Military Review

Two powerful strikes: how a Soviet submarine collided with a US aircraft carrier

109

During the Cold War, Soviet submarines and American carrier strike groups (AUGs) were constantly looking for each other and practiced training attacks. On 21 of March 1984, such actions ended in a clash. The American aircraft carrier USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63) rammed the Soviet submarine K-314, after which both ships went for repair. What preceded these events, and what happened in their wake?


Teaching and observation


In March 1984, the naval forces of the United States and South Korea began the next joint Team Spirit exercises in the Sea of ​​Japan. A key component of the American group was the AUG led by the Kitty Hawk ship. To the group and her Aviation entrusted with the solution of all the basic tasks, from providing air defense to the search for underwater objects.


US and South Korean aircraft at Team Spirit exercises, March 15 1984. Photo by US Navy

Major international teaching could not but attract the attention of the USSR. Pacific Command fleet ordered several ships and submarines to go to the area of ​​maneuvers to detect and track the actions of the US Navy. Covert, long-term surveillance of the AUG was assigned to the nuclear submarine K-314, project 671 "Ruff" under the command of Captain 2nd Rank Alexander Evseenko.

A few days after receiving the order, K-314 was in a given area and searched for ships of a potential enemy. The aircraft carrier group was successfully discovered and followed, monitoring and sending data to the headquarters of the fleet. Such work continued for a week.


Submarine project 671 in the water. US Navy Photos

Later, the US Navy published data on the progress of the exercises. It was alleged that the SUG with the USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63) timely discovered the Soviet submarine and also conducted surveillance. In addition, ships and aircraft of the 15 group once simulated an attack on an underwater target.

A few hours before ...


Submarine Pacific Fleet continued to monitor the American AUG without losing sight of it. However, during the next communication session, K-314 fell behind its target. For safe ascent of the submarine, it was necessary to increase the backlog from the observed ships, and those, taking advantage of the situation, broke away for 15-20 miles.

After completing the exchange of data, K-314 had to catch up with a likely enemy. The submarine developed a high underwater speed, but this led to an increase in noise. American hydroacoustics spotted the boat, and the ACG command took action. Flights were suspended, radio-electronic equipment turned off, the group went into the territorial waters of South Korea.

A little later, the US Navy ships again showed themselves. The Vladivostok BPK, engaged in a tracking operation, discovered AOG in 150 miles off the coast. In the evening of March 21, the K-314 submarine was able to enter the aircraft carrier area and began its search.

Two powerful blows


In 22: 10 local time, the submarine began preparations for the communication session and reached the periscope depth. Using a periscope, the commander examined the water area and found several surface targets. At a distance of 20-30 cable, the side lights of the ships were observed. At the same time, the US Navy ships moved towards the boat.


Kitty Haw aircraft carrier escorted by a missile cruiser, 2004 g. Photo by US Navy

The commander ordered the start of an urgent dive to avoid a collision. Shortly after the start of the dive, the submarine felt a strong blow. After a few seconds - a second powerful push. It was clear that the submarine did not have time to go to a safe depth, and it was hit by some of the American ships. As we learned later, it was a Kitty Haw aircraft carrier.

K-314 immediately surfaced behind the American warrant, the crew was already inspecting the materiel and preparing for a possible struggle for survivability. A couple of helicopters were lifted at the USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63). They found and examined the Soviet submarine. Aircraft carrier commander Captain David N. Rogers later spoke of a willingness to help those in distress. However, the inspection of the boat also had reconnaissance purposes.

Collision effects


Fortunately, serious survivability measures were not needed. The ship was damaged, but there was no leak or fire. General ship systems worked, retractable devices continued to function. In this case, the runout of the line of the propeller shaft was observed. Upon further examination, torn damage to the light body and deformation of the propeller were found.

A surface aircraft carrier also received significant damage. The submarine proportional to the skin of the bottom and made a hole several tens of square meters in size. Damage to tanks for aviation fuel, some of which leaked into the sea, took place. Fortunately for the crew, the vital structural elements remained intact, and the kerosene did not catch fire. Later, a fragment of the propeller and several pieces of the rubber coating of the submarine were found in the hole.

Due to damage to the screw and shaft, the K-314 lost speed and needed the help of a tugboat. “Kitty Hawk” could continue independent movement, but the performance of combat missions was difficult.


Submarine K-314 while tracking the American AUG, March 1984. Photo by US Navy

According to various sources, during the collision there was a risk of a nuclear incident. On board the American aircraft carrier there were several dozen tactical nuclear weapons. The Soviet submarine also had several missiles with a similar warhead. In a collision, all these products were not affected, and the whole situation ended only in mechanical damage.

Help hastened to two damaged ships. With the help of other ships, the submarine and aircraft carrier went to base. K-314 was taken to Chazhma Bay and docked for repairs. USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63) was sent to the port of Yokosuka (Japan) for preliminary repairs. Then the aircraft carrier went to the Subic Bay base in the Philippine Islands. A few months later, the ships returned to the combat structure of their fleets after repair.

Organizational conclusions


The United States and the Soviet Union conducted their own investigations and did not exchange information. However, the conclusions seemed to be similar - although they had different results.

The American side considered that the Soviet submarine was the culprit in the clash. According to the US command, it was the K-314 crew that was unprofessional, as a result of which the boat was in the way of a larger surface ship, which led to a collision. However, they did not express any claims and did not demand compensation.

Two powerful strikes: how a Soviet submarine collided with a US aircraft carrier

Submarine K-314 after surfacing. Damage to the light body is visible. Photo Vpk.name

As participants in the incident later recalled from the Soviet side, when they returned to the base, the fleet command literally cursed them and urged them to prepare for the consequences. The K-314 commander was removed from his post and transferred to the shore. No further action was taken.

Accident


As follows from the available data, the collision of the submarine K-314 and the aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk 21 on March 1984 was a direct result of an unfortunate set of circumstances. There were no direct and obvious violations on the part of the incident participants, but some of their actions, combined with external factors, led to well-known consequences.

The command of the Pacific Fleet criticized the commanders of the submarine for not being able to timely detect several large surface targets - moreover, at a minimum distance. Why this happened is unknown. There are several different versions, from negligence to the specifics of the water area.

The probable enemy’s submarine getting into the center of the warrant and its subsequent collision with an aircraft carrier is an occasion for uncomfortable questions to sonar speakers and commanders of the American AUG. In fact, a potentially dangerous underwater object was missed at a distance of confident shooting - and even closer. It is not difficult to imagine what this could lead to in a real conflict.

Naval fate


After the repair was completed, the K-314 submarine returned to the Pacific Fleet. However, a full-fledged service did not last too long. Already in 1985, the ship had to be sent for repair again due to an accident at the main power plant. After several years of service, in 1989, the ship was withdrawn from the Navy and put to sediment.


USS Kitty Hawk Aircraft Carrier at 2017. Photo by Navysite.de

K-314 was the tenth representative of the 671 Ruff project, but finished the service first. Soon, the process of decommissioning the remaining submarines of this type began. Disposal started only in the two thousandth. The last to go was K-314 - it happened already in 2010-11.

The aircraft carrier USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63) returned to the San Diego base in August 1984 and soon returned to combat service. The ship regularly worked in different parts of the Pacific, and in 1987-88. made a voyage around the world. After that, the aircraft carrier was put on scheduled repairs and modernization, due to which the service life was extended by 20 years.

Campaigns, training and combat missions, etc. lasted until the end of the two thousandth year. In 2009, the ship, which had served for nearly half a century, was withdrawn from the Navy. Despite numerous statements, Kitty Hawk has not yet been sent for recycling. And the public is seeking to turn the ship into a museum.

Based on the results of the 21 incident of March 1984, the command of the fleets of the two superpowers made conclusions and took action. It seems that all this led to the required results. At least since then, aircraft carriers have never rammed submarines.
Author:
109 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. Comrade
    Comrade 12 December 2019 06: 08
    +4
    Major international teaching could not fail to attract the attention of the USSR. The command of the Pacific Fleet ordered several ships and submarines to go to the area of ​​maneuvers to detect and track the actions of the US Navy.

    An excerpt from the official document of the aircraft carrier (USS KITTY HAWK (CV-63) COMMAND HISTORY) for 1984, you can see a list of Soviet aircraft and ships sent to the training area and seen from the aircraft carrier.

    "Touted" tightly.
  2. svp67
    svp67 12 December 2019 07: 14
    +11
    The American aircraft carrier USS Kitty Hawk (CV-63) rammed the Soviet submarine K-314, after which both ships went for repair.

    The story is of course given in such a way as to remove part of the blame from the commander of the submarine, but they punished him CORRECTLY. He didn’t go to any communication session, sailed under the periscope to look around, since the acoustic contact with the aircraft carrier was lost, and this is apparently the main mystery in this incident, why did both sides lose this contact? Such a feature of the area or something else.
    But both parties are to blame for the incidents, it’s okay to lose contact, but not to hear the purge of the tanks when the boat started to ascend .... Well, the speed of the collision was not large, and the consequences could be much more sad
    1. Nehist
      Nehist 12 December 2019 08: 27
      +10
      That's right. Negligence of the commander of our submarine. This case periodically at KTOF to understand. But the Amerekins are also great. By the way, they lost contact because they broke away from the submarine, it is strange that they did not find it later, because the boat was in underwater position at a decent speed.
      PS Comrades give out this case cheers as an achievement! Type like in the center of the order were, swamp anyone you want
      1. The leader of the Redskins
        The leader of the Redskins 12 December 2019 09: 07
        +4
        I agree with you. Negligence and not professionalism. It turns out:
        "I didn't even notice the elephant ..."
        1. svp67
          svp67 13 December 2019 10: 27
          +2
          Quote: Leader of the Redskins
          Negligence and not professionalism. It turns out:
          "I didn't even notice the elephant ..."

          Well, the commission decided so, although it did not receive answers to many questions. But the COMMANDER is responsible for everything, including God's conduct
    2. The comment was deleted.
      1. Serg65
        Serg65 12 December 2019 11: 26
        +5
        Quote: rudolff
        And why should tanks be blown up to float under the periscope?

        laughing You do not understand this!
        hi Great!
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. Podvodnik
          Podvodnik 12 December 2019 16: 14
          +2
          When surfacing to the periscope depth, tanks are not blown. Used horizontal rudders.
      2. svp67
        svp67 13 December 2019 10: 24
        +1
        Quote: rudolff
        And why should tanks be blown up to float under the periscope?

        The speed was low, the rudders were not very efficient. They listened to the "horizons" for a long time, right up to an almost complete stop and not hearing anything, the commander decided to swim up to look around.
    3. Andrey NM
      Andrey NM 13 December 2019 07: 40
      +1
      Quote: svp67
      but not to hear the purge of the tanks when the boat went to the ascent ...

      When surfacing to the periscope depth, no tanks are blown. Can be filled with pulp and paper to speed depth maneuvers. Just for the maneuver to avoid collision.
      1. svp67
        svp67 17 December 2019 04: 20
        +1
        Quote: Andrey NM
        When surfacing to the periscope depth, no tanks are blown. Can be filled with pulp and paper to speed depth maneuvers.

        Everything can be. I have never been a submariner. But I convey all this from the words, just the submarine officer who participated in the work of this commission. And I remember exactly that there was a purge of tanks, but in particular, for what it did KPL I will not answer. But there was a purge, at this point, in particular, an attempt was made to protect the commander, what kind of specialists are these, these Americans, if they did not hear this ...
        1. Mordvin 3
          Mordvin 3 17 December 2019 05: 04
          0
          Quote: svp67
          what kind of specialists are they, these Americans, if you haven’t heard this ...

          And, reminded ... About the American boat. laughing
          Two groups arrive on board the nuclear powered ship: acoustics and nuclear scientists. They arrive separately, not knowing each other's presence. And they start to play hydraulically ...
          Nuclear scientists: “Is something in our nose sagging? Hey, run off, add five tons of water to the feed tanks! ” The guy escaped to the center post of the boat and added.
          Acoustics, crawling into an open bow hatch and tripping over a tight cable harness extending through it deep into the ship: “Sheep, they didn’t put the rubber dam! The hatch is open! What’s our nose raised? Mess! Brother, drive away, add water to the nasal tanks. ” Brother drove and added.
          Nuclear scientists: “Yes, well, for ...! We just differentiated. Come on, fly - add more water to the stern. ” Flew off.
          Acoustics: “No, you can't work like that! Again, nose up. A bullet! More water in the nose! ”
          So they hung the boat for four hours !!! And at 8 o’clock in the evening, when the acoustics went to dinner, the nuclear scientists also decided to close the sea on the castle. They closed it by preliminary blowing the feed tanks, which they pumped with water all this time.
          What would Archimedes say in such a situation? He would say: "She will drown!"
          That's right, she drowned at 8 hours 55 minutes. Gurgled heavily and gushed. They tried to chop cables with axes to close that bow hatch, but did not have time.
          The boat was called "Guitarro" ...

          https://e-libra.ru/read/525322-charli-charli-bravo.html
    4. IL-64
      IL-64 16 December 2019 19: 58
      -1
      It seems to me that if "Hawk" wanted to stop, he simply could not do it. Due to tremendous inertia.
  3. Amateur
    Amateur 12 December 2019 07: 43
    +2
    On the Soviet submarine also had several missiles with a similar warhead

    671 Ruff torpedo boat. There are no missiles, there were and could not be. Could be a torpedo (torpedoes).
    1. Alex013
      Alex013 12 December 2019 09: 36
      +3
      This particular submarine, modification 671B, is armed with the Vyuga complex
    2. Podvodnik
      Podvodnik 12 December 2019 16: 18
      -3
      Submarines of this type were armed with ballistic missiles. They were fired, naturally, through torpedo tubes. As a filling, a small anti-submarine torpedo, or a deep bomb with nuclear warheads. Ballistic means flying along a ballistic trajectory and not necessarily to the other side of the planet.
  4. Aviator_
    Aviator_ 12 December 2019 07: 55
    +3
    In the photo - the damaged nose of the submarine. Apparently, this is a consequence of the first strike, after which the boat received a trim on the bow and the propeller’s bottom was proportional to the bottom of the aircraft carrier. It is amazing, of course, how acoustics yielded nothing at such distances.
    1. Nehist
      Nehist 12 December 2019 08: 29
      0
      Well, the boat was sailing at a high speed than she jammed herself. But here the Americans ... Apparently relaxed that came off
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. Nehist
          Nehist 12 December 2019 09: 45
          +1
          With this question it’s not for me but cap2 Evseenko why he surfaced at speed. There is a comment at the bottom explaining Evseenko
          1. The comment was deleted.
      2. Podvodnik
        Podvodnik 12 December 2019 16: 23
        +5
        There are no sonar systems on aircraft carriers. He could not hear or see anything. AUG goes at a good speed. Towed GAS (on the ship warrants) do not lower, tear off. The nasal GAS on a good move by ear (Silk mode) will not hear anything. Only in active mode. If there was a jump layer, mutual deafness and blindness.
    2. Podvodnik
      Podvodnik 12 December 2019 16: 45
      +4
      Most likely they lost the situation, the order turned once again for example. Incorrectly identified elements of the movement of the target. One thing is a single ship. Another thing is a group goal. Against the background of cacophony, it is not easy to issue a bearing to the desired target, which may be in alignment with another.
  5. Glory1974
    Glory1974 12 December 2019 08: 48
    -3
    Well, at the beginning of the 20th century, boats surfaced and the commander examined the district with a periscope with one eye.
    But as at the end of the century, the same principle applies to a nuclear submarine!
    Well, the acoustics are "deaf", maybe this is the area. But how the fate of the boat and 100 crew members can depend on one glance through the periscope.
    Where are the videos, cameras, where are the thermal imagers and other technical devices?
    1. Professor
      Professor 12 December 2019 09: 30
      +5
      Quote: glory1974
      Where are the videos, cameras, where are the thermal imagers and other technical devices?

      In 1984? request
      1. Glory1974
        Glory1974 12 December 2019 19: 14
        0
        In 1984?

        Cameras began to be used in the 50s. Infrared monitoring devices (thermal imagers) in the 40s.
        request
        On the retractable buoy, raise the microphones to listen to the surface without bothering with the thermocline and the passage of the signal.
    2. Serg4545
      Serg4545 12 December 2019 09: 43
      +7
      Quote: glory1974
      Well, the acoustics are "deaf", maybe this is the area. But how the fate of the boat and 100 crew members can depend on one glance through the periscope.
      Where is the video, television cameras, where are the thermal imagers


      What are you talking about Glory for?
      In order for everything listed by you to work, they had to be lifted on pull-out devices. Over a cut of water. And for this, again, float to the depth of scanning. With the same result.
      1. Glory1974
        Glory1974 12 December 2019 19: 16
        +1
        In order for everything listed by you to work, they had to be lifted on pull-out devices. Over a cut of water.

        What are we talking about. All at periscope depth. But you can’t release a buoy on a cable 30 meters long?
        There were a lot of accidents. And the boats faced warships and civilian ships. So the question is urgent.
        1. Fizik M
          Fizik M 13 December 2019 09: 41
          0
          Quote: glory1974
          What are we talking about. All at periscope depth. But you can’t release a buoy on a cable 30 meters long?

          can
          The commander of the S-37 (Black Sea Fleet) Proskurin did just that - himself (for himself)
          and had on its submarine a pop-up (towed) buoy of sonar and radio reconnaissance
          The ONLY in the Navy ...
          1. Glory1974
            Glory1974 13 December 2019 09: 48
            +1
            had on its submarine a pop-up (towed) buoy of sonar and radio reconnaissance
            The ONLY in the Navy

            How is it possible? And he was allowed?
            But in any case, well done. The question remains, why is it impossible to do this on all boats? However, I understand that the question is rhetorical. hi
            1. Fizik M
              Fizik M 13 December 2019 09: 53
              +2
              Quote: glory1974
              How is it possible? And he was allowed?

              he wants to - he will tell
              he is here (on Topwar)
        2. Podvodnik
          Podvodnik 13 December 2019 10: 01
          +1
          Available surveillance tools are sufficient for safe ascent under the periscope. It is all about compliance with the procedure and the skill of the crew. A buoy (special device) can be released on a cable for communication. Not used for observation. We have a huge accident on the road. Tens of thousands of people die every year. Traffic lights at the intersections are. So what? Everything is perfectly visible from a car. Only a chain of small errors grows like a snowball and leads to an accident.
          When deciding to ascend, the commander was guided by knowledge of the environment, perhaps the urgent need for ascent, the technical condition of weapons and technical equipment, the need to observe secrecy, guidance documents and many more factors. For a wide circle of the public, this is not advertised. Conclusions are made. The results and reasons are communicated to those who are supposed to know this.
          1. Fizik M
            Fizik M 13 December 2019 10: 45
            0
            Quote: Podvodnik
            Available surveillance tools are sufficient for safe ascent under the periscope.

            depends on conditions
            GSS at 25 meters - a really serious problem
            and for ALL submarines (all countries)
            1. Podvodnik
              Podvodnik 13 December 2019 10: 52
              +1
              The sea is one at all. It does not give concessions.
              I have never met with GSS. I observed several distant zones of acoustic illumination. An interesting phenomenon.
              1. Fizik M
                Fizik M 13 December 2019 10: 56
                0
                Quote: Podvodnik
                I have never met with GSS.

                You probably meant the GSS at 25m?
                1. Podvodnik
                  Podvodnik 13 December 2019 11: 07
                  +1
                  In their practice, the jump layer was never observed at any depth. In the shallow sea in the North, in the BP test sites there is a continuous zone of illumination. No channels, no jump layers. I observed only a few distant zones in the deep sea (up to 4000 m). Introduced the actual distribution of the speed of sound from the instruments, added the atlas. I reported the results to the GKP. The calculations were confirmed by the actual observation of the successive passage of targets through distant shadow zones and light zones.
                  1. Fizik M
                    Fizik M 13 December 2019 13: 39
                    0
                    Quote: Podvodnik
                    In the shallow sea in the North, in the BP test sites there is a continuous zone of illumination.

                    yes nuuuu belay
                    what was standing on your boat to measure? "Birch bark"?
                    measured as - on a dive, or on a ascent
                    (because during immersion, the "fine structure" of the VRSZ is destroyed by the body)

                    Threat - in the north, too, was, including in a very experienced crew Sprastseva
                    1. Podvodnik
                      Podvodnik 13 December 2019 14: 38
                      +1
                      It was the same as Sprastsev’s. Measured on a dive.
                      He commanded my ship after I left.
                      1. Fizik M
                        Fizik M 13 December 2019 15: 14
                        0
                        1. GSS in the north not only exists, but there is a serious factor "micro GSS", significantly affecting the detection range
                        2. Taking into account the location of the "Reflector", the VRSZ should be removed ON THE ASCENT. I was taught this harshly from the lieutenant. Those. plunged, after that we float to measure VRSZ (so that pr.3A does not spend;)) - exactly what would "remove" the "unbroken" body section
                        3. Acoustics and KBCH-7 at Sprastsev were very very sensible, respectively. and result (GR at KPL)
    3. Podvodnik
      Podvodnik 12 December 2019 16: 30
      +8
      No video, body, heat and so on ... there are no cameras on the periscope (in those days). Only a visual inspection and a "quick" but tovs. From those. devices when surfacing only ShP mode GAK (noise direction finding) and mine detection station. Mine detection often helps. Immediately "urgent dive, remove the periscope !!!, boatswain !!!! dive with a trim ... turbine forward ... rpm. At the mine detecting station, you can see" little things "like killer whales. An iron vessel, all the more so. in the CPU.
      1. Glory1974
        Glory1974 12 December 2019 19: 19
        0
        Thanks for the professional comment!
        What is a mine search station? It turns out in this case they did not use it, and so the commander’s guilt is obvious?
        1. Podvodnik
          Podvodnik 12 December 2019 20: 48
          +11
          The mine detection station is designed to search for small-sized objects: mines, combat swimmers, navigational obstacles when passing through a narrow area, etc. It is made separately from the submarine complex and has its own antenna. It is also used when viewing the horizon during ascent to periscope depth. Once I witnessed: upon surfacing, the operator interrupted the reports to the commander in the central control center and reported on a dangerous target, he had it specially prescribed. We immediately dived to 50 m. Apparently there was a trawler "on the stop". If the station had not been turned on, they could have cut in.
          Is the commander to blame? He is in charge of the ship and crew. But this is the work of the entire crew, especially the GKP and BIP. Difficult. Training only. And only the sea. You can't learn to ride a bike on TV. And here is the boat. Any exit to the sea is priceless. And besides everything, even for the sake of jumping killer whales in the periscope and knocking Quakers, it is worth going out to sea, and even if: "Comrade Commander !!! (acoustics report) single-shaft seven-bladed icebreaker !!!!!!!" And away we go .... Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa ...
        2. Fizik M
          Fizik M 13 December 2019 09: 43
          0
          Quote: glory1974
          So the commander’s guilt is obvious?

          certainly
      2. Andrey NM
        Andrey NM 13 December 2019 07: 48
        +1
        Quote: Podvodnik
        "urgent dive, remove periscope !!!, boatswain !!!! dive with trim ... turbine forward ... rpm.

        Well, that’s it. Drowned. They didn’t blow it fast ... smile

        At the mine detection station. This is an active mode. They’ll spot it right away. In the network to the fishermen and we fell. These were on the foot. They dragged the guys along. I had to come up, cut the cables. There are photos of the marks on the wheelhouse. Well, not wound. The fishermen went into the area closed to them, so they did not resent.
        1. Fizik M
          Fizik M 13 December 2019 09: 45
          0
          Quote: Andrey NM
          At the mine detection station. This is an active mode. They’ll spot it right away.

          GUS MI HIGH FREQUENCY
          those. its detection range in the OGS is LESS than the detection range in the silos of the same 671V
          moreover, MUCH less, and accordingly there is no violation of secrecy in fact
          1. The comment was deleted.
            1. Podvodnik
              Podvodnik 13 December 2019 13: 02
              +1
              On the feed term papers, the dead zone is both in the submarine and in the NK. The screws and the location of the HAK antenna interfere. If NK is without a move, then it still makes noise. The rest mechanisms work as before. The search is conducted in active mode on the bow antenna. If the Tax Code will stand, break away from the order. A single target has fewer options. Strength in the warrant. You can omit the towed GAS. But then the speed limit. PLO is a set of activities. Including the attraction of helicopters and aircraft with special. equipment.
              Typically, a submarine has a great advantage in the mutual detection of ND in the NW mode. If only the ship is not an reconnaissance vessel and does not drag four body kits from hydrophones behind the kilometer. Such a vessel is a piece of work, design measures have been taken to reduce noise: zonal blocks, shock absorbers, etc. But then there were none.
              1. The comment was deleted.
              2. The comment was deleted.
                1. Fizik M
                  Fizik M 13 December 2019 16: 13
                  0
                  this is not a "classic", but "happens"

                  I was not present myself, they said - something like this almost happened to us with "Dragon" - "spinning circles at the SFP", and for many hours in a row, while the navigator of the watch, who was stupefied from all this, warning VO "in a minute the turn time .. . "did not confuse the SIDE of the turn
                  VO "on the machine", without thinking, gave acc. bosun command belay
                  cost ...
                  almost angry
                  1. The comment was deleted.
            2. Fizik M
              Fizik M 13 December 2019 13: 29
              0
              Quote: rudolff
              . We were beaten for the echo sounder on the BS in the zone of the organized PLO.

              fools
              see Alexin's good article on the use of navigational aids
              special tests on Pacific Fleet on the stealth of echo sounders were carried out only after a navigational accident with RPK SN

              but for new boats LF (!!!) the echo sounder mode really unmasks, and here "new solutions" are needed bully
          2. Podvodnik
            Podvodnik 13 December 2019 11: 41
            +1
            I confirm. We first found the "partners" submarine, classified it according to certain criteria, and only then the acoustician reported: "I am observing the work of the GAL" (hydroacoustic log). This is another sign of SP. And GAL is also high-frequency, like GAS MI. The power is small, the scale is small. High frequencies have good resolution and see "little things", but quickly fade out.
      3. Fizik M
        Fizik M 13 December 2019 09: 43
        0
        Quote: Podvodnik
        "urgent dive, remove periscope !!!, boatswain !!!! dive with trim.

        Colleague, welcome!
        But I would like to note that "Urgent dive ..." and "Boatswain dive !!!" these are DIFFERENT commands, with completely different actions (in the latter case, the boatswain urgently "tears off the surface" of the submarine with a MINIMUM DIFFERENT (to avoid a ramming strike))
        1. Podvodnik
          Podvodnik 13 December 2019 11: 55
          +1
          Our cap usually indicated to the boatswain a specific trim and depth. In "command words" it can naturally be different. During stress, and 14 meters to the bottom, our native Russian was also, and the boatswain was thrown from the console by the collar.
          According to personal observations, during an emergency alarm or in time trouble, many are lost and forget their duties, are in a stupor. The strong word of the commander and the kick of the chief officer, competent and clear commands of the GKP mean a lot and are able to ensure the completion of the task. The "command words" are remembered later. But we must not forget them.
          1. Fizik M
            Fizik M 13 December 2019 13: 26
            0
            Quote: Podvodnik
            "command words" can naturally be different

            in the command words of the command "Boatswain dive !!!" no, it's in the "good sea practice" category
            Quote: Podvodnik
            Our cap used to tell the boatswain the specific pitch and depth.

            this is not usual, but ALWAYS, when diving, incl. urgent
            BUT - during a "normal urgent diving" the boat "freezes" at shallow depth, substituting the stern for a ramming blow, and therefore appeared "boatswain dive !!!" during "Normal urgent dive" the rudders are controlled differently - not to "lift off" to "trim")
  6. BAI
    BAI 12 December 2019 09: 04
    0
    The aircraft carrier collided with a submarine and she survived. This is some kind of nonsense. Can only be explained by the successful design of the case.
    1. knn54
      knn54 12 December 2019 11: 21
      0
      Impressive and survivability of the aircraft carrier - independently reached the base with a "hole" with a diameter of about 40 meters
      1. Bormanxnumx
        Bormanxnumx 12 December 2019 14: 15
        +1
        Quote: knn54
        Impressive and survivability of the aircraft carrier - independently reached the base with a "hole" with a diameter of about 40 meters

        Maybe "sturgeon" should be cut, otherwise 40m in diameter is 1256m², for example, on the battleship Novorossiysk, the area of ​​the hole was about 170-200m². For the concept of scale, the height of Kitty's hull, from the keel to the flight deck, is about 37m.
    2. Podvodnik
      Podvodnik 12 December 2019 16: 51
      +7
      Double hull boat. Between the frames of the frames. Rugged body made of armored (for general understanding) steel ..cm thick. Very sturdy construction. Aircraft carrier skin is much weaker. This is not a battleship.
  7. bubalik
    bubalik 12 December 2019 09: 31
    +3
    ,,, says Vladimir Evseenko:
    “The reason for the collision - we defined the type of hydrology as No. 1, but in fact it was No. 2 - according to the military-industrial complex Admiral Vinogradov. And this means that the jump layer passed through a depth of 30 meters. We could not use it, since all the governing documents obligated us to keep no higher than a safe depth of 50 meters. For this reason, we did not hear the aircraft carrier, we came to a dangerous rapprochement. When the BIP - combat information post reported to me the distance to the main target of 60–70 cable, it, this distance, was actually much less - 10-15 cable. And given our considerable speed ... At such a distance, I didn’t find Kitty Hawk running lights either - because of the enormous height of the side. Of course, the commander is always right and always to blame. There was a share of my guilt, I do not deny it. But the sea is the sea, it has its own physics and its own logic. ”
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. mik193
        mik193 12 December 2019 14: 10
        +1
        And when they slipped through the jump layer on the ascent, the noise intensity of the group surface target should have increased sharply and this could not be overlooked by the acoustics.
        1. Podvodnik
          Podvodnik 12 December 2019 16: 32
          +3
          If you are inside an order, flashing across the screen. Many goals, acoustics is very difficult.
          1. Fizik M
            Fizik M 13 December 2019 09: 47
            0
            Quote: Podvodnik
            If you are inside an order, flashing across the screen. Many goals, acoustics are very hard

            and just here the work of GAS MI "Radian"
            very good station was
            1. Podvodnik
              Podvodnik 13 December 2019 15: 28
              +1
              Quote: Fizik M
              and just here the work of GAS MI "Radian"

              I agree. "Radian" is a good thing. Only her "barrel" was painfully healthy. Although visually not visible at night. I represent the face of the radiometrist after lifting the RADIAN PMU and the first horizon surveys. A hefty rock on the floor of the IKO screen (all-round view indicator) and even right on the course. I can't even imagine his report to the central post. I would definitely stutter.
              1. Fizik M
                Fizik M 13 December 2019 16: 15
                0
                Quote: Podvodnik
                I agree. "Radian" is a good thing. Only her "barrel" was painfully healthy. Although visually not visible at night. I represent the face of the radiometrist after lifting the PMU

                I'm not talking about MRKP-58, but about MG-509 "Radian" (the predecessor of "Harp", and in some respects better than it)

                and MRKP is an error in the level of crime (combination of radar and SORS on one PMU), and its developer "Granit" understood this perfectly well, but he was "twisted"
  8. mik193
    mik193 12 December 2019 10: 48
    +5
    The last photo of a submarine with a torn nose is a K-53 of the same project after a collision with the motor ship "Brotherhood", September 1984, Mediterranean Sea.
    1. Aviator_
      Aviator_ 12 December 2019 19: 13
      +1
      Well, that seems to be true. This is not the first time that the photographs presented in an article at VO have no relation to the text.
    2. Sasha_rulevoy
      Sasha_rulevoy 13 December 2019 23: 33
      -1
      Quote: mik193
      The last photo


      I read right there on the topwar that the boat was left completely without logging.
  9. Undecim
    Undecim 12 December 2019 13: 08
    +8
    Having diluted a spoonful of information in a barrel of water and seasoned with his own incompetence, the author came to the masterful conclusions - The collision of the K-314 submarine and the Kitty Hawk aircraft carrier on March 21, 1984 was a direct result of an unfortunate set of circumstances.
    The case was examined many times. "An unfortunate coincidence of circumstances" is, first of all, a consequence of the violation by the submarine commander of the strictly regulated procedure for surfacing.
    In this case, the ascent had to be carried out in two stages.
    Surfacing in two stages is carried out in this order. The submarine floats to a safe depth (30-40 m - depending on the design of the boat) using horizontal rudders and course. At this depth, the sonar carefully listens to the horizon in the noise-detecting mode. For a reliable survey of aft course angles, coordinates are described. The fore and aft sectors are examined in the echo direction finding mode.
    Surfacing to periscope depth is carried out according to combat alert for a minimum time. This is achieved by creating the appropriate trim on the stern and giving, as a rule, the average stroke. Before coming to the periscope depth, the course decreases to small, the trim is relegated to zero and the periscope rises, into which the commander quickly inspects the horizon and the air. In fresh weather, in order to prevent the plaque from being emitted by the wave to the surface of the sea before entering the periscope depth, some water should be taken into the equalization tank from the side.
    When surfacing from a safe depth to the periscope, it is recommended to raise the retractable devices in advance: the antenna of the radar search station at a depth of 16-18 m, the periscope at a depth of 12-14 m.
    During the passage of depth from safe to periscopic, you must be ready at any time to fill the quick dive tank.
    So here it is necessary to ask "uncomfortable questions" to the submarine commander - how he directed the ascent while on the AUG course.
    For those who wish, I recommend reading:

    Pleased with the phrase: "The command of the Pacific Fleet has criticized the commanders of the submarine"
    A vivid illustration of the author’s great remoteness from army and navy realities.
    1. mik193
      mik193 12 December 2019 14: 07
      +3
      I dare to supplement you. Safe diving depth for this project, if not mistaken - 50 meters. In that situation, a jump layer was present at a depth of 40 meters, i.e. they heard almost nothing and listening to the stern course angles yielded nothing. Those. they did not control the hydrological situation. Active mode in military service? I doubt it. It was used in the most extreme case, and mostly in BP test sites. Another thing is the ascent with a working GAS (or tract) mine detection. Its signals are not detected at ranges greater than the detection range of the submarine itself in general noise. Surfacing - on a training alert, on cavitation-excluding moves. The rise of the required retractable ones is during the ascent process with preheated equipment starting from a depth of 35 meters or less. I do not think that they raised an active radar, apparently they used only SORS. The rest I agree with you.
      1. Undecim
        Undecim 12 December 2019 14: 19
        +1
        I can’t say anything about the thermocline at the depth indicated by you at a specific time, since I don’t have such data. This question is very individual, depending on the place and time, and only those who have directly encountered this can answer it.
        1. Podvodnik
          Podvodnik 12 December 2019 16: 38
          +7
          Honestly, I can’t imagine a situation where with good equipment and a competent operator you can not hear the warrant of numerous ships thundering at good speed. At a distance of 15-20 cable, no jump layer will hide anyone. Sound even from the bottom will be reflected and will be received by the bow antenna. Continuous light area.
          1. Undecim
            Undecim 12 December 2019 17: 05
            +3
            Apparently, the real picture of this collision, if it becomes known, is not soon.
            1. Podvodnik
              Podvodnik 12 December 2019 17: 12
              +8
              Each warhead on the sub has a "accident and breakdown log". It says about all accidents and accidents with weapons and those. means. About this, for sure, too. Once I asked the mechanics to read about Chernobyl (and it is also written about it as it is), they told me in detail "for the literate". In short, the officer from the first division sighed heavily ... they violated everything that was possible and impossible, but they could. You need to be able to.
          2. mik193
            mik193 12 December 2019 19: 29
            0
            Well, what is the bottom of the Pacific Ocean, your nobility? There, the signal will fade until it reaches the bottom. Yes, and bottom reflections are possible only at very shallow depths. And about the jump layer - if there is a sufficiently large difference in the speed of sound - then you will hear what is called, only point blank ...
            1. Podvodnik
              Podvodnik 12 December 2019 21: 14
              +6
              In the deep sea, we drove goals for days (days!). At a distance of kilometers xxx. At the border of the far zone of acoustic illumination No. x. The target teleported for 6 hours in one zone, entered the shadow zone, a few hours later emerged in the next zone, until the next day it disappeared completely. Direct visibility from the deck of the ship about 12 km. And here are 15-20 cable ones. This is three kilometers. At such a distance at a speed of 20 knots, the order rattles so that everything rattles around. And when flying, the aircraft carrier goes all 30. And to the bottom of a kilometer two or three. Reflects how.
              1. Fizik M
                Fizik M 13 December 2019 10: 09
                0
                Quote: Podvodnik
                Reflects how.

                confirm
                in my first carriage there was a case of "almost detection" ... MYSELF - i.e. their reflection
                well that did not have time to report laughing
          3. Fizik M
            Fizik M 13 December 2019 10: 14
            0
            Quote: Podvodnik
            Honestly, I can’t imagine a situation where with good equipment and a competent operator you can not hear the warrant of numerous ships thundering at good speed. At a distance of 15-20 cable, no jump layer will hide anyone.

            there can only help out the low frequencies
            and on them worthless permission + a bunch of goals that merge
            well, the very fact of the relative "high frequency" of our SACs (despite the huge nasal antennas)
            we have a "baton" on the BS in the periscope once the first thing that I saw was the board of an ocean-going container ship (which did not fit into the periscope), the GSS was 25 meters away, the acoustics saw the target, but considered it far
            + it is necessary to take into account the ACCUMULATION factor in the HOOK (sometimes it is simply forgotten to transfer to the minimum accumulation during ascent)
        2. mik193
          mik193 12 December 2019 19: 21
          0
          I studied in due time the duties of the "RTS Accident and Breakdown Log" where this accident was painted.
      2. Fizik M
        Fizik M 13 December 2019 09: 50
        0
        Quote: mik193
        Safe diving depth for this project, if not mistaken - 50 meters. In that setting, at a depth of 40 meters there was a jump layer,

        safe 40 but jump by 30
        but the remark is correct
        therefore, we need testing operators and emergency control teams for instant actions to avoid ramming
        Quote: mik193
        Active mode in military service? I doubt it.

        in vain
        the MGK-300 asset was frankly crap (there was only ID, not even CO)
        but GAS MI "Radian" was very, very good
        and was actively used at sea (including on the BS) - by SMART commanders
        1. mik193
          mik193 13 December 2019 22: 28
          0
          You read me wrong. Active mode - referring to the ID path. About mine exploration wrote below.
  10. eagle owl
    eagle owl 12 December 2019 17: 07
    +2
    Obviously, the aircraft carrier did not see the boat - in case of a threat of an emergency, exchanging AB for nuclear submarines is clearly not in favor of the United States. And if fuel had flashed in the hold, the exchange would have taken place. So what about the collision - obviously only ours controlled the situation, but didn’t have time to sniff - here’s Yershu’s tail and was bitten off.
    But the main conclusion is that - at that time, our submarines could sink aircraft carriers with pole mines - no one saw them.
    1. Glory1974
      Glory1974 12 December 2019 19: 28
      0
      But the main conclusion is that - at that time, our submarines could sink aircraft carriers with pole mines - no one saw them.

      Sensibly! good
    2. Sasha_rulevoy
      Sasha_rulevoy 13 December 2019 23: 32
      -2
      Quote: Uhu
      our submarines could sink aircraft carriers


      It is only necessary to clarify that a. the aircraft carrier and the whole group went without maneuvering under all navigation lights, i.e. without taking any camouflage measures. b. For four days the boat "followed" the aircraft carrier with the help of Tu-16s, Il-38s and Tu-95s.
      1. eagle owl
        eagle owl 14 December 2019 12: 46
        0
        It should be clarified that the Tu-16, IL-38 was not based on the submarine and there were also no absurdities based on it, but the AUG located at the combat exit - for lack of Tu-16, Il-38, but having the margin of stupidity - the boat CLICKED!
        1. Sasha_rulevoy
          Sasha_rulevoy 15 December 2019 20: 37
          -1
          Quote: Uhu
          AUG ... CLICKED!


          Let's say war. An aircraft carrier passes through the curtain a kilometer from a submerged submarine and does not see it. And the boat, too, this aircraft carrier did not see. Which of them left the two in the cold?
          1. eagle owl
            eagle owl 15 December 2019 20: 49
            0
            Only the AUG boat found it and watched it, so the penguins obviously remained in the fools ... On the battlefield - it didn’t have to dive, I repeat, it could be drowned with a pole mine
  11. Alf
    Alf 12 December 2019 20: 21
    0
    Pacific Fleet Command criticizes submarine commanders

    I wildly apologize, but does the Pacific Fleet command believe that there are SEVERAL commanders on the same boat?
  12. Alexander Alekseev_2
    Alexander Alekseev_2 13 December 2019 01: 33
    -1
    The version of the hunter, but could not the Americans, having discovered the submarine, deliberately ram it?
    1. Podvodnik
      Podvodnik 13 December 2019 09: 46
      +1
      The aircraft carrier cannot detect the submarine. He has no technical means for this. The commander of our submarine said that he had not seen the running "partners". It was dark. It is unrealistic to detect the periscope visually. Even if they did. The ship has a huge displacement and a decent inertia. It is impossible to dodge or ram on purpose. It is a combination of circumstances and a sequence of minor mistakes that eventually led to an accident.
      1. Fizik M
        Fizik M 13 December 2019 10: 06
        0
        Quote: Podvodnik
        An aircraft carrier cannot detect a submarine.

        no, but the air group - quite (even visually)
        and resp. to sort
        1. Podvodnik
          Podvodnik 13 December 2019 10: 22
          +1
          It's about the dark. No one flies near the aircraft carrier and is not looking for anything. All at the borders of the PLO. When flying, everyone is focused on takeoff and landing safety. Pilots either take off or land in a stressful situation. They have no time for observation. Turntables will also not hang nearby. All fulfill the combat training plan. Focused on security.
          I'm not sure if the order is constantly searching for the PL in the active mode. Even so. Within the order, the active GAS has a dead zone and a continuous illumination of the "locator". Even echoing from the bottom. The depth of the area is 3 km? There will be an echo on the screen for 3 km. They do not work on a small scale. And how can you tell a boat from your ship in your order? Forget movies and poo-poo. The movies show cartoons. In reality, everything is different.
          1. Fizik M
            Fizik M 13 December 2019 10: 50
            0
            Quote: Podvodnik
            It's about the dark.

            it can be even easier (phosphorescence trace)
            Quote: Podvodnik
            No one flies near the aircraft carrier and is not looking for anything

            takes off and lands on AB
            Bondarenko (inside AMG near Aleuts), EMNIP, visually discovered "Intruder"
            Quote: Podvodnik
            I’m not sure that the order is constantly searching for submarines in active mode. Even if so. Active GAS has a dead zone within the order

            this is a real problem - for OLD GAS (which Bondarenko, by the way, took advantage of)
            for the new ones the problem is practically solved (examples of indicator pictures of the same "Minotaur" in the "Sea Collection" were officially published)
    2. Fizik M
      Fizik M 13 December 2019 10: 05
      0
      Quote: Alexander Alekseev_2
      but could not the Americans, having discovered a submarine, deliberately ram it?

      no
  13. Fizik M
    Fizik M 13 December 2019 10: 05
    0
    Quote: Alf
    on the same boat a few commanders?

    it also happens ;)
    and there are also 7 (SEVEN) persons on board "claiming command of a ship of the 1st rank of the Navy", and in joint exercises (see the scandalous "French report" on "Chabanenko", but a year later the Americans went nuts at joint exercises when the BOD came to him without a COMMANDER at all (only SPK for VriO))
    1. Podvodnik
      Podvodnik 13 December 2019 10: 28
      +1
      The "senior on board" went to the autonomous system with us. It is a common practice to "take out" the commander. He also needs to be taught and experience passed on. This is also practiced on short exits to the sea.
      But the commander on the ship is always alone. If necessary, the senior on board can take command if the necessary procedures are followed.
      1. The comment was deleted.
        1. Podvodnik
          Podvodnik 13 December 2019 14: 41
          +2
          Well this is by itself. The retinue on the ship only gets underfoot and confuses the commander. Especially when they go to where they return with awards.
        2. gunnerminer
          gunnerminer 27 December 2019 11: 50
          +1
          This was the case on K-278, in 1989. The senior on-board chief of staff of the compound, Captain 1st Rank Kolyada, did not have permission to independently control the boat of this project. His presence in the CPU during the fire did not affect the results of the fight in a positive way. for survivability and crew rescue.
  14. Podvodnik
    Podvodnik 13 December 2019 11: 31
    +2
    Quote: Fizik M
    Quote: Podvodnik
    It's about the dark.

    it can be even easier (phosphorescence trace)
    Quote: Podvodnik
    No one flies near the aircraft carrier and is not looking for anything

    takes off and lands on AB
    Bondarenko (inside AMG near Aleuts), EMNIP, visually discovered "Intruder"
    Quote: Podvodnik
    I’m not sure that the order is constantly searching for submarines in active mode. Even if so. Active GAS has a dead zone within the order

    this is a real problem - for OLD GAS (which Bondarenko, by the way, took advantage of)
    for the new ones the problem is practically solved (examples of indicator pictures of the same "Minotaur" in the "Sea Collection" were officially published)


    What is published in the press does not always correspond to reality. I have not seen the work of new devices. I have been retired for a long time. But I personally observed the sweep progress on the screen of the SAC submarine while operating in active mode. The surprises were very interesting. And in order to understand such things, you need to plan a normal combat training using all modes of the SAC. Otherwise, when the command "measure the distance in active mode to the target №х" in the cabin of the SAC, everything will subside as before a storm, and then the fuss will begin. The reason is simple. On submarines, the active path is almost never used. And the work of the simulator, oddly enough, does not coincide with what the acoustician sees and hears at sea.
    There is only one conclusion: if tankers and infantry don’t shoot, pilots don’t fly, and sailors are fighting at the pier, worthless to them all. Only the sea, the sky, the dust and dirt of a trench and a training ground, there are screams !!! papaliiiiii !!!! (further profanity) Then we all sleep peacefully.
    1. Fizik M
      Fizik M 13 December 2019 13: 36
      -2
      Quote: Podvodnik
      But I personally observed the progress of the sweep on the HAC submarine screen when working in active mode. The surprises were very interesting. And in order to understand such things, you need to plan normal combat training using all the SAC modes.

      my first Commander (from acoustics) came to the crew and went into the cabin of acoustics said:
      - I order to "boil water" !!!!
      (ie, the use of active means WITHOUT LIMITATIONS (and AT ALL "without" - who in the subject understood what the speech was about;)), and by the decision of the acoustics themselves, if there is no direct prohibition from him or VO)
      acc. not only the acoustics themselves, but also "curious miners" (in my person laughing )

      moreover, in the mid-2000s, with my submission (KBCH-3 at the Pacific Fleet), major problems were eliminated in this part in the operation of the SAC on the submarine of the Northern Fleet (then Shevchenko went to the NRTU Navy, he understood everything correctly and "pulled" excellent specialists in the north with "Ladogi" (before that in the north there was only "VTP-Start")
  15. Podvodnik
    Podvodnik 13 December 2019 14: 45
    +1
    Quote: Fizik M
    and "curious miners" (in my face)

    Not only miners are curious. Your left neighbor was no exception.
    1. Fizik M
      Fizik M 13 December 2019 15: 15
      0
      Quote: Podvodnik
      Your left neighbor was no exception.

      especially when aiming for bulls laughing (KBCH-7)
  16. Sandro
    Sandro 13 December 2019 16: 16
    -6
    In the last paragraph there is an incorrect wording! The USSR has never been, although it WOULD WANTED to be a superpower! There has always been a backlog from NATO, and even more so for the naval forces! And then and now, on the water and under it, the US fleet dominates. 40 years ago, due to another military operation OUTSIDE OUR EXTERNAL BORDERS, (I mean the invasion of Afghanistan), the USSR was sanctioned, and a whole range of products disappeared in the country, with a meager menu! How could a country be called a superpower if its population WAS queuing for cooked sausages ?!
    1. Titus
      Titus 17 December 2019 13: 35
      0
      When you eat enough pancake.
  17. Kirill Dou
    Kirill Dou 14 December 2019 16: 32
    0
    In fact, a potentially dangerous underwater object was missed at a distance of confident shooting - and even closer. It is not difficult to imagine what this could lead to in a real conflict.
    - I think that in the event of a real conflict, the personnel of the American AOG would be much more scrupulous in terms of tracking the objects of a real enemy, so the remark is not particularly correct.
  18. Toshka White
    Toshka White 15 December 2019 21: 44
    0
    Submarine captain well done