Military Review

How was born "Poseidon"

112
If the "Poseidon" is so far only a model suitable only for towing trials, which is still far from being ready weaponsthen what experienced? The Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation showed a very short movie of some tests, on which there were footage of launching a certain product from a certain device, which in this article will be considered in more detail. They, in my opinion, are worth it.



Once again, we give a well-known photograph of a product hanging on a traverse


Yet this is a container


In the comments under the previous article, there was a discussion about my assertion that a product painted in a white and orange cage, imprinted on a specially designed traverse, is a transport and launch container. My opponent claimed that it was not a container, but a product for "throwing tests."

I disagree with my opponent and that’s why. Firstly, this product, as can be seen in the photo, has no screws and rudders, without which no underwater vehicle can sail anywhere. Yes, I am aware of the Flurry rocket torpedo, which has no screws, well, after all, no one has claimed that the Poseidon is a rocket torpedo. In addition, a certain end cover is visible in the rear of this product, which most of all suggests thoughts about the container.

Secondly, in the bow you can see a certain red ring separating the black fairing and the rest of the body of the product. The purpose of this product is not entirely clear, but it can be assumed that this black fairing is fixed. This ring is also not part of the product sling system, since nothing is attached to it, either hoists or hooks. In any case, such a ring cannot be installed on a product intended for underwater travel - it would have greatly worsened the streamlining. All torpedoes have a streamlined shape of the warhead, which is quite obvious.

Now let's move on to the video published by the Ministry of Defense. I took a few shots of the start recording.











A hemispherical lid is visible on them (very similar in shape to a black fairing of a product suspended on a beam), which opens with petals under the pressure of gases, and a torpedo passes through these petals. You can notice the dark stripes, extended in length and not at all similar to the white-orange color of the product discussed above.

In general, I think that the hemispherical drop-down lid is a black fairing of the launch vehicle, from which a torpedo was fired during tests. This cover opened almost the same as the rubber cover of a disposable grenade launcher; it is probably also rubber or rubber-metal. The video was shot in order to make sure that the lid opens normally and the torpedo leaves the container without any difficulties.

If someone does not agree with this interpretation, he can put forward his version, but so that it does not diverge from the observed facts.

Torpedo container 65-76


What kind of torpedo was fired from the transport and launch container and why was it necessary to make a container for the torpedo? Is there really not enough torpedo tubes? I think that it was the 65-76 torpedo, which, according to official figures, played a key role in the death of the Kursk submarine K-141.

According to the results of the investigation, based on the study of the remains of the boat in the dock, it was concluded that the boat died from the explosion of a torpedo ammunition stored in the first compartment. Investigators saw a picture of monstrous destruction: the bulkheads torn and pressed together, bent pull-out devices, a mishmash of debris. The hull of the boat was mangled along its entire length, so that the coamings of the aft emergency rescue hatch burst. The hatch itself was jammed and was pulled out by a robot arm. Survivors of the explosion were doomed; they could not open the hatch in any way. Personally, I was struck by the photo of the payola in the ruined nose compartment, in which there were good 20 mm steel and which was crumpled into the corrugation like foil. It was an unimaginably powerful explosion.

How was born "Poseidon"

Steel floor crumpled into corrugation. Impressive?


The investigation showed that the launch of the disaster was the explosion of the 65-76 torpedo in the torpedo tube. Apparently, there was a leak of hydrogen peroxide. He decomposed with an explosion. A gas-vapor mixture of water and oxygen heated to several hundred degrees (from 500 to 800 degrees) destroyed the torpedo itself, as a result of which the rest of the hydrogen peroxide in the dashboard decomposed. A powerful explosion knocked out the front cover of the torpedo tube (it was later found at the bottom); the rear cover of the torpedo tube flew through the entire compartment and stuck into the bulkhead between the first and second compartments. Hot gas mixed with kerosene (the 65-76 torpedo uses kerosene as fuel) burst into the compartment. In fact, it was a flamethrower jet that ignited everything that could burn, and a powerful volumetric fire arose, fueled by the oxygen of the combined cycle gas. At the same time, water poured through the ruined compartment. The combination of a powerful fire and flooding of the compartment caused a rapid increase in temperature and pressure, which is why explosives in all other torpedoes exploded. The catastrophe can be described something like this.


Everywhere soot - traces of a strong fire


After the death of the Kursk, the 65-76 torpedo was withdrawn from service. This decision was understandable and justified. But the bad. This torpedo was the best of all that was in the torpedo arsenal of the Russian Navy. It had good speed, range, homing system, and such a torpedo could attack large surface ships of the enemy, including aircraft carriers, with decent chances of success. It was impossible to use it as before, but there was nothing to replace it with.

Based on these considerations, I believe that the command of the Navy came up with the idea to abandon the 65-76 torpedo from a torpedo launcher, and to develop a special transport and launch container for it located outside the solid hull of the submarine. In this case, if the torpedo leaks and even explodes, the possible damage will be much less than if it exploded in a torpedo tube, and probably will not lead to the loss of a combat unit, as happened with the Kursk. If the front cover of the container is opened by steam pressure and the back cover is strong, then the explosion of hydrogen peroxide is most likely to lead to an emergency torpedo shot.

Despite the obviousness of the idea and the similarity of the torpedo container with the container for the cruise missile, it is still not so simple to make it. The container must be operational at any depth of immersion, up to the limit, it must ensure the launch of a torpedo on the move, launch from it should not damage the hull of the boat and so on. There are many requirements for it. Therefore, it was a difficult task requiring research, development and testing. Coloring the container in white-orange squares, obviously, was required to study the hydrodynamic effects that occur when launching a torpedo. The shooting, of course, was conducted from all angles, but we were shown only a small part of these records.

As far as one can judge, the trials were successful.

The Birth of Poseidon


This circumstance, as can be assumed, led to the birth of the concept of "Poseidon." Once torpedoes climbed out of a sturdy hull, their caliber limitation is lifted. You can build a much larger torpedo.

The photos of a certain product in the workshop, which were analyzed in the previous article, are obviously the photos of the layout of this new, promising large-caliber torpedo. Commentators drew attention to the steps of the stairs behind the torpedo and even indicated the step of the steps - about 30 cm. Using this scale, you can evaluate the diameter of the product. I got 250 cm. That is, it is 3,8 times larger in diameter than the 65-76 torpedo.

If you equip it with a proven engine using kerosene and hydrogen peroxide, you can achieve a significant increase in its range by increasing the supply of fuel and oxidizer. The torpedo 65-76 had a range of up to 100 km, and here, probably, it will be three times as much.

A large case can accommodate a much larger explosive charge. The charge of the torpedo 65-76 was impressive - 765 kg of TNT. In a large torpedo, it can be 2-3 tons. That is, the carrier will dispose of the belly almost guaranteed. In addition, a large torpedo itself can be a carrier of torpedoes, for example, the same torpedoes "Flurry". At least one such torpedo can be installed. A carrier torpedo can attack two targets: one with a Flurry, for example, a destroyer or a submarine, and the second with its own charge. This is technically feasible.

Not to mention options with a nuclear reactor and a nuclear warhead.

If all this is true, then the compelled decision to place a hazardous, but necessary torpedo out of the sturdy hull of the boat led to new opportunities that did not exist before. A new class of naval weapons can be created, unprecedentedly powerful and long-range. These are only prospects going through the stage of development and the first samples. As for the transport and launch container for the 65-76 torpedo, it is likely that without much noise it will soon be put into service, since installing them on existing boats will not require significant changes in their design.
Author:
112 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Waltasar
    Waltasar 16 October 2019 06: 18
    0
    The idea is certainly interesting, but where on the streamlined hull of the boat to put several of these containers? With Poseidon it is clear - a separate carrier for it, and on the nuclear submarine pr. 949 where, also "without significant design changes."
    1. Observer2014
      Observer2014 16 October 2019 08: 22
      +1
      Waltasar (Paul)
      but where on the streamlined hull of the boat to fit several such containers? With Poseidon, it is clear - a separate carrier for it, and on the nuclear submarine of pr. 949 where, also "without significant design changes."
      Nowhere. If we have entered the era of "all-the-footers of all agreements" So be it. We start Poseidon from the shore fellow Business then.
      1. Kalmar
        Kalmar 16 October 2019 09: 34
        0
        Quote: Observer2014
        If we have entered the era of "all the puffs of the all-round agreement" So be it. We start "Poseidon" from the shore

        And now, is this prohibited by some kind of agreements? A torpedo is not a rocket. Another thing is that for the same reason you will have to be very confused with the choice of the launch site: you need both a fairway and a way to send a torpedo into it, and so that no one interferes on the road (do torpedoes have a friend or foe identification system?).
        1. Observer2014
          Observer2014 16 October 2019 10: 49
          0
          Kalmar
          And now is it really prohibited by some agreements? A torpedo is not a rocket. Another thing is that for the same reason, you will have to be very confused with the choice of the launch site: you need both a fairway and a way to send a torpedo into it, and so that no one gets in the way on the road (do torpedoes have a friend or foe identification system?).
          Oh times, oh morals ... laughing
      2. Ryaruav
        Ryaruav 16 October 2019 10: 46
        +4
        and your product when exiting the base is intercepted by a torpedo mk-48 mod7
        1. g1washntwn
          g1washntwn 16 October 2019 11: 07
          -9
          no son, it's fantastic. all the possible routes and routes of the submarine are not able to cover with buoys. who will launch your Mk if before launching the Poseidons the first will be the drones-baits and drones-hunters of Virginia similar to them? will you keep them in the fairways with zumwalt and donald kuks under constant watch?
          1. timokhin-aa
            timokhin-aa 16 October 2019 12: 15
            +6
            Virginia Hunting Drones?


            An example of such a hunter is possible?
            1. g1washntwn
              g1washntwn 16 October 2019 12: 39
              -7
              Quote: timokhin-aa
              An example of such a hunter is possible?

              ... and the keys to the apartment where the money is?
              1. timokhin-aa
                timokhin-aa 16 October 2019 12: 41
                +8
                All that you write about does not exist outside the walls of your skull.
                Thanks for confirming
                laughing
                1. g1washntwn
                  g1washntwn 16 October 2019 12: 46
                  -11
                  I have at least something unlike a draft in yours. Train trolling on cats.
                  1. timokhin-aa
                    timokhin-aa 16 October 2019 13: 49
                    +7
                    No, by. I have a real understanding of some issues, you have fantasies and pathos.

                    I’m probably wasting my time, but still - it seems to you that you are very convincing to those who read the opposite.

                    People do not believe in your fantasies, no one except you believes in them.
                    1. g1washntwn
                      g1washntwn 16 October 2019 13: 56
                      -8
                      Quote: timokhin-aa
                      I have a real understanding of some issues

                      Keep grazing your pink ponies in your fantasy world? Good luck.
                      1. timokhin-aa
                        timokhin-aa 16 October 2019 14: 18
                        +6
                        This does not work against normal people, understand already.
                      2. g1washntwn
                        g1washntwn 17 October 2019 09: 58
                        -1
                        Everything is relative, and your belief in your "normality" and your own beliefs too.
                      3. timokhin-aa
                        timokhin-aa 17 October 2019 10: 49
                        +1
                        No, the norm is the norm, and replacing reality with your own fabrications and passing them off as reality is quite another.

                        In the end, there is always a tough criterion - the presence of something in reality.
                        So where is the drone-hunter for "Virginias" (do not offer the depth of your consciousness)?
                      4. g1washntwn
                        g1washntwn 17 October 2019 10: 59
                        -1
                        Quote: timokhin-aa
                        the presence of something in reality.

                        The vision of reality is formed exclusively in the depths of your consciousness. I wrote to you about relativity and variability, and you demand information from me under the heading (go back even further, where I wrote about the keys to the apartment). It seems that it was you who was put off the train in front of Severodvinsk.
                      5. timokhin-aa
                        timokhin-aa 17 October 2019 11: 28
                        +1
                        NOT from the neck, there is no drone-hunter in Virginia, this is your nonsense, which you pass off as reality, and expect from others that they will agree with this.
                      6. g1washntwn
                        g1washntwn 17 October 2019 11: 36
                        -1
                        I do not expect anything from others, I give them information for consideration. And I’ll hint to you, but no more: Poseidon’s tasks can be completely different. All.
                      7. timokhin-aa
                        timokhin-aa 17 October 2019 11: 40
                        +1
                        You dump your thoughts on them, not information.
                      8. g1washntwn
                        g1washntwn 17 October 2019 11: 47
                        -1
                        Are you doing NOW something else, trying to manipulate the readers towards me? laughing Two to you again on trolling, come for a retake next semester.
                      9. timokhin-aa
                        timokhin-aa 17 October 2019 13: 56
                        +1
                        Back to the beginning - what kind of a drone hunter is Virginia? Just do not la la about the fact that he is somewhere, he is secretly impossible.
        2. timokhin-aa
          timokhin-aa 16 October 2019 12: 14
          +5
          It itself cannot leave the base; it must be pulled out by the carrier.
          1. karabass
            karabass 16 October 2019 17: 33
            +1
            Alexander, maybe you are right and Poseidon doesn’t work, but it’s okay, in case of an atomic war, it’s probably intended to put there (in a torpedo) a desperate submariner, if there is no submariner, then let the defense ministry contact me, I know one such military man from Cap Yar, though he not a sailor, but fish without fish and cancer
            Regards Karabass
            1. timokhin-aa
              timokhin-aa 16 October 2019 18: 51
              +3
              Good! I, too, was joking somehow and some fan of mega-torpedoes hit me a minus like you.

              In order not to get up twice - PZK is an underwater sound channel - google. there is.
  2. andrewkor
    andrewkor 16 October 2019 06: 37
    0
    Dragging torpedo tubes outside the hull of the boat were very common at the dawn of the formation of this type of weapon at the beginning of the 20th century!
    The history of weapons sometimes makes a spiral spiral, according to the Dialectic!
    For example, modern BPS in artillery is a slightly improved crossbow bolt!
    1. mik193
      mik193 16 October 2019 18: 52
      0
      Please do not confuse tow and frame torpedo tubes.
  3. tlauicol
    tlauicol 16 October 2019 06: 48
    +8
    The boat is still noisy
    1. venik
      venik 16 October 2019 08: 29
      +1
      Quote: Tlauicol
      у

      ======
      Not only and not so much it - the boat will also become slower!! But what to do? Sometimes you have to make sacrifices, at least for now safe in operation analogue of the torpedo 65-76 not created?
      1. tlauicol
        tlauicol 16 October 2019 08: 57
        +1
        a good 533m caliber torpedo needs to be created and not fooled
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 16 October 2019 10: 11
          -1
          And the Physicist and the Case - why do you have bad torpedoes?
          1. SovAr238A
            SovAr238A 17 October 2019 07: 42
            -5
            Quote: Vadim237
            And the Physicist and the Case - why do you have bad torpedoes?


            Do they have any?
            Are they good?
            But do they know how to work in the Arctic under the ice and in the Baltic, in the Black Sea and in the Pacific Ocean?
            And that would be successful everywhere?
          2. venik
            venik 17 October 2019 07: 55
            +1
            Quote: Vadim237
            And the Physicist and the Case - why do you have bad torpedoes?

            =========
            Torpedoes are GOOD! Here is the interpretation of the performance characteristics to them up to "65-76" - it will be too far!
  4. Alex_59
    Alex_59 16 October 2019 07: 57
    +2
    This torpedo was the best of all that was in the torpedo arsenal of the Russian Navy.
    I doubt something. The best is never so dangerous. And in general, the third ten was already in the 2000 year - the development of the 70's.
    As for the Kursk, there is Valery Ryazantsev's version, which is quite adequate for those who know at least a little what kind of mess was going on in the navy in the 90s.
  5. Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat 16 October 2019 08: 08
    -12
    Most likely Poseidon is not at all what it seems to many. It is clear that a torpedo moving 10000 km to a point target in a nonsense nuclear reactor. Most likely, it is supposed to use something like a self-propelled nuclear charge of about 50-150 megatons to undermine it at stress points of the earth's crust, such as the Sant Andreas fault, where high accuracy is not needed.
    1. tlauicol
      tlauicol 16 October 2019 08: 11
      +8
      Even more fierce nonsense
    2. Ryaruav
      Ryaruav 16 October 2019 10: 43
      +3
      you tovarisch sweat faults blow up everywhere it is written America will not die from the blasting of faults all mankind will not have enough bunches
  6. timokhin-aa
    timokhin-aa 16 October 2019 08: 16
    +11
    Dmitry stop fantasizing. The ring on the nose of the torpedo is designed to prevent bending of the body of the product and its longitudinal displacements when transported in a conveyor car. The car itself is also on your photo, you just did not notice it laughing

    Painting the product in a checker is necessary for measuring speed when exiting the launcher, and missiles are also painted. But they don’t paint containers, Dmitry, because they don’t start anywhere and they don’t measure their speed.

    The method of launching the product cannot be related to the Kursk disaster, since it was chosen long before this disaster.

    Dmitry does not need to arrange races around this project. This is not a movie about aliens in which you can fantasize the whole universe behind the scenes, this is a very specific product, it has drawings, documents, test reports, instructions for it. No need to fantasize.
    1. Polinom
      Polinom 16 October 2019 11: 10
      0
      So on all experimental products do. For reference and for sharpening when shooting. IL-38, it’s an experiment. make a DZT. But it didn’t.
    2. wehr
      16 October 2019 12: 57
      +2
      They do not show me documents, test reports, instructions, but only offer to take my word for it.
      But I do not believe, and on this I analyze what is presented to me.
      Why do not I believe? Because August 1991 of the year convinced me that this audience would lie without even blinking an eye.
      1. timokhin-aa
        timokhin-aa 16 October 2019 13: 20
        +3
        1. Look at your frames, there on the 2 frame number the bubbles escaping from the TA cover the fairing almost completely, but on the frame below the bubbles are already smaller, and the black zone is larger.
        This is a black nose fairing, the one you see in the photo.

        2. TPK are not painted into a checker and most often it has devices for transportation, eye bolts, for example. Traverses for TPK are not needed.

        3. The connectors on the case are similar to the connectors on the Poseidon case from another MO video, where the product is painted in gray, simply made in other places, which can be explained by different purposes of the products from different videos (for example, a running layout in one video and throwing in another)

        4. TPK is usually 1,3-1,6 times larger in diameter than the weapons that are in it. This is not here.

        In general, think not much more.

        And do not read the local loonies on VO, who sometimes write on this topic and always run amok in the comments on articles about the subject
        1. wehr
          16 October 2019 14: 12
          -1
          No, I do not agree. Not enough facts.
          If you want to convince, give some good reason, another photograph, for example. For example, a product on a traverse from a different angle or something else like that.
          1. timokhin-aa
            timokhin-aa 16 October 2019 14: 25
            +1
            Here is a photo of the layout

            Here is a photo of another instance, most likely also a layout, but already running or some kind of demonstration

            Well, the picture you used already


            You yourself dare to compare?

            Just in case, I’ll tell you one of the possible logical chains.
            The picture is a screenshot from the presentation of the PLASN "Belgorod" for the VPR, part of which was declassified for the famous speech of Putin. It shows a drawing of the finished product, and from an official source.
            The picture above is the same externally product, on the body of which are holding devices for slinging and lifting with a crane.
            Above is a photo of something in the same dimensions as the product, with the SAME EXACTLY holding devices mounted around the product body EXACTLY THE SAME, without a margin for the increased "under TPK" diameter.

            Doesn't convince too?

            Measure the diameter of the "checkered product" starting from the grid of columns, then the diameter of the gray product. Compare, if the error is 20-30 cm (this is normal for such "measurements"), then everything seems obvious, though?

            You can also watch the video, where you can see that the product comes out of TA or PU painted "in checkerboard". Well, the color is not the same, so this is a monochrome TV camera underwater.

            Although you can try to persist as long as you like
            1. Alex_59
              Alex_59 16 October 2019 14: 38
              +2
              That's right, in the photo where the "product" in a checker on the nose fairing is put on a kind of protective ring made of red material, and from it sticks out the muzzle of the head fairing in black. The photo below shows the same cigar, but without this shell and in gray. The head fairing has a characteristic round window on the side in both pictures.
            2. wehr
              16 October 2019 17: 50
              +2
              A handwheel is visible on the traverse. Its diameter is somewhere around 40 cm. If you use it as a scale, it turns out that the diameter of the white-orange product is about 160 cm.
              And the diameter of the gray product on the scale of the steps is about 250 cm.

              I hope you will not convince me that 160 = 250?
              1. timokhin-aa
                timokhin-aa 16 October 2019 18: 53
                +1
                You missed a bit, try again.
              2. SovAr238A
                SovAr238A 17 October 2019 07: 50
                -6
                Quote: wehr
                A handwheel is visible on the traverse. Its diameter is somewhere around 40 cm. If you use it as a scale, it turns out that the diameter of the white-orange product is about 160 cm.
                And the diameter of the gray product on the scale of the steps is about 250 cm.

                I hope you will not convince me that 160 = 250?


                I wrote about the scale of the steps in that article.
                I wrote about 150-200mm, for some reason you indicated 300 mm.
                Here is yours and "nebivka"
                1. wehr
                  17 October 2019 11: 09
                  0
                  220 - step steps in the stepladder according to GOST.
                  It turns out about 1800.
                  In any case, these are different products.
                  And let's stop this debate already. You have no good reason for me to change my mind. Put a photo of the product from the stern - then we'll talk.
                  1. timokhin-aa
                    timokhin-aa 17 October 2019 11: 37
                    +1
                    Different products with the same dimensions.

                    Sutton measured it well and drew a picture

                    1. wehr
                      17 October 2019 22: 10
                      -1
                      I appreciated your efforts. laughing
                      Tell your special officer that he is well done.
                      1. timokhin-aa
                        timokhin-aa 17 October 2019 22: 20
                        +1
                        Perseverance is the result of will, and obstinacy is the undeveloped frontal lobes of the brain. So, by the way.

                        Just in case, review the video from 0: 24 to 0: 27



                        In the dynamics, the color of the product emerging from the TA or the launching device is clearly visible. It is painted in a checker, with a black nose fairing.
                      2. wehr
                        18 October 2019 00: 30
                        -1
                        The starter here is exactly as I described.
                        But I still don’t see the similarities of the manufactured product with what hangs on the traverse. He has structural elements that do not allow him to be a torpedo.
                      3. timokhin-aa
                        timokhin-aa 18 October 2019 15: 15
                        0
                        You look better, see. A structural element that does not allow exactly one there is a branch pipe on its side. And then, we don’t know whether it is dismantled before installation in the TA, and whether there is no structural element in the TA that allows launching with this branch pipe (groove in the launch tube).

                        With Poseidon, there is ambiguity - there is a healthy hatch with a handle "on top", recessed into the body, that is, its correct orientation in space is rigidly set. It is not in your photo-videos, but in general it is there, and it is quite possible that the TA there is very different from usual.

                        I even admit that they will let him out of the TPK, I’m all about the fact that in the photo - not TPK.
      2. Lexus
        Lexus 16 October 2019 15: 46
        -4
        How was born "Poseidon"

        Feeling that the Japanese planted the "kaiten". In exchange for the Kuril Islands.
        Why do not I believe? Because August 1991 of the year convinced me that this audience would lie without even blinking an eye.

        good
  7. timokhin-aa
    timokhin-aa 16 October 2019 08: 18
    +2
    And yes, the torpedo on the Kursk exploded for a different reason.
    1. Gust
      Gust 16 October 2019 10: 59
      0
      Enlighten.
      1) Peroxide leak - official version.
      2) Torpedoed nuclear submarines.
      3) Collision with nuclear submarine "Memphis", hereinafter p. 1)
      4) I ran into a mine during WWII.
      1. timokhin-aa
        timokhin-aa 16 October 2019 12: 11
        0
        A torpedo fuse likely.
  8. The comment was deleted.
    1. Alex_59
      Alex_59 16 October 2019 09: 10
      +5
      Quote: rudolff
      Nonsense from the first to the last word.

      According to Ryazantsev, a fake about breaking the hatch coaming was created to explain the inability to dock the underwater vehicle with him. But he could not dock, in fact, due to a malfunction of the sealant, which provided sealing of the docking place. Considering that ACC does not fail for the first time (Komsomolets), and the processes of the 90's were unlikely to have a beneficial effect on ACC, I am inclined to believe Ryazantsev.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. Alex_59
          Alex_59 16 October 2019 11: 04
          +1
          Quote: rudolff
          In the case of Komsomolets, many who are to blame without ACC

          Well, it goes without saying. With "Kursk", by and large, the ACC is also more a victim of negligence and slovenliness of higher officials than the direct culprit. Again: according to Ryazanov, the commander of the rescue vehicle has been submitting reports for several years with a request to update the seals, but to no avail.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. The comment was deleted.
            2. Alex_59
              Alex_59 16 October 2019 12: 07
              +1
              Quote: rudolff
              According to Ryazantsev, probably?

              Yes of course. Typo.
    2. Ivanchester
      Ivanchester 16 October 2019 10: 40
      +1
      Rudolff, but have you seen any documents / photographs allowing you to conclude that the coaming pad and hatch were not damaged during the accident?
      After all, this is extremely important for understanding the reasons why none of the crew members were saved.
      The information that I meet on the Internet is mostly divinatory :(
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. Ivanchester
          Ivanchester 16 October 2019 12: 12
          +2
          Thank you.
          It turns out that at least part of the absurdities shown in a recent film by Thomas Winterberg, fully consistent with reality: (((
        2. wehr
          16 October 2019 13: 00
          -4
          Come on. In the well-known and long-published photo gallery of the Kursk inspection there was a photograph of the Granita mine. It clearly shows that the rocket is torn off the guides, one of them has a damaged fairing, and the shafts themselves are filled with foam. Serious damage is more than evident.
          And so in everything. No matter how "specialist", so - a liar, and shameless.
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. wehr
              16 October 2019 13: 16
              -4
              Yes please.
              Only whom and what are you going to convince with your uncomplicated refuted lies?
              People who have lies in their heads, who do not eliminate this lies, and even cultivate them, cannot be effective and, moreover, cannot win a single war.
              1. The comment was deleted.
                1. wehr
                  16 October 2019 14: 07
                  -3
                  Why not? The deformation of the light body from the explosion (and this is still thousands of tons of metal) may well crush the steel ring of the coaming area.
                  Yes please. Create and protect your cozy little world further. I do not pity you, you are doomed to defeat. laughing
                  1. Alex_59
                    Alex_59 16 October 2019 14: 48
                    +6
                    Quote: wehr
                    Create and protect your cozy little world further. I do not pity you, you are doomed to defeat.

                    Can you voice your experience in the Navy? Or experience as a submarine design engineer? Xnumx years? Xnumx years? Are you a veteran submariner?
                    On this site, you can sometimes faint from militant amateurs. Okay, you are writing articles without being a pro in the industry you are judging about, but then at least adhere to journalistic etiquette and the good tone of an objective researcher. Listen and respect the opinions of those who know more than you, who have served in the Navy for many years. Consider different hypotheses, not push your own. Rudolff - the fleet’s winds, and you’re interfering with mud here.
                    I also write about the fleet, but when knowledgeable people tell me that I was mistaken, I admit it. Because I'm just a writer in love with the sea, and they are pros.
                    1. wehr
                      16 October 2019 17: 54
                      -2
                      Excuse me, why should I specifically respect you and listen to you? Have you come here in a uniform with orders? No. You are here - anonymous. And Rudolph is also anonymous, for the same reasons. Therefore, your autobiographical statements are not confirmed, and in general, inappropriate.

                      If you want to convince me of something, give indisputable facts. A photograph of the Kursk coaming will do.
                      1. SovAr238A
                        SovAr238A 17 October 2019 07: 57
                        -4
                        Quote: wehr
                        Excuse me, why should I specifically respect you and listen to you? Have you come here in a uniform with orders? No. You are here - anonymous. And Rudolph is also anonymous, for the same reasons. Therefore, your autobiographical statements are not confirmed, and in general, inappropriate.

                        If you want to convince me of something, give indisputable facts. A photograph of the Kursk coaming will do.



                        If you read carefully the comments carefully, you would know that there are really knowledgeable people on the forum (there are very few of them - less than a couple of dozen) ... Although they are anonymous.
                        But for this you need to read comments a lot and carefully.
                        Rudolph is among them.
                        Bongo among them.
                        and some others.
                        Although anonymous, but over the years of reading, they are no longer anonymous.
                        Already understand who and where and how.
              2. Ivanchester
                Ivanchester 16 October 2019 14: 09
                +2
                Taking into account the fact that the missiles on the Kursk did not explode, the damage to the mines, apparently, was not critical.
                But the integrity of the coaming area and the stern hatch itself - had. At least to save those people who managed to gather in the aft compartment. And there is a contradiction between the words of the Norwegian rescuers, claiming that these structures were intact, and the statements of our senior military (and yours) that they were damaged.
                1. karabass
                  karabass 16 October 2019 17: 21
                  +3
                  I trust Norwegians more (90%) because I know the price well for our leaders
      2. Sasha_rulevoy
        Sasha_rulevoy 16 October 2019 16: 09
        +3
        Quote: Ivanchester
        Have you seen any documents / photographs allowing you to conclude that the coaming pad and hatch were not damaged during the accident?


        https://rutube.ru/video/e07d7f3c7375bae70c39e006d3652d84/

        Here in the video, the divers calmly open the hatch with their hands. And from there even bubbles come out.
        1. Ivanchester
          Ivanchester 17 October 2019 00: 22
          0
          Unfortunately, the quality of the video does not allow us to state unequivocally that the coaming site is not damaged (as, by the way, the opposite).
          Regarding the hatch, we do not know exactly what the divers did for 25 minutes before calmly opening it with his hands ...
          1. Sasha_rulevoy
            Sasha_rulevoy 18 October 2019 18: 12
            0
            Quote: Ivanchester
            we don’t know exactly what the divers did for 25 minutes


            They probably opened the valve and waited for the flooding of the compartment to equalize the pressure. I don’t think they opened it with some kind of device, then closed it, removed everything and opened it again, taking pictures with the camera. Where would the bubbles come from?
  9. Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 16 October 2019 09: 13
    -2
    a very important direction in the development of marine technology
  10. Kalmar
    Kalmar 16 October 2019 09: 36
    +2
    The torpedo 65-76 had a range of up to 100 km, and here, probably, it will be three times as much.

    A question for connoisseurs: is the GAS of a modern (or promising) nuclear submarine, in principle, capable of detecting and recognizing a target like the same aircraft carrier with adequate reliability at three times the distance (300 km)?
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. Kalmar
        Kalmar 16 October 2019 10: 42
        +1
        Quote: rudolff
        However, a long range is quite incidental, for example, when firing at a dog on the wake of the track. The target can go at speeds up to 30 knots, the distance will be reduced slowly.

        It seems to me that in these conditions the target will have too much time to fight off the anti-torpedoes (now they are in fashion). Or the attacked ship behind the noise of its propellers in this scenario will not hear the torpedo?
      2. timokhin-aa
        timokhin-aa 16 October 2019 12: 08
        +1
        And if you quietly go down to some PZK? Will not work? I know that Americans do that, but not at that range.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. karabass
          karabass 16 October 2019 17: 24
          +1
          And what is PZK?
          1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Vadim237
      Vadim237 16 October 2019 10: 15
      -1
      A modern noise finder is likely to recognize the noise of aircraft carrier propellers.
    3. Ryaruav
      Ryaruav 16 October 2019 10: 37
      0
      squid, it all depends on the depths of the region and hydrology, I think 300km is impossible
  11. Operator
    Operator 16 October 2019 10: 12
    +5
    The author - "Poseidon" is not a torpedo with negative buoyancy, but an uninhabited underwater vehicle with controlled buoyancy (using a ballast tank).

    The first photo in the article shows the Poseidon TPK, used for ground transportation and submarine launches of UVA before the launch of the nuclear submarine carrier. On the TPK body, one can see the hinged assembly of the air loading hatch cover, the black bursting disc of the underwater launch (mounted in the red ring of the cover) and inspection hatches with tubular barriers.
    1. Polinom
      Polinom 16 October 2019 12: 13
      +2
      and unmanned underwater vehicle with controlled buoyancy (using a ballast tank)
      And underwater gnomes from Putin's cartoon control this apparatus.
    2. wehr
      16 October 2019 13: 01
      -1
      The most qualified "specialists" have just told me that this is not true. laughing
      1. Operator
        Operator 16 October 2019 13: 09
        +8
        The "specialists" (pictured) are bombing in the morning not childishly because of the statement by the US Deputy Secretary of Defense about the inefficiency of the aircraft carrier fleet laughing
  12. Ryaruav
    Ryaruav 16 October 2019 10: 33
    0
    personally, I don’t believe in the author’s version of the death of Kursk, the pieces of skin plating bent inwards speak of a primary external explosion, and everything else is just the result
    1. Ivanchester
      Ivanchester 16 October 2019 10: 52
      0
      And what do you believe in? Who do you think the Kursk was attacked if the first explosion was outside the boat?
    2. timokhin-aa
      timokhin-aa 16 October 2019 12: 10
      0
      There are deformations around the cut holes when lifting. From the torpedo would pound much stronger.
    3. Polinom
      Polinom 16 October 2019 12: 19
      +2
      About it? So it seems a long time ago they found out that these holes were cut by divers when a flexible cable saw burst from them. They started a new cable ..
  13. Monster_Fat
    Monster_Fat 16 October 2019 12: 16
    +1
    How was born .....

    wink
  14. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 16 October 2019 12: 31
    +3
    Mdaaa ... so much heel was read here that the desire to comment on something disappeared! Waiting, where is VO going?
    1. Fan-fan
      Fan-fan 16 October 2019 18: 39
      0
      Yes, this is not VO rolling, but individuals have rolled off the "coils".
  15. mik193
    mik193 16 October 2019 14: 44
    0
    So many tricked out things, already the ears are fading. The rarest stupidity is the transition to external torpedo tubes. It really resembles the design of the framework torpedo tubes of the Dzhevetsky system before the First World War.
    Torpedo 65-76 in service has been, as the name suggests, since 1976. During this time, there were no serious accidents with this type of weapon. If external influence is excluded (which I personally doubt), the K-141 catastrophe is caused by the preparation of weapons at the TTB and its maintenance at sea. And about the torpedo itself, here is the link
    https://topwar.ru/138581-dalnohodnye-torpedy-65-76-i-65-76a.html.
  16. evgen1221
    evgen1221 16 October 2019 16: 33
    0
    If this is a container for an old torpedo, but for placement outside the hull, then this is necessary because the performance characteristics of the entire boat will be substantially sagged then no one will allow this. It’s easier then to shoot from them, plus or minus a direct course, I’ll get into America, which also looks like wild delirium.
  17. evgen1221
    evgen1221 16 October 2019 16: 43
    +2
    Damn the author, even under previous articles, many people said openly that they should climb with their assumptions into the top-secret sphere and build theories on a few photos and video materials that were pretty censored - this is the blonde's way to meet a dinosaur on the street around the corner (soft version). secondly, by God it’s easier for you with the same stubbornness worthy of a better application, to prove your point of view on the existence of living aliens in zone 51, or the flight of Americans to the moon, there’s at least information to compose harmonious theories and chains of there are significantly more loans than 0.1% as with Poseidon.
    1. wehr
      16 October 2019 18: 01
      -3
      If you have secret information, keep your mouth shut. But then they rang out that there was a de super-powerful, super-powerful "Poseidon", which ... Now, if you please, confirm the very fact of the presence of this very "Poseidon", and its super-magical performance characteristics.
      You can not? So - liars, if not stronger.

      You should be glad that with my hypotheses I allow you to get out of this bad story with minimal losses. But you have chosen the most stupid tactic possible: insist that you can’t confirm (for the banal reason of the lack of availability).
      Well, I’m not at all sorry for you.
      1. evgen1221
        evgen1221 16 October 2019 18: 04
        +3
        And yourself? You insist that this can not be, because it can never be, because the author does not know the technical characteristics and, in general, the principles of the entire system are even close and this cannot happen. Logic 100500 level.
      2. Vadim237
        Vadim237 16 October 2019 19: 33
        0
        If you have not seen something or do not know, then this does not mean that this is not at all.
        1. wehr
          17 October 2019 11: 04
          0
          No one bothered to keep quiet
          But once ringed, now prove it.
          1. evgen1221
            evgen1221 17 October 2019 18: 10
            0
            And America has proven to you by launching at least one of its MBRs with multiple warheads that these same warheads in general in this MBR are, are divided, guided and get there where they are aimed and not how lucky? Of the closest in time (evidence) of the existence and effectiveness of weapons is the epic obosrams of Patriot and their other air defense systems (and they were there) for the protection of the entrusted object.
            1. wehr
              17 October 2019 22: 14
              -1
              Minutemen have long been reequipped for monoblock warheads, and recently let in, no more than October 2. I even have an article about this.
  18. Aleks2000
    Aleks2000 17 October 2019 00: 23
    0
    Immediately after the election promises, a bunch of military men and designers gave interviews - no, no and no working layout, details, etc.

    And then they went to run after retirees from Roskosmos for a similar no, no and no ....

    If we were lying about pensions, lying, lying, then will they not lie here?
  19. Morgan
    Morgan 27 November 2019 15: 37
    0
    "The submariners who survived the explosion were doomed" is a big question. As far as I remember, the Norwegians (if I'm not mistaken) opened the hatch quickly without any manipulators, it's another matter that no one was allowed there for a week, and people were still alive at that time. As proof, there were many videos and interviews that were then quickly deleted.
  20. Last centurion
    Last centurion 20 December 2019 12: 43
    0
    or maybe just take a tractor a'la from the "poplar" and make a rear unloading system. Well, I drove up to any more or less even beach, climbed into the water, splash there TPK with Poseidon and the result is hot.