo" are to blame, then I wish our commanders to be angry and have a good memory.
    But the rescue operation should be touched separately. Where was the Northern Fleet ACS and why, having the nuclear submarines in service, we cannot help the crew in an emergency? Do we have disposable boats? Like people?
    The catamaran "Kommuna" has been sailing on the Black Sea Fleet for over 100 years! Can you imagine the level of technology in service?
    There are no Russian words that are not obscene when I think that the length of the boat was almost two depths on which it lay. And if we had modern means of salvation, we would get from the last compartment living boys ... Eh .. if so, if only ... Gossip, irresponsibility, cowardice ... "She drowned ..."Bl ...!
    1. +8
      10 May 2012
      The devil knows how old the rescue vessel "Mikhail Rudnitsky" is, and it was put on readiness to go to sea for 1 hour only 12 hours after the explosion. As if no one on Peter the Great felt the explosion. We felt all the shuddering of the case, the acoustics said about the explosion, but ... I wrote above about how they docked, but it should also be noted that the batteries, which had exhausted their resource, did not hold a charge, and therefore almost never really "sucked" them not enough. And also the failed antennas, because of which they had to aim at the boat from the rescue vessel. We must remember the main thing - financing. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, even completely new warships were sold and cut, let alone the rescue service. By the way, it was beneficial for some people not to find anyone alive. Maybe that's why they didn't call deep divers (and there are some in Russia). To the enclosures for connecting and supplying air to the boat from the outside (and even hot coffee) is possible only by divers, and not by devices and their manipulators.

      As for depth and length ... I cannot agree. In the 39th year, the British were able to save the submariners and the submarine "Tethys", the stern of which stuck out for a long time on the surface
      1. 0
        10 May 2012
        those. Failed
    2. PARROT
      0
      10 May 2012
      Regarding the rescue operation, there was a chance that the Norwegians would save part of the crew, Norway offered help, but your authorities refused.
  25. +9
    10 May 2012
    In the article, a typo about copper, in fact, a torpedo does not melt copper, just on the nose of this torpedo there is a copper ring and it collides in some way (when it warms up to a state of melting or can turn into a plasma, understand horseradish :)) it contributes to a more confident passage plating. Another feature of this torpedo is that from a pair of nasal devices it can be let in instantly, without preparation time, the guidance system directs it precisely to the torpedo compartment, where we see a hole, and as far as I remember it DOES NOT EXPLETE but causes an extensive FIRE.
    In general, think for yourself, decide for yourself, but I do not believe the official version, the words "she drowned" jar me, we were sold and will be sold, I did not vote for PU and I do not support its activities. I think that the country is slowly, not quite skillfully, being prepared for surrender, trying to beat out more profitable conditions.
    You can minus.
    1. +3
      10 May 2012
      Quote: heruv1me
      heating up to a state of melting or it can turn into a plasma, get the hell out of it :)

      Now imagine the heat capacity of the surrounding sea water and the steel side of the torpedoed object. The moment of the rebound upon impact is how long the contact will take.
      It’s just interesting where you can read the characteristics of the topedos because I looked at the truth on surface ships; a torpedo explodes under the bottom.
    2. +2
      10 May 2012
      Did you write all this seriously? It's not a minus, but technical literacy and logic, at least. As for Putin .... that's interesting, but what was he supposed to answer a clearly provocative and stupid question?
    3. +2
      10 May 2012
      We can give you our Janik with Ahmet))) Oh, these are definitely faster than your nut-cut Russia! Ukraine has already been torn ... Sori, that is off topic.
  26. Cuba
    +1
    10 May 2012
    Guys, even if the Americans did this, the GDP chose the lesser evil, if they gave an answer (they used force) there would be World War 3 .. Have you ever thought about this? I had to sacrifice a hundred sailors to save the lives of millions, including ours with you.
    1. +10
      10 May 2012
      Tomorrow, by mistake, bombed in Severomorsk or P / Pavlovsk ... Horseradish with them-save the lives of millions ??? Powers was shot down, the Korean Boeing was overwhelmed, and there were many more. With boors it is necessary in boorish, otherwise they become impudent.
      Russia is not Honduras!
    2. 703-s
      +3
      10 May 2012
      Cuba
      there were no people close to you.
      and people close to me died there!
  27. +4
    10 May 2012
    As for the "business card" of the Mk48 torpedo, I can say that I saw the American documentary film where they sank a decommissioned destroyer from a submarine with this torpedo. So, according to the computer graphics, you can see that the torpedo was detonated under the bottom of the destroyer. Due to the strongest blast wave and the following vacuum rarefaction, the ship's hull fractured. In the video, the spectacle is even more eerie - with one torpedo, the ship is cut in half! An explosion of such force that mama do not cry!
    In our case, maybe this version of the Mk48 torpedo is purely anti-submarine with different parameters and direction of the blast wave ?? The fact that she is sinking a large warship is beyond doubt. The sub will probably sink too. And the Kursk ...? I do not know. How is the version? But it is also quite likely. But just to smack about the "Kursk", the amers must have had reasons. And so ... a dummy. Interestingly, do our boats have something like "black boxes"? If there is, then for sure there should be infa about targeting the boat and the subsequent torpedo attack. But it seems to me that we will not find out the truth soon, or we will not find out at all. I just feel sorry for the guys. Their eternal memory and eternal rest ...
    1. +2
      10 May 2012
      there are no black boxes and never were. True, after the "Komsomolets" they were forced to keep an audio recording of the crew's actions during accidents, but there were no special means for this. The command simply advised the crews to drop off and buy ordinary tape recorders, which, of course, have neither fire nor water protection. There was such a tape recorder on the Kursk, it was found after the ascent, but there were only the recordings of the Lyube group and no crew talks.
  28. Darn
    0
    10 May 2012
    After all, such a large submarine, and perhaps there is not a small space for a rescue capsule for the crew. I read about the tragedy of the Komsomolets submarine where the rescue capsule did not help, but times have changed, maybe now it can be brought to mind.
    1. +3
      10 May 2012
      um .... there is a rescue capsule for the entire crew. How, explain, the crew could use it if from the first to the fourth compartment everything was pressed through by the explosion? including people, machinery, bulkheads. And people in these compartments died instantly. The escape pod is located above the 2nd compartment. You would somehow still learn what a submarine is. On "Komsomolets" the rescue capsule did not help because of the illiterate actions of the crew. By the way, one person (midshipman Slyusarenko) was saved thanks to her. And the commander of the submarine is still in it. Three more with him
      1. Darn
        0
        10 May 2012
        Your gland’s arguments, but do you have any suggestions on how to save the crew in such a situation? I understand that one of the most important measures of survival is precisely the high training of sailors.
        1. +4
          10 May 2012
          in such a situation, several factors would be the key to salvation:
          1. The detachment of warships after the explosion simply left the area, without waiting for the submarine to emerge and the results of torpedo firing, which could not be done. If the OBK had taken steps to clarify the reasons for the silence of the boat, then it would not have been declared emergency 12 hours after the explosion.
          2. If the rescue vehicles were technically ready, docking and withdrawal of the surviving crew members could be carried out. About sealing rubber and batteries of the devices mentioned above


          By the way, the sailors themselves did not go to the surface, most likely precisely for the reason that they knew that there were ships at the top and everyone had heard such an explosion. And then, when I didn’t wait for help for several hours, when the pressure in the compartment reached the critical level for free exit (by locking) to the surface, there was only one exit - to flood the compartment and exit already flooded, with delays at a depth to comply with the decompression mode. Maybe they tried to do it, but too much oil from the tanks floated in the compartment water. If even a drop of oil falls on the regeneration plate, a fire occurs that cannot be extinguished by anything.
      2. 0
        11 May 2012
        My classmate served at Komsomolets for 3 years. Demobilized a month before the death of the boat. As I found out, he had been drinking for a week, as he himself later said, either out of grief, because so many of his yesterday's comrades had died, or out of joy that he himself did not die. One word is stress. It can be understood ... Fate.
  29. Engus007
    -4
    10 May 2012
    I was traveling on a train with one sailor-signalman (they were then all released on holidays after these events) so he told me this version: he served on the main ship (as it was Petr1, I don’t remember right now) there were exercises like torpedo fire . And now, when Kursk was supposed to launch a torpedo (literally the countdown went one second), he listened to her like a chief shooting commander (who was there xs) yelling that they say why Kursk is in a surface position? (Not quite in a surface position, but something sticks out simply) well and Kursk begins to dive, well, he dived, and the depth was small there, so the torpedo went to the bottom, well, then you know what happened ... How do you like this version?
    1. +3
      10 May 2012
      version of a drunken sailor. Not higher. And therefore it is clearly in the junk. "Kursk" went in periscope position, which he had to do to identify the target - a detachment of warships, which was represented by two BODs and the cruiser "Peter the Great". It would be interesting to watch the torpedo shooting when the ship makes sharp jumps. Oh interesting ...
      1. Aleksey67
        +7
        10 May 2012
        Deltaadequate forum member good Stay on the site, do not leave, it's nice to read your comments smile
        1. +10
          10 May 2012
          only one dissent runs now and minuses))) it became obvious that it indicated illiteracy)))
          1. Aleksey67
            +4
            10 May 2012
            Quote: Delta
            Abydna became

            Vyacheslav, do not pay attention to minusers, There are more good people, I used to (sometimes now) for each comment with 6 minuses, but sensible comments are visible right away. You only need "+" from me
        2. +3
          11 May 2012
          Delta, adequate forum member = join and support! good
          1. +2
            12 May 2012
            I support Delta !!! fellow Nice to chat with a competent person. drinks
  30. +6
    10 May 2012
    The author of the article, if he undertakes to discuss on technical topics, it would be necessary to read and communicate with the competent people. The fact that Amer’s boats follow ours is normal, it has always been like that. Amer could start firing only if he heard that a torpedo tube had opened. Apparently, it was. The crew is unprepared, fact. We did not have time to unload practical torpedoes, also a fact. When Komsomolets drowned, they were also in no hurry with help, from which the number of victims increased. They didn’t drown the Amer’s boat, and it’s right, there were similar incidents, K219, and they didn’t drown Sea Wolf. In my opinion, the cause of the tragedy is a coincidence. Well, Putin benefited from this, well, do not start a war! But the only question is bewildering why the rescue vehicle did not sit on the coaming site?
  31. +1
    10 May 2012
    I then studied at a technical university, at the department of which the systems of the electric drive of torpedo bomb bays for boats of this type were developed, incl. and for Kursk. On the very first day of news the head of the department said that a malfunction of the drive system, or "self-detonation" of the torpedo, is absolutely excluded.
    1. +2
      10 May 2012
      "torpedo bomb bays" do not exist in nature. After the explosion of a peroxide torpedo on a British boat, which exploded on the Kursk, Great Britain and the United States abandoned the use of such torpedoes. And here are some electric drives ??? what are you speaking about??
      1. -2
        11 May 2012
        I’m not a submariner, and I named them based on my knowledge. You don’t have to grab a word, you know, about the drives, study all versions of this incident, and then try to enter into the discussion.
        1. 0
          11 May 2012
          and so you explain to me, what does any electric drive of the hatches to the explosion have to do with it? Well, or to torpedo all the more)))

          By the way, regarding the mind: if a person does not possess not only technical specialized knowledge, but even logic, does not actually know what he is talking about, then does he have a great mind, discussing such topics or trying to retell someone?
          1. -1
            15 May 2012
            I expressed the information that I possessed. Where did you see the reasoning on my part, dear? !!! And about the possession of logic, aren't we trying to take on ourselves a lot? Although I noticed that here, through the monitor screens, there are many "heroes".
  32. +6
    10 May 2012
    The answer was given earlier, for the "state" heroes were more profitable, witnesses were out of place.
    I can’t say what I would do in Putin’s place, but the applicant was made by him, where there are maybe two times, the Americans completely feel impunity. The money that they received in exchange was stolen, disgusting at heart, but there seems to be no war (explicit). What's better? Where are the guarantees that we will not be sold under the old scheme again? What is the whole army for? Why so much police? Why can not I go out and speak out without being fired from work? When will we stop being cattle?
  33. +2
    10 May 2012
    Would you rather have nuclear war ?! For Russia, it would be a collapse. Putin acted very visionary and rationally. Sorry for the divers, they will not be returned. The British and Amers could launch nuclear missiles. These officers and sailors saved the world by their doom. Thank you for the article, there is a French film, the old "submarine in troubled waters" Many have seen it, there is nothing new in the article.

    Would you rather have nuclear war ?! For Russia, it would be a collapse. Putin acted very visionary and rationally. Sorry for the divers, they will not be returned. The British and Amers could launch nuclear missiles. These officers and sailors saved the world by their doom. Thank you for the article, there is a French film, the old "submarine in troubled waters" Many have seen it, there is nothing new in the article.

    Would you rather have nuclear war ?! For Russia, it would be a collapse. Putin acted very visionary and rationally. Sorry for the divers, they will not be returned. The British and Amers could launch nuclear missiles. These officers and sailors saved the world by their doom. Thank you for the article, there is a French film, the old "submarine in troubled waters" Many have seen it, there is nothing new in the article.
    1. PARROT
      0
      10 May 2012
      What makes you think that the point of view of a Frenchman who has almost no evidence is 100% true to talk about why the sailors and officers died?
      1. Jabara
        +1
        11 May 2012
        Quote: PARROT
        What makes you think that the point of view of a Frenchman who has almost no evidence is 100% true,

        Because, this version is very convenient for the perception of an external enemy.
        And this French director, well, could not have access to even secret documents in order to remove this nonsense.
  34. bremest
    +1
    10 May 2012
    I think that it is clear to everyone that the mechanism for the formation of the entrance hole, which we see in the photo, could have been formed only from the external influence of the torpedo. If someone wants to object, then I ask you to give a reasonable explanation for the formation of this hole. I saw a lot of different holes and entrance and exit and in the human body and in objects, etc. For me, as a retired criminalist, everything is very clear here. The question is the following. Whose torpedo is this? What preceded the torpedo attack? Collision of Kursk and an unidentified submarine, or did our surface ships hit their submarine during torpedo firing? I find Putin's behavior very strange. In any case, the investigation cannot be considered complete. It is necessary to fully disclose the reasons for this emergency, perhaps the commander of the US nuclear submarine went crazy or scared and for some reason torpedoed the Kursk nuclear submarine. We must seek the truth. This is our duty! And all these pseudo-heroes Ustinovs, Makarovs will disappear into oblivion, and we will always remember the dead sailors, warrant officers and officers of the Kursk nuclear submarine!
    1. +4
      10 May 2012
      You should at least read the comments. It is clear to the majority that such a hole cannot be a hole from the entrance of a torpedo there. First, modern torpedoes do not burst into the hull anywhere, but explode not far from the ship's propellers, following their noise. Secondly, the solid case was not punched in that place. By the way, if a solid hull had been punched, the hole would have been ripped apart much more. This hole could have appeared only after the explosion. Either during the cutting off of the first compartment, or at the time when the submarine was dragging along the bottom (about 30 meters it plowed by inertia) from its own horizontal rudder, which came off. In addition, you should remember about the bottom topography, which is not a runway, with perfect coverage. It is easy to break through a light body. Especially considering that the boat had a roll after the explosion to the starboard side, then to the left, shook it. Do not compare the human body, bullet inlets and the lightweight body of a nuclear submarine and the impact of various objects (including torpedoes) on it. Surface ships were not firing at that moment. In addition, do not breed stupid rumors - our ships were shooting with practical ammunition, i.e. educational. Such a torpedo cannot do damage when hit. A training torpedo in the warhead is filled with water, as the torpedo moves out of it with compressed air, water is forced out, and the on-board computer records data on its progress. Then she is caught by a special boat. This is me in order to once and for all stop talk about the possible hit of "at least something" from "Peter the Great"
      1. bremest
        0
        10 May 2012
        I respect your point of view, I agree that this could not be a torpedo of our surface ships. But this is only a version. The investigator is then a professional, when he puts forward many versions, and during the investigation insolvent disappears and, on the contrary, remains supported by evidence.
        Дexertion and proof This is the section that all lawyers study at the institute. There is direct, but there is indirect evidence.
        Direct evidence of external impact is the hole itself. Its smooth round shape and a depression inward. The main thing is to determine the mechanism of hole formation. Here we need comprehensive chemical, physical and technical expertise.
        But personally, I insist that, by all external signs, this is the result of a torpedo hitting. This is an external effect, and if there is evidence of another, I ask you to state them, and not to guess that this hole of the correct round shape could have formed as a result of friction against the ground. If this were so, then there would be traces of a different nature - horizontal tracks, with some bias, but not a round branch or traces of friction. Just in the right part and somewhat below there is a shift in the roundness of the answer. It could just be a displacement during contact with the ground or a displacement during the sawing of the bow. What indirect evidence would I pay attention to. This information is about the buoys of a foreign submarine, the SOS signal, the oil stain, the Americans' recognition that their submarines were in the area. What else is needed to conclude an attack on the Krusk submarine? Is it another matter whether the attack was planned or was it the result of a combination of circumstances? It is necessary to find out the causes and conditions that contributed to this emergency. This must be done openly, just as the crash of TU-154 with the Polish delegation was investigated. This is important for the future of the country, and most importantly, that this does not happen again.
        1. +5
          10 May 2012
          the signals were not recognized as SOS signals and it was subsequently established that acoustics recorded the impacts of the anchor chains on the anchor-clus, classifying them as a morse. Recognized that the submarines were in the area. And what of that? this is a common practice. Is this evidence of anything? oil stain? I have not seen this in the official chronicle of events. If there was, did someone take his samples?

          in peaceful life warships NEVER
          DO NOT shoot at each other - under no circumstances. If an American or Soviet ship shoots at another, then at
          he will probably also receive an answer of no less weighty shot, and perhaps with a nuclear warhead - in such situations, there’s no time to understand what they shoot! But after receiving a message that there was a nuclear explosion - the opposite side has the right
          suggest that the enemy has already launched a preventive nuclear war, and in response can begin to launch his entire nuclear arsenal
          countries that will cause unlimited thermonuclear war. And so the result of a single unforeseen
          shots can become the complete destruction of human life on the whole Earth. Now think: is there one single
          ship (let me remind you that the Americans have only 120 nuclear submarines), so: is there one boat
          life of all mankind?

          it should be clear to any captain of a foreign submarine that the displacement of the Kursk is much greater than that of his own
          submarines, and the survivability of the Russian ship is unprecedented, so shooting at it with just one torpedo is just stupid, you have to
          at least from all four torpedo tubes. But even this would not guarantee the destruction of K-141, it could well remain
          afloat. But in this case, after the return of the Kursk to the base, traces of foreign torpedo hits and fragments of foreign metal
          they would have synthesized such a grandiose world scandal, which could easily develop into a third world war! Well really
          are American sailors so stupid not to understand this? It is very characteristic that Russian admirals from the very beginning
          the tragedy with "Kursk" wanted to shift the blame from a sore head to a healthy one: that is, instead of a thorough investigation of internal
          the reasons for his death, for a very long time engaged in the exaggeration of the version of the impact of a foreign submarine. But for this huge
          for a period of time they still have not provided any even the smallest facts of the operation of a foreign submarine: nor its fragments
          torpedoes, no traces on the Kursk's hull - in which case microparticles of foreign metal should have remained
          submarines or pieces of its hull. Yes, it is very difficult to find the traces of a black cat in a dark room, especially if she is not there. However
          This does not bother Russian admirals at all.
  35. radikdan79
    0
    10 May 2012
    author for the article +
    but the whole truth, I'm afraid we will never know. somehow it’s not customary for us to talk about problems in the army. the only pity for the submariners. eternal memory to them
  36. Nechai
    +6
    10 May 2012
    Quote: shipbuilder
    Why did the Americans start to fuss?

    Quote: Aleksey67
    and ours were supposed to provide protection for the test area.

    Quote: viktorrymar
    It turns out that the American boat torpedoed ours, and then it began to fall apart: threw buoys, oil stains, dropped the guard from the conning tower))) - some strange torpedo attack, do not you think?

    So there were at least TWO nuclear submarines of sworn friends there. Why so much attention? In addition to the resumption of the exercises of the Russian Navy, the testing of the latest anti-torpedo defense systems was also carried out. The Chinese were not just dragged for a ride. "Course" and covered with its body the most interesting from the intrusive attention of not invited guests. And they really want to. It’s impossible, they don’t let the Russians see it, but I want to .... And away we go.
    Quote: Delta
    This suggests that when equipping the plates that regenerate oxygen, a fire occurred, which was not possible to extinguish (these plates are not quenched by water or sand, because they themselves produce oxygen). The fire burned out the last oxygen, everyone died from suffocation, and not from drowning (these are the results of forensic examination).

    The cassettes were located on the lower deck of the compartment. When the lower hatch of the emergency airlock was opened, to release the first submariner. Water gushed into the compartment, because the top hatch and the chamber itself had a deformation crack. Water hitting the regkasets - oxygen release - potassium and sodium superoxide + ash two O, rapid release of oxygen, heating and ignition. Volumetric instant fireman. (Take the plastic case of the additional regatron from the IP-5, throw out the rubber standard sealed gasket. Replace it with the old Soviet penny. Throw a little water into the case and twist it quickly. Direct your heel anywhere, just not at people. . Find the resulting from a nickle THINKING,)
    Quote: Kars
    Now imagine the heat capacity of the surrounding sea water and the steel side of the torpedoed object. The moment of the rebound upon impact is how long the contact will take.

    Anrey, what is the heat capacity? The processes are very dynamic !!! The infa passed that on this torpedo they put a disk from a depleted hurricane. Here he then accelerates and punches. They are all given rest by our "Tsar Head" - on the opposite, from being hit by a torpedo, winged side, or the bottom of a medium-tonnage ship will make a hole up to 12 sq. M ....
  37. +1
    10 May 2012
    I read about all sorts of versions of the Kursk's death, about this hole on the starboard side, torpedo-torpedo, but the fact is obvious, the hole was made clearly from the outside ... Therefore, the version about the explosion of its own torpedo clearly does not stand up to criticism ... Own torpedo can and really exploded, but only after the Kursk got into what left behind such a hole ...
    1. +2
      10 May 2012
      you at least get acquainted with the project of the boat. The hole is already in the area of ​​the second compartment. How did "IT" get to the torpedoes in the first one ??
      1. Vadim555
        +3
        10 May 2012
        Quote: Delta
        you at least get acquainted with the project of the boat. The hole is already in the area of ​​the second compartment. How did "IT" get to the torpedoes in the first one ??

        Good afternoon.
        I decide to express a couple of things.
        who says that there was one torpedo? Perhaps the photo shows a hole from the second torpedo.
        As far as I know, MK48 has an annular cumulative "nozzle", so the hole looks like it was from it (I read it, but did not save it).
        Is it because the nose was cut off ???
        Talk about the remaining ammunition is considered frivolous.
        Rescuers could not dock due to the fact that the light hull was kind of "swollen" and the transom of the emergency hatch turned out to be deeper than the light hull, and had to protrude 10-15mm.
        1. +1
          10 May 2012
          even if there were ten torpedoes, then where does the entry into the bow of the submarine and the destruction there? where did the first (in your opinion first) torpedo hit? in the stern area rushed? why is the feed intact in this case?

          Torpedoes do not have cumulative nozzles, this is not an anti-tank shell (how do you get such information?) This torpedo explodes near the ship. The effect of the explosion increases.

          The nose is cut off ... here no one has an answer. But the torpedoes of the bow compartment have been studied, and the torpedo tubes too. So there really was no need to lift what was left of the first compartment.

          Talk about the remaining ammunition, why do you consider it frivolous? Have you ever heard of an artillery bombing explosion, in which then they still find unexploded ordnance for a long time?

          Why would a light body be "blown up" ??? again, where does the information come from?
          1. Vadim555
            +2
            10 May 2012
            Quote: Delta
            Why would a light body be "blown up" ??? again, where does the information come from?

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tFO7eylSBzw&feature=related
            For 15min30sec

            Quote: Delta
            The nose is cut off ... here no one has an answer. But the torpedoes of the bow compartment have been studied, and the torpedo tubes too. So there really was no need to lift what was left of the first compartment.

            Here I am about the same thing. Cut off what for? Maybe there is also a "round" hole on the bow, or maybe the bend (break) of the hull inward.

            Quote: Delta
            Torpedoes do not have cumulative nozzles, this is not an anti-tank shell (how do you get such information?) This torpedo explodes near the ship. The effect of the explosion increases.

            In this film, there is also a conversation about this.
            1. +4
              10 May 2012
              yes there was nothing to see there - such destruction is great. It was impossible to see the holes there. As one of the divers said later: we’re going through the hull and suddenly, instead of the first compartment, an abyss ...

              According to shipbuilders, it was necessary to cut off the first compartment precisely because of its destruction. Like, when lifting, it could collapse completely and thereby cause the unbalance of the lifting system and lead to the destruction of the entire body
              1. Vadim555
                +1
                10 May 2012
                Quote: Delta
                According to shipbuilders, it was necessary to cut off the first compartment precisely because of its destruction. Like, when lifting, it could collapse completely and thereby cause the unbalance of the lifting system and lead to the destruction of the entire body

                Thanks +
                It’s just that infa slipped in many places that only one company (which raised Kursk) agreed to lift without a bow, all the rest agreed to raise the whole and KB seemed to agree, and there again HZ.
                I personally understand that something is not clean there, but what ????
    2. +1
      10 May 2012
      Once again: in the photo, correlate the size of people standing 30 meters CLOSER and the size of the hole - it is at least 1,5 m, the torpedo caliber is 533 mm. A hole of this shape is easily formed when pulling out part of the casing (light body) along the normal (I do not insist on it) ... All this applies only to the origin of the hole on the starboard side of the torpedo strike at this point.
      1. +2
        10 May 2012
        Do you really think that someone here will ponder over the numbers and technical details? it’s easier for them to think that they torpedoed. And that's it
  38. Bob
    +4
    10 May 2012
    In the article, the veil over the "secret" was finally lifted, but it was too late, at first the French were talking about it (2000), then the whole world, and only now we have infa passed. An attempt to keep silent about the true causes of the tragedy had a very negative consequence for the authorities, for Putin, because this is nothing more than deceiving the people, and then when and how much they deceived the people, much has been said about this. The fact that the Kursk was valued at $ 10 billion is also for the Russians, and above all for the families of these sailors and for the Navy and the Armed Forces in general - this is a Jewish approach, according to which everything is bought and sold, and this also did not raise the authority of the authorities , but only once again demonstrated what kind of power it is, what its motives are and how you can negotiate with it, and even for how much.
    One good thing - managed to avoid the 3rd world once again. But this only once again speaks of the thin line between the line between peace and war, and if it goes on like this, then a catastrophic outcome is inevitable.
    Nobody will say who is right and who is to blame for the Kursk tragedy, as long as all the information is under the heading. In my opinion, the main fault lies with the Americans, because it was they who entered into combat contact with our nuclear submarine at the place of the exercises of our fleet. In a difficult relief location of the Barents Sea with zero visibility and a turbulent current, they did not take into account all the factors in tracking our boat and rammed the Kursk with their side, after which, having heard the characteristic sound from the Kursk torpedo tube, they made a combat shot at it with their Super modern torpedo MK-48. Eternal memory to sailors.
  39. igorek408
    0
    10 May 2012
    sadly ...
  40. +2
    10 May 2012
    It was like in a fog, it was not yet clear! No answer! Some questions!
  41. Nechai
    +2
    10 May 2012
    Quote: Rus_87
    about this hole on the starboard side, a torpedo-not torpedo, but the fact is clear, the hole was made clearly from the outside ..

    They spread information about the hole, that this supposedly the right tail of the depth rudder came off when it was broken out, he said, and bent the outer case inside. Maybe so. The torpedo could then plant a second boat in the first compartment. Mutual maneuvering took place at minimum distances.
    Quote: Bob
    In a difficult relief place in the Barents Sea with zero visibility and a turbulent current, they did not take into account all the factors in tracking our boat and rammed the Kursk with their side, after which, having heard the characteristic sound from the Kursk torpedo tube, they made a combat shot at it with their Super modern torpedo MK-48

    Yes, that's right, it seems to me. Consider also what depths! It is not for nothing that the "loaf" was driven into shallow water. The depth is less than the length of the submarine. Maybe the Amer was trying to squeeze through, dive between the bottom and the Kursk. And "Kursk" pressed him to the bottom, blocked the trajectory of movement. On the Kursk, the rudders were on the dive. Amer cracked the wheelhouse into our boat. Lay down to the bottom. His brother, agl not agl, what's the difference, planted the Russian in the side. And the fact that the Kursk opened the outer covers of the TA speaks for the fact that ours tried to influence them, morally pressure. But I found a scythe on a stone ...
    And the Norwegian divers took that submariner from the stern of the emergency airlock. He could not open the outer cover. Her jammed deformation. How many norgs were tormented with it, ate ate pulled off hydraulics. And just then they issued a verdict that the compartment was flooded. The operation was stopped until next summer. All material things. Docks sawed off. Left at the bottom, and then ironed outbacks.
    1. 0
      10 May 2012
      can I link to information about the sailor in the "lock chamber"? and at the same time about "ironing out the depths of the bottom"
  42. +3
    10 May 2012
    My friend, naval officer, lieutenant captain, submariner, immediately drew my attention to the "scratch" on the Kursk hull going through the coaming platform in front of the wheelhouse, and, accordingly, did not allow the rescue bell to dock hermetically. He noticed that only titanium tail rudders of obviously another submarine could leave such furrows. I remembered his words, then, when the press showed a space image of an American boat with a damaged bow, docked in one of the Norwegian fiords.
    Everything was done to "confuse our own people and confuse the rest", but the families of the dead sailors, I am sure, need to know the truth, otherwise they "poured" so much on the dead ...
    1. +2
      10 May 2012
      Do you think the tail rudders and the damaged nose of a foreign submarine do not seem a problem?)))) By the way, your submarine captain did not indicate which fleets of the world make submarine hulls from titanium?
      1. +2
        10 May 2012
        Quote: Delta
        Do you think the tail rudders and the damaged nose of a foreign submarine do not seem a problem?)))) By the way, your submarine captain did not indicate which fleets of the world make submarine hulls from titanium?

        In a collision in the opposite courses, the nose of the enemy boat was obviously slightly higher, therefore, after the collision, its nose, on the axis of the applicate, rose (and the nose of Kursk sank in a much lower amplitude), and, accordingly, the tail of the boat dropped. And since there was a further inertial longitudinal movement of the boats along the abscissa axis and to a lesser extent along the ordinate axis, the tail rudders of the alien boat made contact with the space in front of the Kursk boat cabin.
        Regarding the second - something needs to be done with dyslexia - there was no talk about a light or durable body, but only about steering wheels winked
        Although if for general development - titanium alloys in the case were used in the construction of the 661 project (K-222), the 685 project (Komsomolets), the 701 project. Search for help, and show-offs to the dump laughing
        1. +2
          10 May 2012
          You have a show-off, but I would like to hear about titanium boats from foreign fleets. Or "Kursk" rammed "Komsomolets"? or K-222 transferred for disposal?

          About the steering wheel it was, yeah. And about the crumpled nose of a foreign boat. So where is the truth?)))))) And crushed his nose and walked with the helms. Wah, virtuoso
          1. +2
            10 May 2012
            We drove through bully
            __________________________
            1. -2
              10 May 2012
              very sorry. Well, yes, in the language of n ... t - do not toss the bags. This is to say that the one who mentions about the show would take care of a bunch of his speech and the basis for statements.
  43. +1
    10 May 2012
    They love conspiracy theories on this site - they are the scribe.
    1. Aleksey67
      +4
      10 May 2012
      Quote: Pimply
      They love conspiracy theories on this site - they are the scribe.

      THIS IS PASSING IN ALL SITES, we find out the truth or not, but Russia did not present any complaints to anyone
  44. +5
    10 May 2012
    The attempt to silence the true causes of the tragedy had a very negative consequence for the authorities, for Putin, because it is nothing more than a deception of the people, and then when and how much the people deceived, much has been said about this

    How easy it is to immediately attack Putin and accuse him of all mortal sins ... Personally, it seems to me that the death of submariners is on the conscience of E.B.N. Yes, yes, exactly him, because it was he and his pack of liberal democratizers who brought the great country and the navy in particular, to the handle, to such a handle that they simply could not change the rubber seal on the rescue apparatus, as a result of which he could not dock with "Kursk", and much more that our generation will be ashamed of for a long time in front of our children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren! Putin raised that Russia, Russia, which lay at the feet of the West, begging for loans with a trembling hand, to a normal "human" level! Yes, and now not everything is so rosy and rosy, but again I repeat, compare that Russia of the 90-2000s. from the modern, really, during those years of dancing to the Western tune, you Russians have completely atrophied a feeling of gratitude and respect for people, and specifically for a person who has done so much for this Russia?
    And the fact that we mere "mortals" are not told this very longed-for truth about the Kursk is understandable, these are military matters. And as for the military, never, under any system, under any president, they will not disclose everything to the end to a common man in the street ... Such is our philistine fate, we are told what the authorities want, and then, believe or not believe , build your own guesses and assumptions, this is the will of everyone ...

    Delta,
    And how did "ONO" get to half of the compartments, where everyone died instantly? In your opinion, if "IT" got into the 2nd compartment, then only the second compartment should have suffered, so what do you think is it? Then, in order to sink the boat, according to your logic, you need to plant this "IT" in each compartment?
    1. +1
      10 May 2012
      if the torpedo hit the second compartment, the explosion would have come from it, from the second to the third and first. However, the explosion came from the first compartment. The bulkhead of the first compartment was sealed by an explosion to the bulkhead of the second compartment. Now, even if you do not believe people who are literate in this regard, turn on logic. To sink such a boat, it is necessary to flood at least two compartments, which happened through the destroyed torpedo tube of the first compartment and the ventilation ducts between the first and the second. during torpedo firing (for which the Kursk was preparing) ventilation (as recommended by the designers) must be unlocked
  45. +2
    10 May 2012
    The human factor ... they didn’t understand it right ... they didn’t do it right here ... ALL submariners believe that Kursk torpedoed ... there are old showdowns from the Mediterranean Sea ... but interestingly, the commander and officers of Memphis died as a result of the accident case ... it seems that this was one of the conditions of compensation ... the only thing that cannot be forgiven ... if you had fitted a crane and just stupidly raised the stern ... some people would have been saved ... but then the attack could not be hidden ... always simple soldiers extreme ... eternal memory to them ... article plus ..
    1. Sleptsoff
      +2
      10 May 2012
      If the officers of Memphis were "removed" then the amers themselves did it and only so that they would not blurt out something by provoking an international scandal, and not as some kind of compensation.
    2. +4
      10 May 2012
      Oh my god .... are you drunk? which crane could lift a submarine with a displacement of 24 tons ??? in addition, which absorbed hundreds of tons of water in addition. Is it just technical illiteracy or something else? Where did the information about the death of Memphis officers come from?
      1. 0
        11 May 2012
        You drink it in Kiev without drying up ... and we have the Internet in Russia ... there you can see the crane capacity ... and the length of the boat ... and depth ... and the travel time of this crane ... would be a desire ... but you do not have time for you kvass ... minus ...
        1. +3
          11 May 2012
          very qualified answer. Especially about the "leaven". Again, from the lack of intelligible argumentation, the transition to cities, nationalities ... everything is clear. Although no, not everything is clear - you can understand where the information comes from about the officers?
    3. Num lock U.A.
      +3
      10 May 2012
      Quote: ward
      but interestingly, the commander and officers of Memphis died in an accident ..

      But can you give me more details?
    4. bremest
      +2
      10 May 2012
      Regarding the death of the commander and officers of Memphis ........ In order for the witnesses to be silent forever, they must be killed. This is the principle of the CIA. The last case of the elimination of important witnesses is the sweep of the special forces, who allegedly stormed the shelter of Osama Bin Laden, or killed him, but there is no corpse ...... In general, they loaded the entire special forces into a helicopter and shot down. All ends in the water ......
      1. +1
        10 May 2012
        I am of course forgiveness ... but where did you get information about the death of Memphis officers?
      2. veryalone
        +2
        11 May 2012
        Not a single officer or even a sailor from the Memphis crew was killed and does not even have a scratch. What are you talking about, my dear?
  46. Sarus
    0
    10 May 2012
    I read the comments ...
    I agree in many ways ..
    But if all the same, the Yankees torpedoed Kursk or someone else and the Government of the Russian Federation wrote off debts because of this, then I am ashamed of my country ...
    Sorry guys ...
  47. +2
    10 May 2012
    in the 2000s, I was served with a comrade who was doing military service on one of the ships that was on those exercises. so I bought it for that and sell it .., his words on this case ..-
    there a buoy of not our color surfaced (something yellow with green) .. almost the entire crew saw him and a logbook was recorded, then people flew in a helicopter and weighed out the magazine and forbade chatting.
  48. +3
    10 May 2012
    Speaking of the fact that this is the very hole on the starboard side, this plumage of the depth rudder came off when it was broken out, he supposedly bent the outer case inside. Take a closer look, do not you think that the rudders of depth are slightly higher than this notorious hole, and closer to the nose of the rudders than a hole ...
    1. +2
      10 May 2012
      let's do it differently. Tell me bluntly - do you want the truth to be that the Americans drowned it? if so, then why argue about something? all technical issues have already been discussed, but you continue further ...
  49. +15
    10 May 2012
    The dregs are continuous ... and from all sides ... No version is plausible. They will never tell us the truth ... But, nevertheless, I recommend turning to the opinion of a professional underwater business - Admiral Ryazantsev. His rather detailed article on the reasons for the death of the Kursk can be read in full here. As a former North Sea officer, I tend to stick to his version:

    http://avtonomka.org/vospominaniya/vitse-admiral-ryazantsev-valeriy-dmitrievich.
    html

    Regarding the "participation" of amers in this whole story, we can say the following:
    1. At all times they tracked our landfills. Here the claim is not to them, but to the heap of our guard ships, which were supposed to protect the firing range for the period of firing from such guests. But, judging by the materials of the investigation, our acoustics did not even hear American boats ... This is a shame ...! They learned about their presence from journalists ...
    2. There is enough mischief in the American fleet, although, I affirm authoritatively, no submarine commander, neither ours nor a foreign one, will think of an arbitrary bullet by combat torpedoes within the boundaries of a foreign training ground. Amers are a regulated people, and submariners are many times. Without instructions and commands from above, they won't sit down (sorry for being rude). It is unlikely that any commander really wanted to become the "ancestor" of the third world ...

    In the end: Guys, read Ryazantsev's material. You must first defeat the "enemy" within yourself, and then look for the outside ...

    PS I do not pretend to 100% of reality ... Everything is muddy ... Maybe our children will find out the truth .. in years through 50 ...
    1. +1
      10 May 2012
      +100. Although I do not agree with Ryazantsev, he wrote truthfully and at least technically competent. Anyone who is not too lazy to read his research will become much clear and will not need to make their own illiterate conclusions
    2. bremest
      -3
      10 May 2012
      What do you think about such a factor as the instinct of self-preservation? It's instinct. This is innate and no provision of the charter can cancel it. But if the commander of the US nuclear submarine heard the noise of our nuclear submarine's torpedo tube and, first of all, frightened for his life, acting in the grip of the instinct of self-preservation, gave the command to torpedo the nuclear submarine "Kursk" ...... Could it be so? This is a human factor. This is the version.
      1. +5
        10 May 2012
        Version zero. And that's why! American nuclear submarines were in the firing area with a specific task - to control the course of these very firing. They knew that the Kursk would fire and the noise of a loaded TA was expected and could not lead to such tragic consequences. The American commander must be a complete alarmist-hysterical in order to react to the expected actions of the Russian submarine. Everything, of course, is possible, but I want to believe that neither the amers, nor we have psycho commanders ...
        1. +1
          10 May 2012
          To this I would like to add that many adherents of the version of torpedoing paint a situation when an American, hearing the opening of the lids of the Kursk torpedo tubes, mistook it for hostile actions and fired preventive shots. At the same time, no one thinks about the fact that the American nuclear submarines were in the area (I emphasize - in the area, and not in the immediate vicinity) of the SF exercises. And it was clear to everyone that there would be training torpedoes. Moreover, purely theoretically, our ships could also fire combat torpedoes. So what??? who would think of attacking a Russian ship for this in its waters ??? for what???
          1. shipbuilder
            +2
            10 May 2012
            Somehow, it seems on this site, was the story of our pilot about flying to the USA for demonstrations. How they kicked their ass in a training battle and how on the way back they received low-quality fuel, that they nearly crashed in the desert. This is to say that an American can shoot, especially considering the political situation. We were not considered then at all, they considered us practically already a colony without the ability to answer (I mean political will too). Although this option is unlikely.
        2. bremest
          +3
          10 May 2012
          This is just a version, and even if it’s zero ..... The most important thing is that the criminal case is classified and we are not able to study its materials and draw conclusions ......
  50. Odinplys
    +3
    10 May 2012
    It’s clear that one article boils down to the fact that Putin is bad ... he didn’t make it public ... and that means he didn’t strike back ... which means he’s a type of enemy ... And that’s clear, the enemies are not asleep ... anniversary in August ... article today ...
    Huge minus article ... for its provocative nature ... aimed at shattering the situation in Russia ...
    1. +6
      10 May 2012
      The claims to Putin are not that "he did not publish and did not retaliate." Thank God I didn't. The complaint is that he ineptly fed us with lies and mediocrely didn’t save the guys from the Kursk!
  51. S_mirnov
    +8
    10 May 2012
    I recently came across an article about the nuclear submarine Kursk - I’ll give it in full, read and analyze. I won't comment.


    UNDERWATER INTELLIGENCE WARFARE

    Why was Gennady Lyachin nominated for the title of Hero of Russia?

    After the death of 118 sailors of the nuclear submarine cruiser Kursk, its commander, Captain 1999st Rank Gennady Lyachin, was posthumously awarded the title of Hero of Russia. Many then were perplexed: for what? Not for the second largest tragedy in human casualties in the history of the Russian submarine fleet? Or for exploits during a top-secret expedition to the Mediterranean Sea in August - October 38? Accurate answers to these questions will only be given XNUMX years later. It was for half a century that the logbooks for this unique autonomous vehicle were classified. And other official documents tell too little about that voyage.

    And while the “top secret” label hangs over this operation like a sword of Damocles, submariners and intelligence officers only share their thoughts about the secret war in the depths of the sea within the limits of what is permitted.
    ...

    - Is there evidence?

    - The French director Jean-Michel cites them in abundance in his film “Kursk”. A submarine in troubled waters,” answered Sergei Ivanovich. - It was shown on French television. The film claims that the Kursk was torpedoed by the American submarine Memphis. During the exercises, the Kursk carried out a demonstration shot of a modernized torpedo missile. Allegedly, these tests were observed by two American submarines, Memphis and Toledo. One of them collided with our nuclear-powered ship. And the other, either out of fright, or took revenge on the Kursk for old affairs, but shot it with three torpedoes.

    - Isn’t the French director exaggerating? Why did our submarine so annoy the Americans? - I couldn’t resist asking malicious questions.

    - Ask your admirals about this. You interviewed Eduard Baltin, and that’s where the communication session ended.


    Help "AN"

    On March 3, 1882, by order of the Department of the Navy of the North American United States, a new unit was formed - the intelligence department in the Bureau of Navigation, which some time later became the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI - Navy Intelligence). This date is considered the founding day of the naval intelligence of the United States of America - the oldest of all American intelligence services.

    In 2000, US naval intelligence was exposed twice - in the Edmond Pope case and around the Kursk nuclear submarine disaster. At the time of the accident, the American anti-submarine reconnaissance ship Loyal was in the area. It is always accompanied by 1-3 nuclear submarines - anti-submarine fighters of enemy submarines. Using helicopters and space-based detection capabilities, Loyal effectively targets its anti-submarine fighter submarines. It was this ship that was the first to transmit a message about the accident on the Kursk to the Pentagon and the Office of Naval Intelligence on August 13.
    Admiral's story

    .....- What tasks did the Kursk perform on that campaign?

    The admiral took some paper from the red folder and said:

    - This is the only declassified official document. I read out an excerpt: “During the performance of combat service missions in the Mediterranean Sea, the Kursk APRK operated in conditions of overwhelming superiority of the anti-submarine forces of the potential enemy. Performed the task of monitoring enemy aircraft carrier multipurpose strike groups. He monitored them and carried out a search for nuclear submarines of foreign countries along the way, maintaining secrecy and combat stability. Based on the results of combat service, 72 crew members were nominated for government awards. Captain XNUMXst Rank G. Lyachin was nominated for the title of Hero of Russia.”

    - It’s written formally and is not entirely clear: why are sailors nominated for high state awards?

    - The Lyachin people have already shown in our time that Russian submariners are capable of overcoming the Faroe-Icelandic anti-submarine line and reaching the western shores of Europe. Back in the 50s, the United States placed a special SOSUS system along this “border” - devices on the ocean floor that recorded the noise of the submarine’s propellers. And the Kursk, thanks to the skill of the crew, slipped through unnoticed. Thus, our sailors proved that we can break through any defense. There are no invulnerable missile defense and anti-aircraft defense systems. And in vain the Americans are spending huge amounts of money on them. Anti-submarine and missile defense are billions of dollars thrown away.

    - How did you manage to break through Gibraltar?

    - The commander of the Northern Fleet, Admiral Popov, spoke about it enthusiastically: “It was not a breakthrough, but a song!” Indeed, it is a very narrow place, and the chances of getting past the super-powerful anti-submarine defense there are very small. Previously, in Soviet times, submarines crossed Gibraltar by hiding behind a civilian fleet vessel. Some old cargo ship was walking, rattling its propellers, and a nuclear submarine was secretly moving underneath it. But now this is prohibited. For the first time, Lyachin managed to break through the Strait of Gibraltar unnoticed on his own. How he did it will remain a military secret for a long time.

    - They say that on that campaign Lyachin became a personal enemy of the American admirals. Who was punished for the Kursk breakthrough?

    - Indeed, Gena Lyachin, like the legendary submariner Marinesko during the Great Patriotic War, was declared a personal enemy. Not the Fuhrer and great Germany, but America and its naval intelligence. It dealt a crushing blow to the pride of American admirals. After all, after the Kursk’s voyage, several prominent naval commanders, including the commander of the anti-submarine defense of the Gibraltar zone, lost their positions. By the way, the commander of the American submarine Memphis, who lost our Kursk in the Mediterranean, was also severely punished.

    - Is it true that after that campaign Lyachin was received by Putin? Do submariners often report to the president?

    - In my memory, this was the only case. As Lyachin himself later said, the president listened carefully to his report on the campaign, asked several questions and expressed satisfaction with the mission of the crew of the Kursk nuclear submarine missile cruiser in the Atlantic and Mediterranean. And we at the General Staff of the Navy noted in a report to the Kremlin that thanks to the good comprehensive preparation for the voyage of the ship itself and its crew in autonomous navigation when performing combat missions, there were no emergency, extreme or emergency situations. The enemy was forced to throw all his forces into searching for our boat.

    - How much money did the Americans spend searching for the Kursk?

    - They spent 10,5 million dollars in fuel alone to search for our boat, and plus other expenses, the search and attempts to track our boat cost 20 million dollars.

    - Why spend that kind of money? One boat at sea is not a warrior. What could one Kursk do with the US 6th Fleet?

    - You won’t believe it, but having received the order, Lyachin could well have destroyed the US 6th Fleet. The Project 949 boat, which was the Kursk, is armed with 24 Granit-type cruise missiles. They are capable of breaking through any ship's air defense. And even torpedoes with nuclear warheads. When our newest boat arrived in the Mediterranean Sea, there was just a change in US and NATO aircraft carrier groups. One was leaving for her base in Norfolk, the other had just arrived. The task was to detect and track both the first group and the second. The Kursk crew discovered them. And even conditionally, the Lyachinites fired five rockets: three at one group, two at another. In reality, the aircraft carriers from which Serbia was bombed at that time could have been sunk.


    Expert Opinion

    Retired Captain I rank Vitaly Lyulin, former commander of a nuclear submarine:

    It was revenge. The Memphis commander received a punch on the nose more than once from Gena Lyachin. In the Mediterranean, an American was “flogged” more than once for missing a Russian submarine... Let me remind you that at the end of 1999, at the height of the Yugoslav crisis, the “Kursk” really upset NATO’s nerves by unexpectedly appearing in the Mediterranean Sea. The experienced, furious commander exhausted all his nerves tracking him down. And then fate brought them together with Lyachin again... In order to hush up the scandal, it was already August 17 - the fifth day after the disaster! - CIA Director George Tenet flew to Moscow incognito, on a private plane...
    full text http://svoim.info/201219/?19_3_2
    1. veryalone
      0
      11 May 2012
      It's amazing that the admiral spouts such nonsense. To start. Marinesko was never Hitler's personal enemy.
      Nonsense about the omnipotence of missiles is already from the category of jokes - because the USA had exactly the same missiles - and Dean Lyachin could not do anything. And given the chaos of the entire fleet and all of the USSR, Memphis could most likely sink all 4 Soviet fleets combined.
      1. +3
        11 May 2012
        many people like to live by myths and legends. And present them as truth.
  52. Galina
    +4
    10 May 2012
    Guys, don't swear! When we find out the truth, I think we will be able to respond adequately. And now there is no need to be nervous and put forward fantastic hypotheses, because they are all worthless. Calm down.
    The death of Kursk is a bleeding wound for all of us, but let's find out the truth, and then we will decide what we will do and how. We will not remain in debt! (just in case).
  53. yurypetrunin
    0
    10 May 2012
    Yuri Petrunin left a comment on the Evidence page of the Kursk nuclear submarine collision.
    Of 118 people, three were not found (not identified). The hatch opens towards the 1st compartment. Insert any bolt into the rack mechanism, and NOBODY will get into the compartment, and according to any schedule, there should be significantly more people in the compartment. So the submariner brought to despair frolic.
  54. +1
    10 May 2012
    And no matter what anyone says, a dent with a hole in the side speaks volumes. The Americans or they themselves may have made a mistake during shooting - that is the question.
    1. 0
      11 May 2012
      What did the dent tell you?
  55. gor
    gor
    +2
    10 May 2012
    for example, I will not deny collisions; this has already happened more than once. But the author raked everything into a heap and somehow stuck the MK-48 torpedo here. So I would advise him to decide whether it’s a torpedo or a collision? In other words, the article is bullshit and didn't learn anything new
    1. shipbuilder
      +4
      10 May 2012
      But what a discourse after! I learned a lot of new things from here. Thanks to all!!!
    2. Oleg0705
      0
      10 May 2012
      Quote: gor
      I will not deny collisions; this has already happened more than once


      Nonsense, it's all a version of the collision

      whoever believes in the possibility of a collision should start looking for evidence. If one submarine came into contact with another, they would rub against each other for several seconds with terrible force. And on the breaks in the plating of our boat, there must definitely be particles of metal from the alien ship. It is enough to scrape them off and subject them to spectral analysis, and it will immediately become clear whether there was a collision or not.
  56. Call Sign Half Fifteen
    +1
    10 May 2012
    firstly, we need to honor the memory of the guys who died, and it’s so disgusting in our souls, from resentment, let everyone decide for themselves why...(((
  57. fedora
    +1
    10 May 2012
    http://yuvit.mylivepage.ru/image/2682/14016
    Information for thought.
    Here is an example of a torpedo explosion in a topedo tube on a submarine underwater in the Mediterranean Sea. As you can see, the boat is afloat, it was repaired and it returned to the Northern Fleet on its own.
    1. 0
      10 May 2012
      no accident can be similar to another down to the smallest detail. In addition, it is necessary to take into account the peculiarities of submarine designs. I wrote above that the design features of the Antey project boat provide for the depressurization of compartments 1 and 2 during torpedo firing. What is missing from other projects. Here's the answer
  58. Liliputin
    +1
    10 May 2012
    The article is so-so - there is nothing new in it.
    The main question is: where is the truth about the sinking of the nuclear submarine? It is possible that there was a collision with an American boat, and Putin on the phone with Clinton, and then Tennet in Moscow, discussed how to “hush up” this “unfortunate misunderstanding” ....
    This means that it is quite possible that someone owns the truth. This is a limited number of people - 2 or maybe 5 people... the question is one thing - will these people be able to retain this information until the end of their days...
    1. Oleg0705
      +1
      10 May 2012
      Quote: Liliputin
      This is a limited number of people - 2 or maybe 5 people... the question is one thing - will these people be able to retain this information until the end of their days...


      Three keep a secret safely if two of them are in the grave.
    2. 0
      11 May 2012
      she drowned.
  59. +1
    10 May 2012
    Good afternoon to all forum members.
    With all due respect, the version with an American torpedo is nothing more than an attempt by naval commanders to abdicate responsibility. It seems to me that the most likely reason is the following - I quote: “an unprecedented confluence in one place of monstrous irresponsibility, unprofessionalism, sloppiness, negligence, carelessness and bungling that reigned in the fleet after the collapse of the Union.” These are the words of a man who worked at the Almaty torpedo-making plant named after Kirov.
    Here is the address of the entire material: http://avtonomka.org/novosti/aprk-kursk/851-vzglyad-na-tragediiu-kurska-iz-kazac
    hstana.html
  60. Highlander
    0
    10 May 2012
    There is a French documentary film “Kursk in Troubled Waters” on this topic. The facts are all stated. If you haven't seen it, I advise you to watch it.
    1. gor
      gor
      +1
      11 May 2012
      and if we turn on thinking? we get that the captain had time to write a note and indicate that there was no one to save. But he didn’t have time to make an entry in the ship’s log about the collision or in the same note, and especially did not write about the torpedoing. If he managed to write this, that means he didn’t die instantly and should have known what happened, at least in general terms. But the fact that someone makes films, excuse me, and there are a lot of documentaries about Armageddon and everyone passes it off as the only ultimate truth
    2. veryalone
      +2
      11 May 2012
      There are just no facts there. There is ONE freeze frame and a lot of chatter.
      Strictly speaking, in the French film itself, the only factual evidence of its credibility is a still image that captures the hole in the light body on the starboard side. However, this hole is located in close proximity to the cut line of the nasal compartment, but there are no clear signs of the origin of this defect from the impact of a torpedo, and the solid case in this area is intact. American torpedoes Mk-48, referred to in the film, explode outside the hull and do not leave such holes. As a result of this, it can be assumed that the hole could have been formed as a result of lifting and towing operations, when placing the boat in the dock, etc. Another strong counterargument against the torpedo version is the mismatch between the capacities of the 1st and 2nd explosions on the Kursk, recorded by seismologists, and the power of the American torpedo
  61. Yankuz
    0
    10 May 2012
    Versions, guesses, conjectures... The time will come and people will know the true Truth! And someone will answer sooner or later! I feel sorry for the young sailors on this boat...
  62. IGR
    IGR
    +2
    10 May 2012
    "The truth is always secret."
    L.V. Shebarshin
  63. Ace Ventura
    +2
    11 May 2012
    Our people will not tire of blaming the Americans for everything and throwing shit at them in every possible way.
  64. +1
    11 May 2012
    there are a lot of versions of the disaster, and very often they “mix” the Americans. And this is logical, because there were several dozen collisions of Soviet (Russian) submarines during the Cold War and after (more precisely, you can google). Including the one that ended in the death of a Soviet submarine (diesel- electric at the Pacific Fleet). But torpedo duels were not observed even during the most severe confrontation of the Cold War. Therefore, the version about the madness of some NATO submarine commanders who destroyed Kursk with a torpedo shot is more than unlikely. Moreover, the conditions in the area of ​​​​the destruction of Kursk were not suitable for “cowboy showdowns” - shallow water made maneuvering difficult. As for me, the version with a faulty torpedo is more realistic. There are also delusional versions: torpedoing by Peter, or firing a missile from a Ukrainian Tu-22. The version with explosive battery gas is too obvious; everyone knows about this danger, known since WWI. I just don’t really understand why the surviving guys didn’t try to leave the boat, although the depth was borderline critical.
  65. Zlu
    Zlu
    +2
    11 May 2012
    Quote: kasha
    That’s why they are RUSSIAN soldiers, so that they can give their lives for their homeland!

    I just want to write your word “nato” separately so that the meaning is not distorted in any way
  66. -3
    11 May 2012
    Sorry! I'm far from a Navy pro! But in the photo, even a blonde will understand that the boat was torpedoed (a hole from a torpedo and a dent with cuts inward) angry Thank you to Putin for your endurance! At that moment, being at a broken “trough” (RUSSIA humiliated and trampled after EBN) Emotions could lead to a catastrophe on a global scale! The guys did not die in vain!!! Work on bugs!, Done! And very serious! Our strength is growing!!! good And the Yankees feel it!!! Guys, Brothers from Kursk! THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN!!!! recourse
    1. +1
      11 May 2012
      That's right, they started about the distance from the fleet and about the blonde. It’s quite forgivable for a blonde to think about a torpedo
  67. Ratibor12
    +1
    11 May 2012
    Why did the Kursk die? I'll try to clearly formulate my opinion:
    1. The tragedy is not the fault of the crew. There’s not even anything to comment on here. These were trained guys with enough experience, since they were able to get their act together in the Mediterranean Sea.

    2. Torpedo attack on an enemy nuclear submarine (England, USA) - incorrect version.
    From a technical point of view, I have nothing to say. I'll come from the other side.
    Why was the Kursk attacked in the Barents Sea 175 km from Severomorsk, and not, say, during its voyage to the Mediterranean in 1999? Strange Americans! There, in a situation of complete dominance in the region, they were afraid, but now they suddenly became brave! Well, here some may say that they were prepared and took sophisticated revenge on Russia and Lyachin personally for his successful campaign. Or they say the captain of the Memphis got scared of a collision or an imaginary attack and fired at the Kursk. But these are just words! In response, one might argue that the Americans would be afraid to do this. They are capable of attacking the weak (Grenada, Panama) or committing meanness with the wrong hands (August 8, 2008 - for example). They come only to finish off more serious opponents, first weakening them with a blockade or civil war. This is not the situation here. A special operation of this scale would hardly have gone unnoticed by Russian intelligence. And it is unlikely that the American elite would sanction this. They have their own behind-the-scenes struggle and they would not come to a common opinion.
    As for the brave captain of "Memphis", he would not have decided on such an adventure on his own. This is primarily a p..ts for him personally. If the Russians don’t sink them, they will kill their own. Well, my career is definitely over.

    When the Scorpion nuclear submarine sank in 1968, there were also rumors among American submariners that it had been waylaid and sunk by a Soviet submarine. But it looks like:

    The last seconds of the Scorpio (based on a hydroacoustic recording of the Scorpion disaster made by the SOSUS station in the Canary Islands. Source: Additional recording of the hearings of the Commission of Inquiry of the Commander-in-Chief of the US Navy Atlantic Fleet)
    18:59:35 - 1. The explosion of a torpedo warhead from the left side in the middle of the submarine causes rapid flooding of the central post and other compartments in the middle part of the submarine. 2. Water enters the reactor and engine compartments through the transition tunnel.

    19:01:06 - 3. The torpedo compartment bulkhead collapsed, causing rapid flooding.

    19:01:10 - 4. The aft bulkhead of the engine compartment is destroyed, the 85-foot aft section of the submarine is sequentially destroyed in the direction of the additional mechanisms compartment and the reactor compartment.

    Source: http://submarine.id.ru/api/w114.shtml


    3.Death as a result of a collision with an enemy (“partner”) nuclear submarine. This is the most suitable version, in my opinion. After all, this has happened more than once. Who has not encountered anyone? So there is no need to create unnecessary entities. In 1983, a Soviet submarine sank a Chinese diesel ship. In 1992 (there were American casualties) and 1993 - a collision between Russian and American submarines (both American nuclear submarines were decommissioned). In 2009, the French and English nuclear submarines collided. There were no casualties. And here is a fatal accident - colossal destruction, the death of the entire crew.
    From some submariners, through third parties, the following vision of events came to me: ours on the Kursk are watching the Americans, dangerous maneuvering is underway, a torpedo is fired from the racks, at that moment there is a collision, the torpedo falls (where???) and explodes. Something like that. Brevity is the soul of wit. Well, I've never been in a submarine. I can’t imagine how it all happens there. So I can hang any noodles on me. Who can - comment.

    And now, since we consider version No. 3 to be working, let’s think about what the leadership of Russia or, say, the USSR should have done. But no way... I'll say more. Even if the Kursk had been sunk by a torpedo salvo, everything would have been hushed up. And if the Kursk had sunk the Memphis and Toledo with torpedoes, the Americans would have hushed everything up too. This is how and only this way such incidents are resolved. You cannot tell your people, “They attacked us. They killed our people. Let us forgive them.” No people will understand this. You can forgive only after a retaliatory strike. You can even feel sorry and feed. Like ours - the Germans, in Berlin in 1945.

    What to do? At a minimum, we must remember and appreciate the feat of our guys. To see the true face of our “partners” and the “fifth column”. We must remember this ourselves, remind those who have forgotten, tell those who do not know.

    PS Delta’s phrase about “the United States alone has 120 nuclear submarines” caused cheerful surprise. Firstly, 70 nuclear submarines (1,7 times less). Secondly, the United States only has nuclear boats.
    1. +1
      11 May 2012
      Are you so sure about the “sniff” in the Mediterranean? this is from the words of Russian admirals. What if you listen to the Americans? was there any luck for them? Why are you so confident in the preparedness of the crew? were you familiar with them? with their preparation?
      About the "scorpion" - the Americans themselves admitted that the death was caused by design flaws and shortcomings in the crew's training. And they drew conclusions. And ours are still looking for the enemy

      About the collision: yes, there were quite a few of them, and purely theoretically, such a collision could have taken place this time too. But there are technical justifications and arguments for the version of the explosion of a torpedo with an oxidizer. What are your arguments in support of the version of the collision? just that 3 NATO boats were “nearby”? and how close do you know? no one knows this. For tracking, they could be 30-40 miles from the Kursk, and this would be quite enough for them, since their sonars “catch” ours at greater distances.

      Did I write about US diesel boats? where does the number 70 nuclear submarines come from? 62 Los Angeles aircraft alone were built (although some have already been scrapped), Ohio - 18, 3 Seawolf, Virginia - 7 already in combat service. No way 70
  68. +3
    11 May 2012
    Delta,
    What did the dent tell you?

    So you keep convincing us that this dent with a hole is not from a torpedo... Depth rudders? Well, I seem to have put forward the assumption a little earlier that the depth control surfaces are located in a slightly different place... Then explain how, from your point of view, this dent with a hole could have formed?
    PS Personally, I’m not in favor of any version, all versions have their own “+” and “-”, so to speak, I’m just really curious about what this hole is all about...
    1. shipbuilder
      +1
      11 May 2012
      Maybe from the towed GUS of the adversaries.
    2. +2
      11 May 2012
      I wasn’t there, like no one else alive today, and I can’t say anything with 100% accuracy. BUT! The fact that this is not a trace from a torpedo is exactly 100%. I'll break it down into sections:
      1. The MK 48 torpedo, like all modern torpedoes, does not explode when entering the hull anywhere. It explodes next to the ship to enhance the effect, which was used back during the war. I’ll say right away that if you go to Wikipedia, you will see heresy in the form: “the torpedo is configured in such a way as to hit the end of the first compartment into the second (command) compartment.” This was written by some kid who didn’t even bother to think about the fact that few boats have a command post in the second compartment. As well as the fact that not a single ammunition is smart enough to recognize where the command post is hidden on the ship. I made this entry after the death of the Kursk, and of course there is no such thing on the English version of Wikipedia.

      2. If (let’s imagine this) a torpedo suddenly hit exactly there, then the durable hull would be pierced (not by the torpedo itself, but by the explosion). Penetrating a light hull would give nothing but grief. The solid building in that place is intact and that is the conclusion of the investigative commission. Believe me, if the strong hull in that place had been torn apart, we would not have argued now, but would have firmly known that most likely a torpedo had entered. I don’t know how, but in this case one could say so with a high degree of probability.

      3. Some are trying to at least invent something about the torpedo and say that it did not enter that hole, and this is a cumulative jet from it. Well, this doesn’t fit into any gates at all, but even here I will comment (for especially technically backward sections of the population. I’m not talking about you). If there was an external impact, it would be visible not only in the form of some kind of hole, but in the form of the impact of an explosive substance. Everyone saw tanks hit by shells and grenades. Look again. It would be the same on a boat.

      This dent is on a LIGHT body, it is quite thin and such a dent could easily have been left by a large boulder at the bottom (if you don’t like the steering wheel). The boat crawled for about 30 meters by inertia, tilting on one side or the other. After the explosion she was shaken. It’s not surprising to crush the lightweight body. In addition, do not forget about sawing off the first compartment.
      1. -1
        11 May 2012
        Delta is b.r.e.d. wow mare!!!
        1. +1
          12 May 2012
          I won’t even ask for justification. It’s easier for people like you to write about nonsense and shut up, because there are zero arguments. And therefore - free
  69. 0
    11 May 2012
    http://via-midgard.info/13422-kapitan-podlodki-kursk-nas-rasstrelyali-raketami.h
    tml
    Read this, the version of death is also interesting...
  70. +3
    11 May 2012
    Delta,
    You are using a lot of technical terms here, creating the impression of a person literate in this topic, but in some important cases, taking advantage of the general illiteracy of local representatives, you are deliberately substituting facts and technical characteristics.
    You wrote that the hole in the hull is in the second compartment, as can be seen from here http://topwar.ru/4954-plark-proekt-949a-antey-oscar-ii.html the first (torpedo compartment)
    it ends right at the start of the cabin, and as we see from the photo, the long-suffering hole in the hull is still located in the first compartment, close to the second, but still in the first. The hole itself is perfectly flat, the wing-shaped depth control could not have caused such damage.
    Regarding why the Americans would torpedo the boat, I can say the following. The behavior of Americans as masters of the world, and especially submarine captains, is very different from that of our compatriots, who don’t even take a shit without a command from above. The captain of an American submarine has complete freedom of action, whose main task is the safety of the boat. If the Memphis captain sensed a threat to his ship or an allied ship (the film says that after the Toledo-Kursk collision, the Toledo captain asked for help from the Memphis because he heard the sound of torpedo tubes opening) could well have decided to attack. Don’t forget that Russia 2000 is still not Russia 2012.
    The version expressed in the film “a submarine in troubled waters” is more than plausible.
    1. +1
      11 May 2012
      Well, believe the French film, why should I try to convince you otherwise? You’ve already decided everything for yourself, the French are the last resort. They know our boats better than us, they created them, participated in the investigation of the disaster
    2. veryalone
      +2
      11 May 2012
      Stop spewing conspiracy nonsense
  71. +1
    11 May 2012
    I dare to express the opinion of an amateur in naval matters, but, nevertheless, familiar with the consequences of an explosion in a confined space. I don’t want to suggest that the submarine should resemble an open “rose,” but a hole “sucked inside” has no place on its hull when the explosive inside is triggered. Based on this, I am a supporter of “external influence” on the boat.
  72. 0
    11 May 2012
    This is not a WWII submarine; the boat was equipped with such performance characteristics that it could withstand more than one torpedo hit. I cannot find an explanation for the smooth edges of the hole, as if it was cut out with an autogenous machine, other than the impact of some new type of weapon with something similar to a cumulative effect.
    1. 0
      11 May 2012
      you need to back up your idle speculation with something, at least for yourself. Otherwise, you can come to an agreement with aliens. Like, they fucked up. You will find a shaped charge torpedo in service with the US or British Navy. Shock me
  73. +4
    11 May 2012
    Ratibor12
    +1
    I fully support.
    But the torpedoing version should not be completely dismissed. Still, whatever one may say, she also has the right to be.
    And at that moment the GDP, in my opinion, made the right decision and did not accelerate the flywheel of confrontation with the United States. Because at that moment, and even now, we would not have survived this conflict either militarily or politically.
    The USA could simply send us a direct message and that’s all. They would accuse us of ruining our own boat and now trying to blame everything on the United States. And it doesn’t matter that it would be a lie. The main thing is that they wouldn’t let us open our mouths, but the United States would believe. We wouldn’t achieve anything, no matter how much we puffed out our cheeks and beat our chests. So he did everything right. And all these calls are to call people to account! nothing more than pathos, not backed up by anything.
  74. +1
    11 May 2012
    In my opinion, there are as many opinions as there are participants in the discussion of the topic.
    But we will never come to one opinion, even if all the classified documents on this case are published again.
    The most correct version of the tragedy that occurred comes from the relatives and friends of the dead sailors. I believe that with our assumptions and “knowledge of the depth of the subject” we are only once again traumatizing their souls. It would, I think, be right if we silently remembered the dead while drinking the third toast.
    An important circumstance of the tragedy that occurred is the reaction of Putin and his entourage to it. The grins and laughter of these gentlemen when normal people usually empathize with family and friends about their losses should cause nothing but indignation.
    But there are geeks who are trying to explain this too!
    1. 0
      11 May 2012
      I don’t remember the grins on Putin’s face! Maybe post a link to a photo or better yet a video of him grinning and laughing! There is no need to write heresy, lie and don’t lie!!!
      1. 0
        11 May 2012
        Rus_87
        Watch the videos attached to the article carefully. And choose your expressions, then they won’t send you either....
  75. Nechai
    +1
    11 May 2012
    Quote: heruv1me
    The captain of an American submarine has complete freedom of action, whose main task is the safety of the boat.

    Approved for the position personally by the President of the United States. The situation shown in films is that only by receiving a signal on ultra-long waves does he, the commander, get the opportunity to use weapons, this is a Hollywood fable.
    Again, the version is that the Lyachinites left the amers in the Atlantic and Mediterranean with their noses. And apparently they were bought again in the Barents Sea. They created complete confidence among the arrogant guests that they would be the main weapon in these exercises to shoot. By the way, it may also be from here that the external covers of the TA are open. It was around K-141 that the whole bunch was spinning around. And when the stage of firing and repelling the torpedo attack by “Peter the Great” began, the uninvited observers realized that the Lyachinites had left them high and dry this time too. They rushed in the hope of at least “seeing” something, but K-141 blocked their path with her hull, fulfilling the task of preventing insolent people from getting to the most interesting part.
    Vyacheslav, Delta, you are conducting the discussion from the position of an accuser, a speaker of truths, as if someone is OBLIGED to present and prove something to you.... Bad manners, my friend, excuse me. If for some reason you did not watch or do not remember the news broadcasts of that time, this is your problem. And even more so, DEMAND that the sources of the information voiced here be opened?!?!?! When this is possible and permissible, the interlocutors themselves indicate everything, in other cases “ring, boy, banana, we won’t grow for you.”
    Delta:"This dent is on a LIGHT body, it is quite thin and such a dent could well have been left by a large boulder at the bottom" - Yeees! No comments. With that YOU said it all.
    1. +3
      11 May 2012
      With what kind of “nose” could NATO submarines leave the “Kursk” in their terrorist waters during exercises? Why would he suddenly compete with them in something?

      Don't you like that I use technical data? Well, excuse me, it’s not my fault that it’s not clear to you that tracking can occur from tens of miles, and not two or three meters away. Therefore, it was not at all necessary to “rush” somewhere under someone, especially considering the depths in that area, which NATO commanders were certainly aware of. It’s not my fault that you don’t see point-blank that the torpedoes do not enter the side of the ship, but explode next to it. Therefore, of course, my speech seems to you to be some kind of alien, but not the kind you would like to hear.

      I don’t pretend to be the ultimate truth (I certainly didn’t denounce anyone, I involuntarily acted as a defender of the Americans here), I’m just retelling in many ways the research of a professional submariner, Admiral Ryazantsev, who was not afraid to speak out about the mess that was going on and is going on in the navy. In particular, on the first fleet of nuclear submarines, in particular on the Kursk itself. And about the preconditions that formed for the disaster. And which COULD lead to it. And these prerequisites have accumulated immeasurably. You have zero arguments in favor of torpedoing, except for a hole in the hull (again, we return to the peculiarities of a torpedo hit near a ship). Of course it’s easier to take a torpedo position and again find the enemy anywhere, just not in your home, of course it’s easier.

      By the way, did you want to say something about the lightweight body? In your opinion, is it about 15 centimeters thick?))) this is not my opinion, this is the opinion of a professional, of whom you certainly do not belong if you judge the causes of the explosion and the consequences by news reports
  76. mitya
    +4
    11 May 2012
    You read the comments and it seems that all the sea wolves present here and all who were on the Kursk are proving something to each other, swearing. Everyone took part in the Second World War, because as you read, everyone also knows EVERYTHING. Ask your grandfathers about the Second World War, and don’t read Wiki. But we won’t know the whole truth about “Kursk” soon and whether we will know it at all. And for submariners, Honor and Glory is not an easy service for them, and they bow to the ground to their parents. And in general, GLORY to the Russian sailors and soldiers!!!
    1. lukaviy
      +6
      11 May 2012
      Mitya, the fact is that everyone here is arguing, proving something to each other only because we care about it. we are still experiencing this tragedy. the people who died remain in our memory. We all followed the situation and it left a mark on our souls.
      As they say, “truth is born in dispute.” From the article and comments, I don’t know how, but I personally learned a lot for myself.
      We can swear here, it was this way or that, but we are all united in one thing - we are hurt.
      Eternal memory to the sailors who died on Kursk! Eternal memory to all who died defending us!
  77. Aleksey67
    +2
    11 May 2012
    Quote: lukaviy
    prove something to each other only because we care. we are still experiencing this tragedy. the people who died remain in our memory. We all followed the situation and it left a mark on our souls.

    Gold words!!! good
  78. Nechai
    +1
    11 May 2012
    Quote: Delta
    which you certainly don’t belong to

    What, what. and your self-confidence and non-appealing nature cannot be taken away. And you instantly get an idea of ​​the person’s competence. How cleverly you distort your opponent’s speech. Or do you understand the language?! They asked and answered from what sources an opinion could be formed. You pull out ONE thing from what was said and oh, you're the king. Well, well, keep on getting out. Oddball, look AGAIN at the hole in the light body, at its IDEAL GEOMETRY - a boulder at the bottom. Hold your horses, at least sometimes.
    1. +2
      11 May 2012
      oh, the transition to nationalities has begun)))) is this due to lack of argumentation? I understand. In my opinion, I indicated my sources. Do I need to repeat it? Should we talk about the technical characteristics of torpedoes (and their effect on ships) again? So which of us doesn’t understand Russian?

      You should at least listen to the person who has repeatedly wondered about the caliber of torpedoes, which in no way corresponds to the size of the hole. Yes, by the way, what about the lightweight case, expert?))) what is its thickness?
      1. Aleksey67
        +6
        11 May 2012
        Nechai, Valery and Delta, Vyacheslav. You are reasonable people, but here you come across like a kid who has been “weakly” conned. smile Why reduce the dispute to a fight? Nationality is not an argument, why stoop to this? I like your comments (I have no right to speak for others). I'm not Leopold the cat, but "Let's live together"
      2. Arc76
        +3
        11 May 2012
        Yes, he is not particularly strong in mind. It is useless to convince this comrade. He likes to think that Kursk is torpedoed and he will think so, so the arguments that your delta, that Admiral Ryazantsev are useless. As are technical calculations. If he refers to a military secret. one statement that the submarine was like an iron covering with its hull something that was worth it.
    2. Novosibirsky
      0
      11 May 2012
      A snowflake, an explosion crater, a drop of water, and many other miracles in nature, such as symmetry, have ideal geometry! Look not at the form, the ideality of which is difficult to judge from these photographs and from this angle. Look at her size, it doesn't match anything. I wrote below.
  79. +4
    11 May 2012
    Well, if you believe the official version that no one torpedoed or rammed our boat, but it “sank” due to the explosion of its own torpedo... Then why should the Americans raise such a fuss, give us multibillion-dollar loans, no government debt? There’s no reason to write it off, Clinton and Putin had to meet on an emergency basis... Photos then, of the crippled Memphis, were even shown on Channel One, in my opinion, and then suddenly they immediately forgot about Memphis... Well, some journalist looked there this boat, so what? A journalist from Russia? no. From a NATO country, which is probably unlikely to distinguish the same Memphis from a boat of the same type... Therefore, you can argue here until you are blue in the face, a ram is not a ram, they were not torpedoed, their own torpedo exploded, or not their own, but one thing is clear, the Americans will cause the death of the Kursk They clearly had a bony hand!
    1. +3
      11 May 2012
      Well, Clinton has already met with Putin....rumors are spreading, knowing no barriers (c) Vysotsky.

      The director of the CIA then came to Moscow and this visit was planned long before the disaster, like any similar meeting. Well, why make guesses from such events? This cannot even be called indirect evidence.

      One can argue, but no one saw any damage to Memphis, and even if there had been, the Americans would have said that they had collided with an iceberg, an underwater rock, a dead whale, God knows what else. And try to prove the opposite. By the way, we and they also had many such clashes. Do we think that there was definitely a collision with the boat?

      and then, you forget the main thing - many here fought for torpedoing. What does this have to do with the damage to Memphis?
      1. -1
        11 May 2012
        Same as an explosion from your own torpedo
    2. veryalone
      +3
      11 May 2012
      You are talking nonsense. ...Americans give loans to everyone - the usual policy. Nobody wrote off the national debt. No damaged Memphis was shown on any TV.
  80. -2
    11 May 2012
    By the way, I confess for the deception, Clinton and Putin met in June 2000...
  81. -1
    11 May 2012
    Actually, we should probably leave the guys alone, as well as their families. Families don’t care what their loved ones died from.
    1. +5
      11 May 2012
      it hardly matters. They are citizens just like us and it is also important for them that this does not happen in the future. And if you get to the bottom of the truth and eliminate the identified shortcomings, then such disasters can be avoided in the future
  82. SIT
    +7
    11 May 2012
    In general, colleagues, if you take the civil GOST standards for design, and then look at what is on nuclear submarines, your hair will stand on end. High pressure steam lines near power cables, etc. etc. From the point of view of a civil engineer, any boat should catch fire and sink at the same moment in time, and all this should happen right after launching. But it is impossible to design the boat differently - too many different systems need to be crammed into a rather limited amount of space. When operating such systems, the human factor begins to play a large role. A crew error can lead to fatal consequences, which may not have been calculated when assessing the risks - there are a lot of combinations of factors and it is impossible to calculate all the consequences.
    As for the hole from the Mk 48 torpedo. Damn, this torpedo doesn’t need to make a hole in a durable hull! The whole meaning of its action is based on the incompressibility of water as a physical body. The warhead is detonated before it touches the hull of the boat and, due to the incompressibility of water, the shock wave sharply shakes the entire boat. Due to this, all systems and mechanisms inside the boat are disrupted from the frames and bases. The boat turns into a floating hell and the most that can be done is to blow out the main ballast tanks and float to the mercy of the winner. As a combat unit, it ceases to exist. This is the same thing if you hit the head well with a bare fist, there will be a cut or fracture of the jaw, and if the head is in a protective helmet for hand-to-hand combat, then there will be no cut, but there will be a major concussion.
  83. veryalone
    +4
    11 May 2012
    Once again they are trying to blame the domestic Russian mess and irresponsibility on the Americans.
  84. +1
    11 May 2012
    Well, actually, I meant that the situation is terrible. Some people think that it’s the crew’s fault and it’s obviously unpleasant for the family, isn’t it? Others believe that it is the fault of the Amers, and these others are considered idiots by those who believe that it is the fault of the crew. So the family still won’t know the truth. In society, apparently, these two points of view will always prevail. So I don’t understand why they were downvoted. anyway
    1. +1
      11 May 2012
      about the minuses, it’s generally a laugh. Those who are offended, who have rubbed their noses into illiteracy, are already downvoting me even with neutral comments that are not related to the dispute
  85. Novosibirsky
    +1
    11 May 2012
    I'm certainly not an expert on this issue, but something doesn't add up in the torpedoing version, gentlemen!
    If the hole in the right side of the boat is the entrance torpedo, then it is much wider than the torpedo itself, almost three times! Unless, of course, the torpedo shown in the 4th photo is MK-48. Well, look for yourself, in the 4th photo the diameter of the torpedo is correlated with the diameter of the human figure (located next to the torpedo), and in the 1st photo of the submarine the inlet hole is much wider than the human figure, literally several times, taking into account the fact that people are standing closer to the point shooting!
    This cannot be the hole of the torpedo shown in the photo! Unless, of course, for some magical reason she leaves a hole larger in diameter than herself...
    1. +1
      11 May 2012
      and then it expands)))))))))
  86. Patriot
    -4
    11 May 2012
    What a secret it is. The whole world knows that our submarine was torpedoed by the American submarine Memphis. And only our little boy spent weeks after the incident telling the whole country about the explosion in the torpedo compartment, while doing practically nothing to save our guys. And at this time they were dying.
    BLIGHT MEMORY TO THOSE WHO KILLED IN KURSK!
    . If this is so... What kind of a bastard are you? After all, with devilish hatred for your people, you deliberately sought to ensure that the Sons of the Russian Fatherland did not tell the whole world what a nonentity you are, that after the torpedoing of Kursk you allowed the Amers to stay unpunished and leave.
    Of course! These are your owners!!!
    Well, let's think about what an American president would do in Putin's place. It seems to me that even if he had not ordered the destruction of the enemy’s boat, he would certainly have forced them to save our guys, apologize and pay compensation.
    Hmmm. What kind of person is he? Dear Comrades, a rezik. Not the president, but a rezik. And after that you still voted for him. Moreover, you wanted him to be not only the head of state, but also the supreme commander in chief.
    What do you think can be expected from such a supreme one? What a secret it is. The whole world knows that our submarine was torpedoed by the American submarine Memphis. And only our little boy spent weeks after the incident telling the whole country about the explosion in the torpedo compartment, while doing practically nothing to save our guys. And at this time they were dying.
    BLIGHT MEMORY TO THOSE WHO KILLED IN KURSK!
    . If this is so... What kind of a bastard are you? After all, with devilish hatred for your people, you deliberately sought to ensure that the Sons of the Russian Fatherland did not tell the whole world what a nonentity you are, that after the torpedoing of Kursk you allowed the Amers to stay unpunished and leave.
    Of course! These are your owners!!!
    Well, let's think about what an American president would do in Putin's place. It seems to me that even if he had not ordered the destruction of the enemy’s boat, he would certainly have forced them to save our guys, apologize and pay compensation.
    Hmmm. What kind of person is he? Dear Comrades, a rezik. Not the president, but a rezik. And after that you still voted for him. Moreover, you wanted him to be not only the head of state, but also the supreme commander in chief.
    What do you think can be expected from such a supreme one?
    1. +2
      11 May 2012
      Well, since the whole world knows...where should we go?
      1. Oleg0705
        -1
        11 May 2012
        Patriot (4)

        well, just like a broken record, don’t break the needle bully
  87. Novosibirsky
    +3
    11 May 2012
    Well, see for yourself!
    The diameter of the hole in the side is approximately 1/13 of the entire height of the boat! The height of Kursk (according to Wiki!) is 18,4 meters. Divide 18,4 meters by 13 and we get an approximate hole diameter of 1 meters! Gentlemen, the diameter of the hole is approximately ONE AND A METER HALF!!! Yes, it can be seen with the naked eye! And what the hell is the MK-415 torpedo with its 48 millimeters?!! What is the market about, guys!? The hole is approximately THREE wider than a torpedo!! What torpedoing?!! Laughter!

    1. +2
      11 May 2012
      I think that there will be something to answer. They can also say “what if it was a secret Yankee torpedo of large diameter” oh, don’t you agree? that means you are not a patriot" and in that spirit)))
      1. Novosibirsky
        0
        11 May 2012
        No, well, there is a limit to everything! I’m also not a fool to criticize, but without fanaticism! This can be seen even by me, a person far from the sea! True, close to criminology.... )))))
    2. +2
      11 May 2012
      I wrote about this twice, no one wants to hear...
      1. Novosibirsky
        0
        11 May 2012
        Well, it’s more useful and easier to accuse Putin of cannibalism...
        1. Novosibirsky
          0
          11 May 2012
          Quote: NovoSibirets
          Well, it’s more useful and easier to accuse Putin of cannibalism...

          But! In fairness, we all, not to mention the sailors and relatives of the victims, had the right to know the TRUTH! And the fact that the ends were hidden in the water, literally and figuratively, and for the fact that: “She drowned...” is Putin’s fault and no one else! It’s good to hold us for cattle, Supreme Commander-in-Chief!
    3. -1
      11 May 2012
      Quote: NovoSibirets
      Well, see for yourself!
      The diameter of the hole in the side is approximately 1/13 of the entire height of the boat! The height of Kursk (according to Wiki!) is 18,4 meters

      How did you determine this???Don’t talk nonsense!!!
      1. Novosibirsky
        +2
        11 May 2012
        I was not part of the investigation team, but I attached a ruler to the photo, measured the diameter of the hole and correlated it with the height of the submarine, including the wheelhouse (on the scale of one photo). Repeat this process and join the discussion rather than simply judging the opinions of others. There are no such passengers here. Either speak to the point or remain silent.
        1. -2
          11 May 2012
          Quote: NovoSibirets
          I was not part of the investigation team, but I attached a ruler to the photo, measured the diameter of the hole and correlated it with the height of the submarine, including the wheelhouse (on the scale of one photo). Repeat this process and join the discussion rather than simply judging the opinions of others. There are no such passengers here. Either speak to the point or remain silent.
          Reply Quote From

          yes no questions! How do you know how American torpedoes operate, given their diameter? Then where do you think this hole, concave inward, came from??? You can express your thoughts, don’t consider it a labor!!!
          1. Novosibirsky
            +3
            11 May 2012
            I wrote in the post above that I am not a great expert in the topic, hence the dance. This time. Secondly, as far as I understand from the thread, no one knows for sure how this torpedo works and was not involved in the design, that’s two. But we, being people capable of reasoning logically, taking into account that the edges of the hole are of a regular round shape (I don’t observe concavity of the edges, I only observe a dent to the left of the hole) and assuming that this is the entrance hole of the MK-48 torpedo, we cannot assume that they formed in no other way than from the mechanical action of the smooth walls of a torpedo or a copper shaped ring (as some suggest) charge. Well, it wasn’t an explosion that formed such smooth edges of the hole?! In this case, the diameter of the hole must match the diameter of the torpedo! And this is not observed even close. So how did a torpedo with a diameter of 533 millimeters form a hole of this shape and size? Well, it doesn’t increase in diameter when it hits the target, and doesn’t it form a cumulative charge, a reverse expanding cone, and even in water, until it touches the body, which contradicts the cumulative theory in principle?!! This is fantastic.
            From this I conclude that this is not the MK-48. The nature of this hole is not known to me, maybe it is technical as they wrote before, or maybe it was formed under the pressure of masses of water, during reverse collapse after detonation of the main warhead, or formed when it hit the ground...
            Here's my opinion. In any case, the diameters of the hole and the torpedo are significantly different, this has been proven.
          2. Novosibirsky
            +3
            11 May 2012
            Quote: nycsson
            Just express your thoughts and don’t think it’s too much work!!!

            Now you won’t even consider it difficult to express your point of view on the question of how this miracle “miracle of American engineering” could leave a hole three times the diameter with smooth edges?!
            And I will criticize whether it is nonsense or not! laughing
  88. +2
    11 May 2012
    Guys, please enlighten me, I’m not a submariner and generally far from the navy. but there are nuclear submarines with nuclear missiles on board. and suddenly there is an explosion on her, she is drowning and what will the computers say about this, what protocols are turned on, maybe the automatic launch of missiles or something else. Maybe they didn’t save us because they were waiting for a salvo from a dead boat, because the missiles might not have come out of the silos and would have exploded right there. and who knows what internal instructions of the Ministry of Defense in such a case _ maybe you would have to shoot your own boat. For those who are particularly emotional, I apologize for my questions. but questions remain.
    1. +2
      11 May 2012
      Where did you get the information about the nuclear missiles on board???
      By the way, try to formulate your questions more clearly or something.
  89. Patriot
    +1
    11 May 2012
    Oppa. Comrades, just look, Putin’s brave United Russia members have taken up MINE PLAYING again. Nu-nu. Be careful not to let your country down...
  90. fedora
    0
    11 May 2012
    At Kursk, the battery was extremely worn out and was very gassy; it needed to be replaced a long time ago, but there was no replacement for it in the fleet. Devices for burning hydrogen could not cope with the abundant release of hydrogen from the battery; the commander was forced to float to a position to ventilate the compartments. The first explosion in the compartment occurred in the positional position of the submarine, at the beginning of the forced ventilation of the compartment. The second explosion is an explosion of missile and torpedo weapons. All!
    1. +2
      11 May 2012
      in positional? Why, in a positional position, extend a periscope that has been extended? can you explain?
  91. 0
    11 May 2012
    ok, let's make it clearer. After the explosion and sinking of a missile-carrying submarine, is it possible in principle for automatic launch of missiles? And if so, according to what principle, scheme can this happen? What computer protocols are included in the missile?
    1. +2
      11 May 2012
      It is impossible for a missile to exit a sunken submarine. Basically impossible. To start it, you need commands from the control room computers
  92. xway
    -3
    11 May 2012
    In my opinion, it is best to watch a documentary from France
    “Steel sharks in troubled waters”, many questions will disappear. I’m not sure, but
    mine is banned in Russia.
    1. dreddy
      0
      11 May 2012
      post a link to the movie
    2. architipai
      +1
      16 May 2012
      This film is made in a very Hollywood way.
      A journalist in search of a sensation, as they say - if there is no bad news, then there is no news at all
      A film for teenagers with a claim to the discovery of some hidden secret
      It’s not that much is far-fetched, it’s just concocted
  93. yurypetrunin
    +1
    11 May 2012
    it is interesting to read the copies of "Komsomolskaya Pravda" I have saved /
    Ex. No. 157 (22381) dated August 26, 2000. A letter from a submariner who died in Kursk to Vladivostok. I quote. "... The village is just" ah ", as you look, you will shudder. Most of all, you were struck by the empty houses with boarded up windows .... We cook vermicelli in a coffee pot .... The crew goes to sea, and families without a penny remain on the shore. ... We curse, grit our teeth ... "End of quotation.
    That you, dear debaters, are complicating the problem. There are still not enough Quakers to connect to this. And UFOs. is it really not clear from the subsequent actions of the leadership (see Komsomolskaya Pravda from 25 August) that "the secret is so terrible that it scares even the military." End of quote. Those who wish will find the author in this newspaper. I remind the words of ComKSF
    V. POPOVA to the whole country on TV. that he "looks guilty in the eyes" /
    Dear submariners! I don’t know how now, but we always went to sea with brewed ASB. And the so-called RCCU failed after the first leak test due to condensate after comparing the pressure.
    And the conclusion is clear. Our weapons are not protected from unauthorized use. Lyachin lost control of the ship from one bolt in the rack. Popov knew that. The boat sank in violation of the BCF, that any struggle for survivability is conducted ONLY in the surface position so that torpedoes cannot be used. I met with FlagMin 4th EPL. According to him, a torpedo falls to 20-30 meters before a set of operational parameters. Maybe this is an immersion for this? ”The torpedo hit the bottom and self-destructed. I’m not a miner, as far as it's true, I can’t judge, but it makes me think.
    Why was the first compartment cut off? I suppose to hide the EMPTY squeezed torpedo tube. The rest are blown apart by an explosion of hardware torpedoes. The presence of practical torpedoes does not exclude this version.
    I think we will never know the truth. Kolesnikov’s note on the scenario proposed by the authorities should begin with words about a combat or emergency alert, and he wrote it when everyone .....
    Yuri Petrunin. Veteran of the Armed Forces of the USSR. Gatchina.
  94. dreddy
    0
    11 May 2012
    I wonder how a nuclear submarine like Kursk has no torpedo protection? If we are talking about a torpedo attack, why was it not repelled?
    1. 0
      11 May 2012
      What does anti-torpedo protection have to do with it?........................and how do you imagine it?
  95. +3
    11 May 2012
    I’m not an expert, but at one time I downloaded this interview on the Free Press website, which I bring to your attention. It's a pity I didn't save the link.
    We asked what the former submariner, retired captain of the first rank, ex-commander of the K-147 submarine, representative of the Society of Veterans of the Third Division of Nuclear Submarines of the Northern Fleet, Alexander Leskov, thought about the explosion on the Kursk.
    He was one of the first to go on Soviet atomic submarines. And in 1967, as an assistant commander of the first nuclear submarine, the K-3 survived a terrible fire on a nuclear submarine. The disaster occurred under the water 8 September in the Norwegian Sea. The commander was seriously wounded, and Alexander Yakovlevich then had to take command.
    In the future, Leskov more than once had to participate in the elimination of emergency situations on nuclear powered ships.
    “SP”: - Alexander Yakovlevich, why the official version of the death of “Kursk”, voiced by the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation, does not seem convincing to you?
    - The fact is that the then General Prosecutor of Russia, setting out the official version of the death of Kursk, did not answer a number of questions that immediately arose among specialists and, in particular, among the commanders of nuclear submarines.
    "SP": - For example?
    - The official version claims that the Kursk was under water at the time of the explosion. This could not have happened, because with a submarine length of 153 meters, it cannot dive where the sea depth does not exceed 115 meters - and this was precisely the depth at the site of the Kursk sinking, which, by the way, is a training ground for surface ships, and not submarines. Such depth for a huge boat is like a puddle for pike. To dive, the submarine must have at least three of its lengths under the keel, that is, in this case, at least half a kilometer. And any nuclear submarine commander knows this. At depths of 100 meters, no one would allow diving.
    Secondly, the official version is that the boat crashed into the bottom and a second explosion occurred. This also does not seem to be true - torpedoes have never exploded from a submarine hitting the bottom in the history of the submarine fleet.
    Another proof that the submarine was on the surface at the time of the explosion is its photographs taken when it was already lying on the bottom. The boat had its retractable devices raised.
    "SP": - What does this mean?
    - All retractable devices of the boat rise only when surfaced.
    “SP”: – Well, let the Kursk be on the surface during the explosion. What does this change in this case?
    - Firstly, one small lie breeds great mistrust. Secondly, an explosion under water appears as the main version. But there was no explosion underwater. If it had happened under water, there would have been a completely different picture of damage: the hull would have been torn apart from the inside, in fact, the entire lining was bent inward. But I repeat, a torpedo cannot explode on its own. In addition, the torpedoes do not detonate because each has four levels of protection. If the torpedo exploded on its own, it would be, excuse me, like a mosquito bite in the ass of an elephant - nonsense for such a submarine. One torpedo could not have caused all the others to explode. Even in a fire, torpedoes cannot all explode together. I saw with my own eyes in photographs how the boat was lying on its side, and the torpedoes were lying on the bottom near it. And further. If, as the investigation says, the entire torpedo compartment had exploded at once, water would have immediately poured into the hull, and there would have been no fire. But the corpses of the submariners found were badly burnt.
    There are still a lot of contradictions...
    In general, the buoyancy reserve of a nuclear submarine is very large and is designed to ensure that the boat remains afloat with two or even three flooded compartments. And there are no accidents in which almost the entire boat, including the command post, is destroyed at once.
    “SP”: – How does it happen?
    - This happens under very powerful external influences. In other words, if the boat is hit by missiles. I think it was the missiles that destroyed the Kursk as it moved across the surface of the sea to the exercise area. Our missiles.
    "SP": - Rockets?
    - Yes, rockets. I think there were two fatal hits one after the other. But, as we see, even with such a hit, the aft compartments remained intact, and the people were alive. And that's a different story. At first they reported that they heard knocking from inside the submarine - this is true, the sailors remained in the compartments. Motsak then said: we have established contact with them and are knocking. And then he retracted his words. And this is the most shameful thing. But they really did knock. But a day passed and everyone died. I am sure that if these guys were rescued, they would tell how they were killed with their own missiles.
    “SP”: – Could they have been saved?
    - It was officially stated that an underwater bell could not be installed on the hull of a sunken submarine. God! Yes, our divers install this bell in five minutes, it’s easier than a steamed turnip. Then they began to say that there were no deep-sea vehicles in the country... There was nothing like that, everything was there, and our submariners were there and photographed everything from deep-sea vehicles. One of them suddenly became a Hero of Russia after that.
    “SP”: – How long did the submariners wait for help?
    - I think we lived for two days. They hardly lasted any longer. And the divers could have tried to save them if they had received the order. But, alas, we didn’t receive it. Otherwise, there would be witnesses to what really happened, and the secret would become clear. More questions remain. For example, why was it necessary for almost a year to keep a surface ship at the place where the Kursk sank, which with depth charges prevented anyone from approaching the boat? Why was it necessary to spend huge sums of money to cut off the first compartment? In general, the first compartment is the most important witness. He could tell everything about what happened, but he was not only cut off at depth, he was also blown up there, destroying into dust everything that could shed light on the causes of the accident. But the cutting operation cost as much as the submarine itself. Billions have been spent. I know that two notes were raised, one of which was written by Captain Kolesnikov. But we never found out their contents.
    “SP”: – Did you also talk about a collision with an American submarine?
    - They hid the truth very clumsily. And they threw out awkward versions. One of them is a collision with an American submarine. Yes, we collided many times under water - both during the ascent and with our noses - so what? We got some dents, nothing special. One boat collided with the Americans twice during its voyage, and then everyone laughed at it. Never will a collision under water bring such fatal destruction as the Kursk had. I think we should have immediately admitted that we sank the Kursk with our own hands. But the main function of the Navy headquarters is to hide the truth. They hide behind the bogey of secrecy in all the accidents that happened in the fleet - not a single one of them is told the truth.
    “SP”: – Do you think that the missile that hit the Kursk could have been launched as part of an exercise?
    - I think yes. This is a coastal missile, probably a surface-to-surface missile. It could have been launched from anywhere: from the Moscow region, from Plesetsk...
    1. -1
      11 May 2012
      A plus for you for sure!!!
    2. +2
      11 May 2012
      the results of the forensic examination mean they are thrown away.....

      the rest is not worth talking about
      1. Novosibirsky
        -1
        11 May 2012
        I think I won’t surprise you, Delta, but, if necessary, the results of the SME can “draw” any... You understand.
        1. +1
          12 May 2012
          They weren’t surprised, of course, But if you assume this and suspect everyone of everything, then you can come to an agreement on anything, even aliens
          1. Novosibirsky
            -2
            12 May 2012
            No way.., you say that as if falsification of evidence is a great rarity among us..))
            1. +2
              12 May 2012
              what is the point of such falsification? Moreover, the conclusions of forensic experts agree with the conclusions of submariners who calculated how much air could remain in the compartment. But even then - under normal circumstances and without water entering the compartment. Well, and most importantly, there was a fire in the 9th, everything there was charred. And there were no more notes, except for those written in the next 5-6 hours after the explosion. Which means they had about 10 hours to live, no more.
              1. Novosibirsky
                -2
                12 May 2012
                Quote: Delta
                especially since the conclusions of forensic experts agree with the conclusions of submariners,

                It’s good when, in our legal reality, the conclusions of the EIA coincide with the conclusions of independent experts. This increases the likelihood of finding the truth in the case.
  96. 0
    11 May 2012
    Everyone fancies himself a strategist, seeing the battle from the outside. All of the above are ASSUMPTIONS. And nothing more. Firstly. We do not know all the circumstances that prevailed at that time (and I think if we do find out, it will not be soon). Secondly. Most versions were launched deliberately (to mislead as many people as possible). Third. Most of the facts are classified and access to them will not be available soon. Only a few, maybe dozens of people know the truth. So my opinion: There is no need to make waves and raise foam. Sincerely.
  97. -2
    11 May 2012
    For me, the most mysterious and inexplicable thing about this story is the question: why was the first compartment cut off??? Sooner or later, we will find out the truth!!! Happy memory to our sailors!!!
  98. Novosibirsky
    -2
    12 May 2012
    On the subject of the "miracle torpedo". I found a link to the American naval website. Your attention.
    http://www.zhanliejian.com/navweaps/WTUS_PostWWII.htm

    Here is a translation of the information from Mark-y 48. Google translation, so adapt it yourself. There is nothing magical about it. There is no word about the shaped charge in the warhead, nor is there a word about other alien technologies. A regular blank bearing 544 kg. TNT. Designed in 1970! year, later only slightly modified.

    Who needs it, rack your brain! Or read the original at the link...)))

    The All 48 is designed to combat fast-deep-diving nuclear submarines and high-performance surface ships. It is carried on all Navy submarines. An improved version, the Mark-48 ADCAP (Advanced Capabilities), is carried on attack submarines and Ohio-class (SSBN-726), submarine-launched ballistic missiles. All 48 have been replaced by both the Mark 37 and Mark 14 torpedoes. The Mark 48 and 48 Mark ADCAP torpedoes can operate with or without wire guidance and can use active and/or passive homing. When launched, they perform programmed target search, acquisition and attack procedures.Both of these can carry out multiple reattacks if they miss the target.

    A non-nuclear approach to high speed, deep-diving submarine was a very fast, deep-sea torpedo with a high-performance guidance system, that is, a greatly improved Mark 37, which took full advantage of post-World War II technologies. Consideration of such weapons as submarine launch and air launch began in November 1956 as part of the RETORC (Research Torpedo Re-Configuration) program. By 1960, specific heavyweight torpedo designs emerged and assigned first the EX 10 and higher as the Mark 48. After price qualification exercises and competition between qualified bidders, the draft contract determination was awarded to Westinghouse. In parallel, a contract was signed for Clevite to develop an alternative acoustic system. The Westinghouse contract was subsequently extended to the development of the turbine powered Mark 48 Mod 0, which was the only ASW capability. Some Mod 0's were evaluated, but in 1967 it was decided that an anti-surface capability was also needed. Some feel that this was more of a ploy to keep Clevite in control rather than significant performance requirements.

    Competition between the Mark 48 Mod 1, which appeared in embryonic form with the Clevite contract, and the Mark 48 Mod 2, a redesign of the Westinghouse Mod 0 ensued. The Westinghouse torpedoes use the Sunstrand turbine used in Mod 0 for the engines, while the Clevite use the Otto fuel external combustion, axial piston engine. One of the selection factors is the apparent increase in piston engine efficiency, especially when running deep rather than quieter but less efficient turbines. The sound systems were somewhat different. In 1971, after a competitive evaluation, full scale contract manufacturing was awarded to Gould15 (formerly Clevite). The first Mark 48 Mod 1 torpedoes were delivered to the fleet in 1972, twelve years after development the characteristics were approved.

    Often published, but unofficial data indicate that Mod 0 was capable of 55 knots at 35000 meters (32000 m) and could operate at depths of up to 2500 feet (760 m), but not at top speed. Its acoustic homing systems are reported to have a range of 4000 yards (3640 m), approximately four times that of the Mark 37. This performance is impressive and generally adequate for handling 30+ knots, deep diving targets.

    The combination of significant airborne capabilities (HCL) for search control, targeting and re-attack maneuvers and wire guidance constitutes a formidable weapon. The addition of two-way communications (TELCON) to Mod 3 received data from the torpedo sonar and actual torpedo performance data (course, speed, depth, etc.) to the submarine's fire control system, significantly improving performance. The Envelope Mod 4 added enhanced capabilities, including increased speed and deep dive, and fire and forget capabilities. Existing torpedoes were updated kits and Mod 4s had been in production torpedoes since 1980. Mod 5 was a temporary upgrade of existing torpedoes until ADCAP was available. All 48 torpedoes had growing pains, but they are very sophisticated, high-performance weapons. Published photographs of the destruction of targets indicate its effectiveness. The main technical criticism of the Mark 48 is that it seems to be very noisy.

    Until the mid-1960s, Soviet submarines were diving depths of 650 to 1000 feet (200 to 330 m) and had submersible speeds of up to 30 knots. Early Mark 48 capabilities are clearly capable of attacking such targets. The appearance of the Soviet submarine ALPHA with a non-magnetic titanium hull, 2500 ft (760 m) diving depth and submerged speed of over 40 knots apparently tested the threat against which the Chief of Naval Operations issued new operational requirements in 1975. Two approaches to meeting this requirement have been initiated. The first was the Mark 48 "envelope expansion program", which used the capabilities of an existing torpedo. The second, essentially a new torpedo, is ADCAP. The major changes to the ADCAP involved all-new digital electronics, inertial guidance (replacing the gyro system), a significant reduction in volume dedicated to electronics, with a corresponding significant increase in fuel capacity, a strengthened shell, and the inclusion of the Mark 48 shell expansion features. All 48 piston engines were retained, but given the high fuel consumption which gave about 63 knots of speed. Much of these changes were made possible by the introduction of integrated circuits, including microprocessors, whose small size allowed many functions to be transferred to the control group. The guide wire reel was moved to a position aft of the enlarged fuel tank and there were no other layout changes. Authorized for series production in 1990 as Model 5, the last new torpedo ADCAP was delivered in 1996.

    All 48 Mod 6 torpedoes had two significant improvements: Guidance and Control (G&C Mod) and torpedo propulsion unit (TPU Mod). G&C modeling improves the acoustic receiver, replaces manuals and controls, installs updated technology, increased memory capacity and improved processor throughput. The TPU simulation provided a tactically significant reduction in torpedo signature radiated noise, thus addressing one of the biggest complaints about earlier versions. Mod 6 reached initial operational capability (IOC) in 1997. Mod 6 was also the first torpedo that could use the Torpedo Downloader System (TDS). TDS can provide rapid software updates for launched weapons, allowing submarines to be deployed with the most up-to-date software option.

    All 48 ADCAPs underwent the Block IV update, which began in 1999. The Navy acquired approximately 1046 modified ADCAPS (Mod 6), which replaced an equivalent number of Mod 5 ADCAPS, keeping the total ADCAP torpedo inventory at 1046.

    All 48 Mod 7 Common Broadband Advanced Sonar System (CBASS) torpedoes are optimized for deep and coastal waters and have advanced countermeasures against capabilities. All 48 ADCAP Mod 7 (CBASS) torpedo launchers are the result of a joint development program with the Royal Australian Navy and reached initial operational capability in 2006.

    The following description is taken from "Jane's Background Information: Mk 48 ADCAP" (see link below).


    All 48 ADCAP Mod 6 (MODS) has two hardware upgrades: one for guidance and control and the other movement upgrade. The Manual and Control update replaced the previous Manual and Control with more modern technology, improved the acoustic receiver, added additional memory modules and increased processor bandwidth to handle expanded software requirements expected soon. Torpedo movement upgrade has improved motor units, the details of which are classified.

    Included in the update is the Common Broadband Advanced Sonar System (CBASS), which will develop fully digital wideband sonar capabilities to enable the torpedo to operate effectively in both shallow water (<180 m) against diesel-electric submarines operating in coastal and deep water bodies. For this torpedo it will also show the speed of frequency tuning and optimal frequency selection. This capability will allow the Mark 48 ADCAP to identify torpedo countermeasures and distinguish them from the target. Full production speed of this upgrade is scheduled to begin in FY04.

    The Stealth Enhancement Torpedo Program (STEP) will be introduced in two phases. Phase 1 will build on CBASS's ability to recommend upgrades and eliminate sonar tracks, while Phase 2 will see stealth and higher power-to-weight ratio propulsion improvements and warhead upgrades.

    All 48 were exported to Australia, Canada, Israel, the Netherlands and Turkey (to ex-US Navy submarines)."
    1. postman
      +1
      12 May 2012
      Quote: NovoSibirets
      On the subject of the "miracle torpedo".

      The Americans, of course, had ADCAP Block IV
      http://www.zhanliejian.com/ это китайский форум о ВМС
      More seriously:
      The Naval Institute Guide to World Naval Weapons Systems, 1997-1998
      But Google, of course, won’t get by here.
      4 pages of neat text and diagrams
      The Naval Institute Guide to Combat Fleets of the World: Their Ships, Aircraft, and Systems

      The Mk 48 mod.5 ADCAP (ADvanced CAPability) torpedo has been in service with the US Navy since the early 90s.

      650 lb (292,5 kg) explosive, reconfigured fuze block
      1. Novosibirsky
        +1
        12 May 2012
        Postman, do you think there was another torpedo? Does this change things? What is its diameter? Is there a link?
        Yes, no matter what it is... one and a half meters of torpedoes do not exist in nature, correct me if I’m wrong!