Military Review

108 meters: submarine "Kursk"

270
- What happened to the submarine Kursk?
- She drowned.
From an interview with Russian President Vladimir V. Putin Larry King


Twelve years ago, 12 August 2000, one of the worst disasters in the Russian stories. The nuclear submarine Kursk has gone to the bottom of the Barents Sea. The submarine missile carrier sank at a depth of 108 meters. All 118 people aboard the ship died. The whole country watched how the crew of the boat tried to save and then lift it from the bottom of the sea. At the same time, the whole of Russia was discussing various versions of the catastrophe, questioning them. After 12 years after the tragedy, the question of how the Kursk submarine still died is still of great interest to many Russians. Many simply do not believe the official version, according to which the explosion of the remote torpedo 65-76 "Kit" became the cause of the death of the boat.

The submarine "Kursk" was exemplary. According to the results of the year of 1999 competition, the Kursk APRK K-141 was recognized as the best in the 7 division. Five submarine cruiser combat units are “excellent”, 23% of crew members are masters of military affairs, the remaining 77% of submariners are specialists of the 1 and 2 classes. Even before the tragedy in the Barents Sea, the submarine commander Gennady Lyachin was presented to the rank of Hero of Russia.

In August-October 1999, the Kursk APRK took part in an autonomous march into the Atlantic Ocean and the Mediterranean Sea, having previously performed an “excellent” rating on the prize of the Commander-in-Chief of the Russian Navy. The submarine was marching to the Mediterranean Sea according to the plan and under the control of KSF commander Admiral Popov V. A., who described the actions of the submariners in such a way: “The commander of the Kursk nuclear-command and control missile completely managed to realize our plan. He led the ship unnoticed through Gibraltar into the Mediterranean, it was not a breakthrough, but a song! ”
108 meters: submarine "Kursk"

In the Mediterranean, the Kursk submarine monitored the 6th fleet The US Navy, which included the Theodore Roosevelt aircraft carrier, from which aircraft took part in the bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999. During the course of its Mediterranean campaign, Kursk carried out 5 conditional attacks on real targets. As a result of this campaign, 72 crew members of the boat were presented to various government awards.

The sudden appearance of a Russian submarine, which is classified as an "aircraft carrier killer", caused panic in the ranks of the US NNXX fleet. The anti-submarine forces of all the states of the Mediterranean basin that are part of the NATO bloc were involved in the search for the Kursk. Despite this, K-6 disappeared from the Mediterranean just as suddenly as it appeared, dealing a crushing blow to American pride. After this incident, a number of commanders, including the commander of the antisubmarine defense of the Gibraltar zone, were deprived of their positions.

10 August 2000, the submarine K-141 "Kursk" went to sea to participate in the three-day planned exercises, this campaign was the last for the Russian nuclear-powered ship. According to the plan of 12 August exercises in 9: 40, “Kursk” was supposed to start training, and in the period from 11: 40 to 13: 40 to conduct a training attack of the aircraft carrier group of ships. Recent entries in the logbook of the boat were left in 11: 15 minutes 12 August. On the same day, in the 11: 30 area, the Norwegian seismological stations recorded 2 jolts, the strength of which was on the Richter scale 1,5 (taking into account the distance from the epicenter, this was equivalent to an explosion of TNT xNUMX kg) (equivalent to 100-3,5 tons of trotyl) ). These shocks occurred at intervals of 1 minutes at sea at a distance of about 2 km from Severomorsk. On the same day, the submarine Kursk did not get in touch and an alarm was announced in the 2 hour of the evening.
The commander of the nuclear submarine "Kursk" Gennady Lyachin

Versions of the disaster of the Kursk APRK

The official version of the catastrophe is the 65-76А “Kit” torpedo blast. The crash report was published in 2002 by Russia's Prosecutor General Ustinov. According to a report in 11 hours 28 minutes 26 seconds Moscow time, a torpedo "Kit" exploded in a torpedo tube No. 4. The cause of the explosion was recognized leakage of components of the fuel torpedoes, specifically - hydrogen peroxide. After 2 minutes, a fire that broke out in the 1 compartment led to the detonation of the torpedoes here.

The second explosion was of such strength that it destroyed several compartments of the boat. At the same time, torpedoes on hydrogen peroxide have not been used in most fleets of the world for over more than 50 years precisely because of reliability and safety considerations. Torpedoes model 65-76 "Kit" were created in 1976 year. They are cheaper than torpedoes equipped with silver-zinc batteries. After the investigation of the death of "Kursk", torpedoes on hydrogen peroxide, which were trying to return to the fleet in order to save, were finally removed from service.
According to the official version, the first explosion caused a strong fire in the first compartment of the boat, the shock wave from the explosion passed into the second compartment. As a result of the second explosion, the bulkhead between the 1 and 2 compartment of the boat (22 frame) was cut off and, moving like a piston, crushed all 22-mm floorings, equipment of the boat, into the robust hull. After lifting the boat, it was found that the bulkhead of the first / second compartment was in place of the bulkhead of the second / third compartments (43 frame). Only the bulkhead of the 5-bis compartment was able to stop the second shock wave. The bulkhead arched, but she parried the blow.

In the course of the investigation, it was established that the Snegir tape recorder was turned off on the boat, which was supposed to record the crew’s hands-free conversations; the toggle switch was off in the corresponding position. According to the regulations during the preparation of the training attack, this equipment should have been turned on. In addition, it was established that the emergency buoy alarm system was not turned on at the Kursk automatic missile defense system and the antenna emergency ejection system was turned off for several years. From the emergency buoy the factory fastening device was not removed, which simply did not allow the buoy to surface.

Close enough to the official version of Vice Admiral Ryazantsev, who was a member of the government commission to investigate the causes and circumstances of the death of the nuclear submarine Kursk. According to his version, the first explosion of the so-called “thick” torpedo occurred because of its filling with non-greasy high-pressure air, which the crew of the boat performed on August 11 on the 2000 of the year, using the wrong instructions. Until August 12, the air filled into the torpedo could not get into the oxidizer tank, since the torpedo was in the rack, the shut-off valve was closed, and safety devices were located on the air channel. Uncontrolled reaction of hydrogen peroxide, which led to the explosion, occurred after the torpedo was loaded into a torpedo tube.

Unfortunately, for the crew of the Kursk, all boats of this class have one constructive disadvantage. To prevent an overpressure in the 1 compartment during salvo firing with torpedoes, the flaps of the general vessel ventilation system during firing remain open. Thus, after the explosion of the 65-76А torpedo, the shock wave enters the 2 command compartment of the boat and the entire composition of this compartment receives a serious contusion, disabling. According to Ryazantsev, the second explosion on the boat is not connected with a fire, but with the fact that the Kursk APRK with the 1 compartment filled with water at a speed in the 3 node with a trim to the nose in 40-42 degrees encounters the ground at 108 depth . At this moment, the battle torpedoes, equipped with fuses and located in the apparatus number 1, 3, 5 and 6, crumple and explode.

Unofficial versions

If we talk about unofficial versions, we can distinguish four of the most common, two of which are related to the participation of American submarines in the incident. In the course of investigating the causes of the catastrophe, the option of colliding a submarine with a mine from World War II was considered, which was ultimately declared untenable. Experts familiar with the strength characteristics of submarines of the Kursk class, noted this version initially.

Also on the Internet, the version that the Kursk was sunk as a result of a missile hit by one of the ships that took part in the exercise was spread. The author of this version is the former captain of the first rank Alexander Leskov. According to him, a submarine of the class "Kursk" for physical reasons (the length of the boat is greater than the maximum depth of the sea under it) could not be under water in a given area. In his opinion, the boat was hit by an anti-ship missile fired from one of the ships while on the surface. However, most submarine officers call this version a complete nonsense.

At the same time, violations during the organization of the exercises took place. The area of ​​action of the Kursk AISSD included a part of the combat training ground of the Northern Fleet, which was not intended for joint work on combat missions by anti-submarine warships and nuclear submarines. In addition, the execution of the task that stood before the "Kursk" in the area was significantly hampered by its shallowness. In the place of its flooding, the boat could not perform all the tactics of attack, acting against the ships of the anti-submarine strike group and the battle group of ships, namely, maneuver in depth while searching and attacking surface ships, and also conducting reconnaissance, dodging after attacking surface ships, developing speed more than 12 nodes.

Along with this, during the official investigation it was established that 12 August was a day of firing of submarines, none of the surface ships of the Northern Fleet participating in the exercises, firing and missile launches. In addition, it was found that the boat at the time of the tragedy was under water and was at the periscope depth. On the submerged Kursk, retractable devices were lifted: a periscope, an observation and identification station antenna, a communication antenna, that is, that set of equipment used when moving under water.

The most talked about were versions involving American submarines. Immediately after the crash, a number of officials and admirals claimed that the Kursk could have been torpedoed by a US submarine. The French director Jean-Michel Carré even shot the documentary Kursk. Muddy Water Submarine, which was shown on January 7 2005. It argues that the torpedo attack by the American submarine Memphis was the cause of the death of the Kursk APRK. According to the version voiced in the film, at the time of the shooting of the new torpedo "Squall", Kursk was observed by two American submarines: "Toledo" and "Memphis".

The film assumes that Toledo was in close proximity to the Kursk and could have run into it (the video of the Kursk lying on the ground shows long gaps on its body). After that, in order to warn a possible salvo of "Kursk" at "Toledo", being at a distance of "Memphis" fired at "Kursk" with a torpedo Mk-48. The film’s director, Carré, claims that President Putin deliberately concealed the truth about what happened to the boat in order not to drastically worsen relations with the United States and for fear of a possible military conflict.

According to another version, there was no torpedo attack, but the cause of the first explosion could be a foreign submarine, ramming the Kursk in the area of ​​torpedo tubes. According to the captain of the first rank Mikhail Volzhensky, the sliding blow of the horizontal rudders of the submarine could lead to a serious deformation of the Kursk torpedo tubes.

Information sources:
http://flot.com/history/events/kursk.htm
http://www.popmech.ru/blogs/post/514-k-141-pamyati-kurska-posvyaschaetsya/page/12/
http://chtoby-pomnili.com/page.php?id=811
http://ru.wikipedia.org/
Author:
270 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. Region71
    Region71 12 August 2012 06: 47
    +10
    There is no doubt now that the real reasons for the death of Kursk will remain a mystery. Regarding the fire and the internal explosion of torpedoes, I talked with the submariner, the commander of the BS-3, this is a torpedo weapon control post. So he called this version complete nonsense.
    1. 755962
      755962 12 August 2012 07: 36
      +11
      2000 August 12 - according to the official version, the explosion of the torpedo 65-76A caused the death of the K-141 Kursk SSGN, pr.949A. The explosion was caused by a leak of fuel (hydrogen peroxide) from a torpedo in torpedo tube # 4. The torpedo specialists reject the version of the fire and explosion of the torpedo 65-76.



      Fragments of a 65-76A torpedo from the Kursk SSGN. Tail section and engine. Museum of Murmansk, May 2010
      http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-461.html
    2. Specialist-
      Specialist- 12 August 2012 07: 47
      +5
      Americans fucked and flooded - 100%.
      This is supported by the fact that they conducted their exercises there, tested the latest weapons, and Kursk spied on all this, right under them.
      They discovered (perhaps an accident) and flooded - and moreover, it is no longer important torpedo, or ram.
      The fact is important - our submarines were flooded by the Americans - UNPUNISHED !!!
      They gave the titles of Heroes to all those who died, because they were all on a combat mission. Putin spoke I remember, says - the essence of the task of the State. mystery, but they fulfilled it and died they say.
      They were afraid of exacerbations. Wow. And if the next time - they blow up the Kremlin - we won’t say anything, or else we’ll drown it.
      They have us - and we type get stronger only from this. There is also enough arrogance for these Amekans - to blame Russia for their Hurricanes like Katrina when the whole state was demolished and destroyed practically under 0. Well, at least - maybe it is. At least some revenge, since we have a thinner intestine. Or was it thin then, and now is getting fat? Now, if something like this happens (and it can easily happen) - what will Russia keep silent about? Or, as it should and must, it will do it (it will destroy, say, an enemy aircraft carrier, even if after that the enemy will use nuclear weapons, which we will use in response).
      That was the only way they reckoned with the USSR, because they knew - just like our missiles were on the way, without thinking. And only in this way they will reckon with Russia. When they will be sure - that in return they will receive if something like that ........... that little will not seem to anyone.
      However, option 2 is still unlikely. Due to the fact that our Oligarchs - oh how they would not want to lose everything acquired by overwork. They have something to lose, we have nothing to do but our own skin. That’s why it always will be like that - it’s better to give up for slaughter - 100/200 soldiers (new ones will be recruited and born anyway in half a year) - than to risk billions and the existing capitalist feudal system - the children need to be put on their feet, grandchildren. Why do they need Russia after the nuclear war? It’s not possible to steal there. And live in luxury and chocolate, passing all this by inheritance.
      That is exactly how one oligarch spoke out - a friend of Prokhor. Well, there will be a war, well, they’ll kill 60 million, think - they’ll still give birth.
      We are cattle for them. More breeding, restoring livestock.
      However, they also provide for option 1 - and in this case they build underground cities for themselves - for the FAVORITES in the case of nuclear weapons (400.000 inhabitants for 50 years). They then will be saved along with their families. And they will survive all this underground. And then, armed with a good army, they will crawl to the surface from head to toe and rebuild what they need. Those who survive on the surface, as they were essentially slaves, they will remain in the end. Nothing will change in essence.
      1. Aleksys2
        Aleksys2 12 August 2012 10: 24
        +28
        Quote: Specialist -
        This is supported by the fact that they conducted their exercises there, tested the latest weapons, and Kursk spied on all this, right under them.

        It is WE who conducted the exercises there, not the Americans. They were watching us, not us.
        Careful approach to the presentation of different versions.
        1. Specialist-
          Specialist- 12 August 2012 13: 18
          -14
          Quote: Aleksys2
          They were watching us, not us.

          Well then, this is generally a complete paragraph.
          We are also drowned in our territory with impunity.
          Or maybe she really drowned herself? Accident due to the fact that everything is rusted, everything is old, everything is on snot and honestly.
          Planes, rockets and satellites are falling and exploding - even NEW. Why don’t the boat drown ?, all the more far from new. And in a terrible technical condition, due to the fact that in the 90s and early 2000s, everyone did not care about these boats and money for their maintenance, no one allocated repairs. And if what pennies fell, then right there the Navy themselves plundered completely.
          And the story of the mysterious 2 submarine is nothing more than a fairy tale invented for excuses and hanging noodles on the ears of the population and other curious people.
          1. slas
            slas 12 August 2012 19: 04
            -3
            Quote: Specialist -
            Or maybe she really drowned herself?

            Et you probably redefined Hollywood laughing
      2. in reserve
        in reserve 12 August 2012 18: 07
        +11
        And what would you do on the spot of Putin and start a nuclear war, you probably would not write comments here right now.
      3. slas
        slas 12 August 2012 19: 00
        +5
        Quote: Specialist -
        That’s why it always will be like that - it’s better to give up for slaughter - 100/200 soldiers (new ones will be recruited and born anyway in half a year) - than to risk billions and the existing capitalist feudal system - the children need to be put on their feet, grandchildren. Why do they need Russia after the nuclear war? It’s not possible to steal there. And live in luxury and chocolate, passing all this by inheritance.

        I agree with you. According to the Americans, they have about $ 500 billion in Western banks. of our oligarfrenes So lose them oh how is that
    3. Ross
      Ross 12 August 2012 13: 50
      +6
      Region71,
      Anyone who saw a photo of the boat when entering the dock (hereinafter prohibited for display) immediately saw the characteristic trail of the MK48 torpedo. There is no doubt about the fault of amers.
      1. Aleksys2
        Aleksys2 12 August 2012 14: 39
        +5
        Quote: Ross
        saw the characteristic trail of the MK48 torpedo


        And what is it characteristic of?
        1. Ross
          Ross 12 August 2012 21: 11
          +3
          Aleksys2,

          Take a look at the photo courtesy of a colleague. Beautiful smooth hole with a curved inward skin. Further on the Internet read the features of this torpedo and its characteristic trail. By the way, it is recognized by English experts as participants in the investigation.
          1. Kars
            Kars 12 August 2012 22: 36
            +6
            Quote: Ross
            Further on the Internet read the features of this torpedo and its characteristic trail.


            And you quote a quote.
            and tell me how a torpedo with a lively warhead could pierce a dozen millimeters at a speed of less than 50 knots, then go so far that its explosion would not bend the skin out.
            1. Ross
              Ross 13 August 2012 01: 54
              -1
              Kars,
              Andrey, part of the information in the French film, and part here:
              http://www.fact.ru/www/arhiv21ob-1.htm
              1. saturn.mmm
                saturn.mmm 13 August 2012 20: 17
                0
                Quote: Ross
                Andrey, part of the information in the French film, and part here:

                The article is more fictional. What ballistic missiles are on the Kursk?
                24 torpedoes and 24 anti-ship missiles "Granit"
                1. saturn.mmm
                  saturn.mmm 13 August 2012 23: 23
                  0
                  RCC P-700 of the Granit missile system (URAF Navy Index: 3M45, according to NATO codification: SS-N-19 “Shipwreck”, shipwreck) - a long-range cruise missile anti-ship missile (RCC) designed to deal with powerful ship groupings, including aircraft carriers.
                  And this is not the only blunder in the article http://www.fact.ru/www/arhiv21ob-1.htm ..
              2. Kars
                Kars 13 August 2012 20: 24
                +1
                Quote: Ross
                French film, and part here:

                Please just a link to the characteristics of the MK48 torpedo showing that it is penetrating, with a fuse deceleration.

                if I honestly almost died of laughter when the French talked about the thermal ring, which heats up and gives penetration. Particularly recalling the temperature of sea water, its heat capacity, the melting point of steel, etc.

                I immediately remembered the underwater drill from James Bond with which the Amer destroyer was drowned.
          2. Aleksys2
            Aleksys2 12 August 2012 23: 24
            +1
            Quote: Ross
            By the way, it is recognized by English experts as participants in the investigation.


            What investigation did they participate in ??
            1. Ross
              Ross 13 August 2012 02: 00
              -1
              Aleksys2,
              http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=3124 и http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi?noframes;read=71041 и http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/4676 и http://www.tribemagazine.com/board/showthread.php?t=98284
              - It is reported here that the fact of the torpedoing of Kursk was recognized, of course, by a former expert and designer on torpedoes of the British Navy Maurice Stradling.
      2. slas
        slas 12 August 2012 19: 30
        +2
        Saw a photo and not only
        1. Ross
          Ross 12 August 2012 21: 13
          0
          slas,

          Thank you for the photo!
        2. slas
          slas 13 August 2012 00: 21
          0
          MK48. This type of torpedo is equipped with a depleted uranium tip, which increases the striking ability.
          1. slas
            slas 13 August 2012 00: 36
            +3
            these are articles on the topic that Kursk was torpedoed in English: http: //www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp? ID = 3124 and http://www.rumormillnews.com/cgi-bin/archive.cgi ? noframes; read = 71041 and http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/4676 and http://www.tribemagazine.com/board/showthread.php?t=98284 - It is reported here that the Kursk torpedo acknowledged Naturally, Maurice Stradling, a former expert and torpedo designer at the British Navy.

            Interestingly, when Stradling in 2001 said that the cause was a malfunction in the Russian torpedo, he was shown everywhere; but as soon as he announced the American torpedo torpedo and he even named the type of the American torpedo: MK-48, he was kicked out from everywhere and stopped giving his word. - "A FORMER British military official Maurice Stradling, a torpedo designer and former lecturer at the Royal Naval Engineering College has backed a sensational claim that the Russian nuclear submarine, the Kursk, was torpedoed by US forces in August 2000. An official inquest concluded that the disaster - in which all 118 crew drowned in the Barents Sea, 135km off the Russian coast - was caused by an accidental explosion of an onboard torpedo. But Maurice Stradling, a former torpedo engineer and a key figure in the original investigation, believes a new French documentary, The Kursk: A Submarine in Troubled Waters, should change world opinion on the sinking. "On the balance of probabilities, the Kursk was sunk by an American MK-48 torpedo," said Mr Stradling, formerly a senior member of the British Defense Ministry ".http: //www.siberianlight.net/2005/05/10/kursk-torpedoed-by-us-sub/ - It also says that Clinton forgave Putin the Russian treasures worth 12.5 billion dollars, that is factually Ki paid for the rise and thereby indirectly acknowledged the fact of the American cause. : The cause of the sinking was covered up at the time in an act of diplomacy between then US presidents Bill Clinton and Russian President Vladimir Putin - a deal that included the cancellation of $ US10 billion ($ 12.5 billion) of Russian debt, the film states ... And this is an article in Russian on "LivJornal" http://oboguev.livejournal.com/854747.html
          2. Kars
            Kars 13 August 2012 00: 40
            +7
            Quote: slas
            This type of torpedo is equipped with a depleted uranium tip, which increases the striking ability


            don't make people laugh - depleted uranium tip ---- without speed it means nothing.
            the best fairy tale from muddy water would be repeated about melting.


            For the most part, I don’t care because of what Kursk died - even if due to a collision with Toledo, which jammed depth wheels and hit its nose with the nose and detonated its torpedoes.

            BUT THESE HOUSES ARE NOT FROM TORPEDA. And THREATING, ARMORPAID TORPES DO NOT HAPPEN. Although you attach a tip to it from enriched osmium.
            1. slas
              slas 13 August 2012 01: 22
              -1
              Quote: Kars
              BUT these openings are NOT from TORPEDA. And THREATING, ARMORPASSES torpedoes DO NOT HAPPEN.

              Well, about uranium, maybe got excited feel But that is NOT a torpedo, then I do not agree
          3. Delta
            Delta 13 August 2012 14: 59
            0
            what tip with depleted uranium ???? what kind of violent fantasy ??? where is the data from? from the ceiling? torpedoes (at least Mark 48) do not penetrate the ship's skin, they do not need it
        3. slas
          slas 13 August 2012 00: 38
          +1
          http://topwar.ru/uploads/images/2012/847/wnge862.png
          1. slas
            slas 13 August 2012 00: 42
            -2
            this is the USS Liberty torpedoed by the Israelis in 1967
            1. Kars
              Kars 13 August 2012 00: 48
              +3
              Quote: slas
              in 1967 the USS "Liberty"

              Truth?,
              Having deployed, the Mirages opened fire on the Liberty from 30-mm cannons, and the Super-Mister attack aircraft that approached them dropped napalm bombs. The ship caught fire in several places at once. The surviving members of the crew, under fire from Israeli aircraft, began a desperate struggle with the fire and tried to help the numerous wounded. Despite the fact that most of the antennas were destroyed during the 20-minute air raid, radio operators managed to install an emergency antenna and broadcast the SOS Distress Signal. The signal was heard, but the aircraft carrier planes promised by Admiral Martin never appeared during the attack or after it.

              Meanwhile, the situation for Liberty took an even worse turn. As soon as the planes were out of sight, three Israeli torpedo boats appeared on the scene - the very surface targets previously detected by radar. Approaching the American ship at a distance of 200 meters, the boats fired their torpedoes at it. Fortunately for the Americans, the Israeli cutters were less accurate than their Air Force counterparts: of the five torpedoes, four passed by. But the fifth landed right in the middle of the building, where the main posts of electronic intelligence and communications were located. For a moment, the explosion literally threw the Liberty out of the water and instantly killed 25 people. The starboard side formed 12 meter hole and the ship immediately got a roll of 10 degrees.

              But the ship was lucky again. The sailors on the lower decks managed to batten down the waterproof bulkheads of the compartments and the flow of sea water into the hull stopped. However, Commander McGonagle ordered his team to prepare for the evacuation. But as soon as the American sailors launched three life rafts, Israeli boats immediately sank two of them with machine-gun fire, and the third was dragged aboard
              1. Kars
                Kars 13 August 2012 01: 01
                +3
                And by the way, he looked - the Jews had only MK 46 torpedoes
                Dimensions: caliber, mm: 324, length, m: 2,6.
                Weight, kg: 257,6 (Mod 0) or 230,4 (Mod 1.2, 4 and 5).
                Warhead: 43,1 kg high-explosive fragmentation

                против

                MK48
                Weight 1 kg (Mk-558)
                1 kg (Mk-676 ADCAP)
                Length 5,79 m
                Diameter 533 mm
                Warhead 295 kg [1]
                1. slas
                  slas 13 August 2012 01: 19
                  -1
                  Quote: Kars
                  And by the way, he looked - the Jews had only MK 46 torpedoes

                  And who was talking about MK 48?
                  1. Delta
                    Delta 13 August 2012 15: 00
                    +1
                    Americans have no other torpedoes except MK 48
              2. slas
                slas 13 August 2012 01: 18
                -1
                Quote: Kars
                A 12-meter hole formed on the starboard side

                Really?
                1. Kars
                  Kars 13 August 2012 13: 26
                  +1
                  Quote: slas
                  Really?

                  the truth is 12 square meters from the explosion of 43 kg warhead.
          2. Aleksys2
            Aleksys2 13 August 2012 08: 30
            0
            In the period from November 5 to 7, Norwegian divers cut the outer case in the dent area on the starboard side of the front section of the 2nd compartment and in the place of a cruciform tear on the starboard side in the region of the 2nd compartment. These works were completed successfully.
        4. saturn.mmm
          saturn.mmm 13 August 2012 23: 36
          0
          Quote: slas
          Saw a photo and not only

          In general, I have the opinion that this is a hole from the clamp with which the boat was held so that it would not loosen when it was sawed.
          I can be mistaken, this is just an assumption.
        5. semen777
          semen777 7 June 2016 17: 05
          0
          Here is a photo ... about the torpedo and picture number 1
          № 2
          and here is the link: http: //ruskline.ru/monitoring_smi/2012/12/14/pravda_o_gibeli_kurska
          /the truth is somewhere near...
      3. REPA1963
        REPA1963 12 August 2012 22: 27
        +1
        You say correctly, on the starboard side somewhere 2 meters or 3 from the cut.
      4. Delta
        Delta 13 August 2012 14: 57
        +1
        again 25 .... if you include at least logic and technical thinking, which a man should have, you will understand that such a dent (hole) cannot remain from a torpedo. Firstly, torpedoes do not penetrate the hull of the boat, but explode near it, and secondly, this dent (hole) in the area of ​​the second compartment, while it is well known that the explosion came from the first compartment to the stern, and not from the second. You really want to see the wine of the Americans, you must agree. There are no and there were no prohibitions, because this "hole" was shown on the RTR and in the future it is free on the internet
  2. Sakhalininsk
    Sakhalininsk 12 August 2012 06: 48
    +35
    In fact, it is unlikely that for the next 50 years one of the ordinary inhabitants will find out the true causes of the death of the submarine, if they are different from the official version. Personally, it seems to me that there was not an intentional collision with a boat of a potential enemy due to which there was an explosion of ammunition. Information was deliberately hidden at that time Russia was an order of magnitude less prepared for any kind of conflict compared to the present time, moreover, in my opinion, they would have hidden the true cause of death if there had been a collision with a US or NATO boat, a direct military conflict is not in our interests.
    ETERNAL MEMORY OF SEAFARERS SEAFARERS! OFFICERS AND SAILERS OF KURSK WAS A Worthy REPRESENTATIVE OF OUR COUNTRY!
    1. Rikoshet
      Rikoshet 12 August 2012 07: 11
      -1
      Twenty-five again! (Oh sorry, you already offer 50!) Let's wait to find out what we all know, but want to doubt, it's just that simple!
      A vova on the rack if you raise ?? Can he say what ??
    2. Delink
      Delink 12 August 2012 07: 30
      +7
      I completely agree. This is already known to our children.
      1. lelikas
        lelikas 12 August 2012 10: 40
        +19
        I'm afraid that the children will not know
        When the first footage of underwater filming was shown in "Vesti", the stripped cover on the nose was clearly visible - a long furrow - Popov and Spassky spoke in one voice - Here is the trace of the blow ...
        This was no longer in the next issue.
        The nasal extremity was cut off under the pretext of explosiveness, and then shots from the dock where explosives are carried out in pieces.
        On betrayed / sold again, for this great pu I really do not like.

        Eternal memory to you brother.
    3. tan0472
      tan0472 12 August 2012 07: 48
      +6
      Quote: Sakhalininets
      direct military conflict is not in our interests.

      Why direct? They also have "long-range torpedoes". They can probably explode too.
      1. Sakhalininsk
        Sakhalininsk 12 August 2012 07: 56
        +16
        Quote: tan0472
        Why direct? They also have "long-range torpedoes". They can probably explode too


        To recognize officially the destruction of a warship by a warship of a foreign power de facto and de jure is a direct act of aggression and an occasion for the outbreak of hostilities.
        Officially, this was not necessary. Not officially, you see, a little time will pass and some "Los Angeles" will gurgle in the world's oceans ... everything has its time.
        1. Kaa
          Kaa 12 August 2012 08: 14
          +15
          Quote: Sakhalininets
          To recognize officially the destruction of a warship by a warship of a foreign power de facto and de jure is a direct act of aggression and an occasion for the outbreak of hostilities.

          I agree with you. What should leadership do in this case, declare war? This would be a dilemma even in the incomparable 80s, and even in 2000 - suicide is practically only for us. It was not for nothing that the head of the CIA urgently flew to Russia, some large money was transferred from the USA to Russia ... We will find out the truth later than about the Kennedy assassination. What remains to say, ETERNAL MEMORY OF KURSK HEROES!
        2. Indigo
          Indigo 12 August 2012 13: 10
          0
          I just recommend an interview with State Duma deputy E. Fedorov about how Russia was occupied, how it pays tribute - your hair stands on end and you understand the GDP, how the current is spinning and what it is doing to restore the country. And how complicated it is. And if E. Fedorov is pushing bills to the State Duma to eliminate this slavish dependence, then there is hope to warm up and there is no need to rock the boat, such as driving all sorts of stools, and other sharp movements ..
          http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fuY_icFMzZQ
        3. Cynic
          Cynic 12 August 2012 17: 23
          +2
          Quote: Sakhalininets
          To recognize officially the destruction of a warship by a warship of a foreign power de facto and de jure is a direct act of aggression and an occasion for the outbreak of hostilities.

          Clearly understood .
          Look at the Turks Phantom identity also fell for technical reasons, though for some reason in Syria’s guides and when trying to re-violate its air border.
          ETERNAL MEMORY OF HEROES!
        4. REPA1963
          REPA1963 12 August 2012 22: 29
          -2
          Shouting nonsense, Vova sossyt
    4. dmitreach
      dmitreach 12 August 2012 14: 11
      +2
      Quote: Sakhalininets
      ETERNAL MEMORY OF SEAFARERS SEAFARERS! OFFICERS AND SAILERS OF KURSK WAS A Worthy REPRESENTATIVE OF OUR COUNTRY!

      support

      The most adequate info on this subject:
      Valery Ryazantsev. "In wake formation after death"
      http://lib.rus.ec/b/214731/read
      Chapter VI. The strength and power of Antei: propaganda and reality.
      Chapter VII. The death of the Kursk: how it was.


      Guys, it's good to watch the French journalist, with their murky waters, and our RenTV "military review", with their nlomania and other Lokhnese wonders.
      Yes, she drowned. And the reason for this is the state of the Navy for that period, with all the ensuing consequences.
      1. Stas57
        Stas57 12 August 2012 14: 24
        +1
        Yes, she drowned. And the reason for this is the state of the Navy for that period, with all the ensuing consequences.

        I completely agree, all these "versions are Americans" are an attempt to cover up the collapse of our fleet
        1. s1н7т
          s1н7т 13 August 2012 00: 45
          0
          Hm. So all these versions are Americans and arose because of the collapse of the fleet. Before, they probably wouldn’t have thought of that.
    5. Specialist-
      Specialist- 12 August 2012 16: 58
      +3
      Quote: Sakhalininets
      direct military conflict is not in our interests

      You might think directly in the interests of Amer and Nata.
      If something serious happens, the living (survivors), the Russians, the Americans, all envy the dead. The Stone Age of years on ...... sies on the whole planet will come, that's all. In fact - it's okay. Nobody is going to live forever. We will all be there.
      Although what is actually surprising. Nothing. Our women are sold into slavery - in a year, 40.000 Russians disappear without a trace. Young people are chipping, smoking and drinking, the nation is degrading. The level of migrant workers and the level of prices for everything goes off scale. The level of salaries and life of the population - the mat is not enough. The level of corruption - you yourself know where.
      For a long time you can list and marvel at the stamina of the Russian people.
      At that pace, the Russians will soon not remain. According to forecasts, by the year 50 - 20-30% will be us in Russia.
      In view of this, it’s a clear matter - what to arrange, even now - because of some 100-200 people who died - the 3rd world - Nobody and Never will be.
      Here, from cigarettes - 500.000 Russians die each year - and no one moves to raise prices for a pack of up to 200 rubles, all blah blah blah. From vodka - 800.000 mines - and the prices for it rise - ridiculously - by 10 rubles. About drugs - in Russia there are about 7-8.000.000 drug addicts. And no one does anything.
      And why? $$$$$$$$$$$$$ - billions of $$$.
      In fact, it turns out that the life of a Russian is not priceless, but has a price. For example - for the dead conscript - the state pays to parents - ASH 40.000r (2010). What a bounty! And is it not from here that the legs and the high number of 200 cargo grow in peacetime at that time. It’s easier, after all, to give 40.000 rubles to MO than to restore order in the army and lose billions. Is not it?
      That paid at least 10.000.000r - then they would have thought about the pressing conditions and problems of ordinary soldiers. That in the winter they are dying of menengitis and pneumonia, that they’ll eat the hell, that they’re doing whatever and wherever. What would be nice to carry out checks more often and more strictly, to provide parts there with medicines, and not to steal these medicines and products. That it’s time to start looking for, judging and imprisoning the soldiers guilty of death. And do not unsubscribe - heart failure / suicide - then put the Doctor in the military enlistment office, which sent the core to serve, since suicide - why? Who brought it? Who extorted money, who threatened?
      Eh - dreams, dreams. Nobody needs this. It's easier to close your eyes. And sit in your chair in place. And then those who cannot close them and love the truth themselves often find themselves behind bars.
    6. Veter
      Veter 13 August 2012 07: 28
      +1
      Quote: Sakhalininets
      Personally, it seems to me that there was an unintentional collision with a boat of a potential enemy

      In the collision of two submarines, one of them receives catastrophic damage, explodes and dies, and the other even leaves under its own power? Doesn't it seem strange?
  3. yurypetrunin
    yurypetrunin 12 August 2012 07: 56
    +11
    yurypetrunin May 11, 2012 20:47 | The death of the Kursk - are there no more secrets? 1
    it is interesting to read the copies of "Komsomolskaya Pravda" I have saved /
    Ex. No. 157 (22381) dated August 26, 2000. A letter from a submariner who died in Kursk to Vladivostok. I quote. "... The village is just" ah ", as you look, you will shudder. Most of all, you were struck by the empty houses with boarded up windows .... We cook vermicelli in a coffee pot .... The crew goes to sea, and families without a penny remain on the shore. ... We curse, grit our teeth ... "End of quotation.
    That you, dear debaters, are complicating the problem. There are still not enough Quakers to connect to this. And UFOs. is it really not clear from the subsequent actions of the leadership (see Komsomolskaya Pravda from 25 August) that "the secret is so terrible that it scares even the military." End of quote. Those who wish will find the author in this newspaper. I remind the words of ComKSF
    V. POPOVA to the whole country on TV. that he "looks guilty in the eyes" /
    Dear submariners! I don’t know how now, but we always went to sea with brewed ASB. And the so-called RCCU failed after the first leak test due to condensate after comparing the pressure.
    And the conclusion is clear. Our weapons are not protected from unauthorized use. Lyachin lost control of the ship from one bolt in the rack. Popov knew that. The boat sank in violation of the BCF, that any struggle for survivability is conducted ONLY in the surface position so that torpedoes cannot be used. I met with FlagMin 4th EPL. According to him, a torpedo falls to 20-30 meters before a set of operational parameters. Maybe this is an immersion for this? ”The torpedo hit the bottom and self-destructed. I’m not a miner, as far as it's true, I can’t judge, but it makes me think.
    Why was the first compartment cut off? I suppose to hide the EMPTY squeezed torpedo tube. The rest are blown apart by an explosion of hardware torpedoes. The presence of practical torpedoes does not exclude this version.
    I think we will never know the truth. Kolesnikov’s note on the scenario proposed by the authorities should begin with words about a combat or emergency alert, and he wrote it when everyone .....
    Yuri Petrunin. Veteran of the Armed Forces of the USSR. Gatchina.

    1. yurypetrunin
      yurypetrunin 12 August 2012 07: 58
      -2
      yurypetrunin May 10, 2012 19:13 | The death of the Kursk - are there no more secrets? 0
      Yuri Petrunin left a comment on the Evidence page of the Kursk nuclear submarine collision.
      Of 118 people, three were not found (not identified). The hatch opens towards the 1st compartment. Insert any bolt into the rack mechanism, and NOBODY will get into the compartment, and according to any schedule, there should be significantly more people in the compartment. So the submariner brought to despair frolic.
      1. Karabekir
        Karabekir 12 August 2012 08: 39
        +2
        Quote: yurypetrunin
        Of 118 people, three were not found (not identified). The hatch opens towards the 1st compartment. Insert any bolt into the rack mechanism, and NOBODY will get into the compartment, and according to any schedule, there should be significantly more people in the compartment. So the submariner brought to despair frolic.

        Could you explain what you mean by this !!
        1. yurypetrunin
          yurypetrunin 12 August 2012 09: 05
          0
          Just what he said. The human factor of the Russian Federation, and not aliens, Americans, or anyone else ... Yu. Petrunin.
          1. Karabekir
            Karabekir 12 August 2012 09: 26
            -1
            Dear yurypetrunin !!
            I really did not understand, someone inserted a bolt into the cream mechanism ??
            1. yurypetrunin
              yurypetrunin 12 August 2012 10: 16
              +1
              And can you name another reason that there were no people in the compartment except 3 people? There could be a nut, a screwdriver, a wrench between the teeth of the cremallera mechanism ... The compartment was cut off along with traces of the tragedy. Yu.
              1. Karabekir
                Karabekir 12 August 2012 10: 46
                +5
                !
                Quote: yurypetrunin

                And can you name another reason that there were no people in the compartment except 3 people? There could be a nut, a screwdriver, a wrench between the teeth of the cremallera mechanism ... The compartment was cut off along with traces of the tragedy. Yu.

                Well, even though I had to serve at the Navy, I know almost nothing about submarines!
                Probably many here do not know, so your more detailed explanations are and will be useful to us to understand!
      2. lelikas
        lelikas 12 August 2012 12: 35
        +2
        According to the battle schedule, there are 5 (five) person .
        What identification after the explosion of torpedoes - WHAT?
        1. yurypetrunin
          yurypetrunin 12 August 2012 21: 16
          +2
          When Kursk was brought to the Roslyakovsky dock, the newspapers published who was found in which compartment. Find this information, find out in which compartment the flagship miner was found? Why not in the first?
    2. lelikas
      lelikas 12 August 2012 10: 44
      +6
      that any struggle for survivability is conducted ONLY in the water position
      - Did you really write this seriously?
      1. Stas57
        Stas57 12 August 2012 10: 52
        +3
        - Did you really write this seriously?


        there and the second part of the phrase is a masterpiece
        so that you can’t use torpedoes.
        1. yurypetrunin
          yurypetrunin 12 August 2012 13: 14
          +2
          I recommend the primary sources - RBZH PL, course of professor VVMIU Muru
          (I don’t remember the initials) Theotia of stability, controllability, survivability of submarines. Look for: a flooded compartment, adjacent Central City Hospital, residual buoyancy. In addition, read the Instructions for use ... of various types.
          Nowhere is there a word about Americans and other reasons.
          Sorry for the educational program. Yu. Petrunin. Submariner, however, long ago it was ...
          1. Stas57
            Stas57 12 August 2012 13: 29
            +2
            Explain how the struggle for survivability and the use of torpedoes are related?
            any struggle for survivability is conducted ONLY in the water position, so you can’t use torpedoes
            In addition, read the Instructions for use ... of various types.

            you speak-Any fight for survivability ONLY in the water position
            Yeah, what does the floor tell us about this (RBZH PL-82)?
            any and only? check your memory, IMHO you are too categorical
            1. yurypetrunin
              yurypetrunin 13 August 2012 09: 03
              +1
              Read carefully my first koment. Why did the boat sink?
              To pump sludge into the cooling circuit, or to let a torpedo self-destruct when it hits the ground? And in the surface position an explosion
              would have opened the first compartment with a daisy, the bulkhead would have stood, and would not have worked as a piston until the 4th compartment. And a boat with a flooded compartment and adjoining GBC would have a residual buoyancy margin. Whether the DH will go beyond the borders of the existing waterline is another question that can only be considered theoretically, since Lyachin did what he did - plunged ... Yu.
            2. yurypetrunin
              yurypetrunin 14 August 2012 21: 24
              0
              You can easily find information that three of the crew are not identified - two sailors and a representative of Dagdizel. And why weren't the BC-3 commander and other officers in the compartment, if the boat was preparing for practical firing, or there were problems with the torpedo? Didn't want to enter the compartment, or couldn't? Isn't this "secret so terrible that it scares even the military"
              (the author of the quotation marks is quite famous) Y. Petrunin. Polar, Gatchina.
            3. yurypetrunin
              yurypetrunin 14 August 2012 21: 43
              0
              You can easily find information that three of the crew are not identified - two sailors and a representative of Dagdizel. And why weren't the BC-3 commander and other officers in the compartment, if the boat was preparing for practical firing, or there were problems with the torpedo? Didn't want to enter the compartment, or couldn't? Isn't this "secret so terrible that it scares even the military"
              (the author of the quotation marks is quite famous) And this is called the loss of control of the ship Yu. Petrunin. Polar, Gatchina.
        2. yurypetrunin
          yurypetrunin 14 August 2012 21: 22
          0
          You can easily find information that three of the crew are not identified - two sailors and a Dagdiesel representative. And why was there no commander of the BS-3 and other officers in the compartment if the boat was preparing for practical firing, or there were problems with a torpedo? Did not want to enter the compartment, or could not? YU.
  4. Apollo
    Apollo 12 August 2012 07: 58
    +11
    Eternal memory of the tragically perished sailors of the submarine "Kursk".
  5. Karabekir
    Karabekir 12 August 2012 08: 41
    +7
    * 8In the course of the investigation, it was found that the Bullfinch tape recorder was turned off on the boat, which was supposed to record the crew’s conversations over the speakerphone, the switch corresponding to its inclusion was in the off position. According to the regulations, during the preparation of the training attack, this equipment should have been turned on. In addition, it was found that the emergency buoy alarm was not turned on at the Kursk nuclear submarine and for several years the emergency antenna ejection system was turned off. The factory mounting device, which simply did not allow the buoy to surface, was not removed from the emergency buoy itself. ** - apparently, again, irresponsibility and negligence!
    1. Stas57
      Stas57 12 August 2012 10: 45
      +8
      The factory mounting device, which simply did not allow the buoy to surface, was not removed from the emergency buoy itself. ** - apparently, again, irresponsibility and negligence!

      it is not negligence, it is a necessity.
      the boat often goes into autonomous mode, secretly walks around the expanses of the oceans, in an extreme situation, that the boat is not uncommon, the buoy can come up and give signals, it is not very pleasant if this happens during exercises,
      and very bad, somewhere in the Canada area.
      1. Karabekir
        Karabekir 12 August 2012 11: 11
        0
        Stas57!
        Thanks for the clarification!
        1. Stas57
          Stas57 12 August 2012 11: 28
          +8
          so as not to be unfounded

          In the practice of some boats there were losses of alarm buoys (ASB). The design of their fastening on all projects was not distinguished by thoughtfulness and reliability. August 17 1981 BS-153 (V. Vedeneev) in a six-point stormy sea lost aft ASB at the outer raid of Balaklava. 5 February 1983 g. S-296 (V. Babenko) lost the bow buoy. The commanders of the warhead-5, whose command included the mechanism for the return of the buoys, sometimes welded the buoys by electric welding to the hull or put additional fasteners that prevent the buoy from floating. Even such measures did not always help. In 1984, the city of C-36 (V. Salomatin) lost the ASB along with additional fasteners and a rusted piece of a durable case. In 1988, B-41 (Y. Batalin) lost feed ASB due to corrosion of the drive
          Yu.M. Nichik V.R. Zakhar "Submarine forces of the Black Sea Fleet" 2004 with. 328-343
          1. Karabekir
            Karabekir 12 August 2012 11: 35
            0
            stas57 !!
            ++++ THANKS !!
      2. yurypetrunin
        yurypetrunin 19 August 2012 16: 26
        0
        I attach a photo of the aft ASB, baytros and emergency hatch. The submariners will understand why the bell was not used with the UNDERDRAWED ASB. YU.
  6. rexby63
    rexby63 12 August 2012 08: 47
    +5
    Everlasting memory
  7. Vito
    Vito 12 August 2012 08: 48
    +10
    How it all coincided today. Round date 100 years of the Russian Air Force and 12 years from the date of the sinking of the KURSK nuclear-powered ship!
    I don’t want to comment, ALREADY WERE DISPUTES ON THIS REASON!
    Remember our sailors
    Let's drink to our Air Force!
    1. Aleksey43
      Aleksey43 12 August 2012 09: 32
      +6
      Vito, I agree that today everything coincided. And a holiday and sorrow. Eternal memory to the sailors. And I wish the pilots that the number of take-offs coincided with the number of landings!
  8. ward
    ward 12 August 2012 09: 29
    +7
    Sailors who cannot have hungry families on the coast can be released into the sea ... about the question of the impact of food security on defense ... you can jump with a grenade under the tank ... but the true courage to carry out a combat mission every day ... knowing that Families are hungry ... Homeland you do not need ... and the enemy is nearby ...
  9. Serg_Y
    Serg_Y 12 August 2012 10: 23
    +4
    rexby63,
    Join
  10. Indigo
    Indigo 12 August 2012 10: 25
    +9
    And they were the Soldiers of their Country. And they will be the eternal memory of the people!
  11. Stas57
    Stas57 12 August 2012 10: 36
    +4
    for several years, the emergency ejection system was shut off. The factory mounting device, which simply did not allow the buoy to surface, was not removed from the emergency buoy itself.

    because the buoy can be lost it is welded, such cases are not rare
  12. slan
    slan 12 August 2012 11: 04
    +1
    Submarine missile carrier sank in depth 108 metroa. All 118 peopleaboard the ship perished.

    http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A4%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B0%D0%B9%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0
    % BD% D0% B3
    From scuba diving records: 225 m (25.04.2010/XNUMX/XNUMX), Natalya Molchanova
    The height of the submarine hull with the wheelhouse is 18 m, by the way. It is obvious that after the accident there were still living people on the submarine. It is likely that the first statements by the leadership of the fleet about establishing acoustic contact with them and preparing a rescue operation are just true. Obviously, the subsequent babble about the possibility of carrying out work exclusively by the forces of Norwegian (obviously military at the main place of service of NATO) divers is an absurd and pathetic lie. It is almost obvious that the death of the crew was simply expected. I do not presume to argue that it was technically possible to save someone, but the point is that such attempts were not even made. Obviously, the essence of the cause of the catastrophe (external or internal impact, explosion or accident) was known on the very first day. Obviously, this reason was again pitiful and absurdly hushed up until all traces were covered (destruction of the remains of the first compartment of the boat). And what else could prevent Putin from disgracing himself to the whole world and instead of “she drowned” to answer: “the reason for the death of the submarine was some kind of internal explosive effect”?
    Based on the above facts, it is difficult to draw a different conclusion except that the voiced official version of the catastrophe is a lie. Then of course you can only guess.
    1. slan
      slan 12 August 2012 14: 10
      +2
      And why not local Putiners silently minus, and present at least one version explaining why Putin could not publicly publicize, first of all for his own people, the version with the explosion of torpedoes until the evidence was destroyed?
      Do not forget to take into account at the same time that the picture of the destruction of the first compartment was no secret at that time for Norwegian divers. And almost certainly among these divers there were reservists, and then the current officers of NATO special forces. It would be strange if this were not so, agree.
      1. Stas57
        Stas57 12 August 2012 14: 26
        +7
        And why not local Putiners silently minus, and present at least one version explaining why Putin could not publicly publicize, first of all for his own people, the version with the explosion of torpedoes until the evidence was destroyed?

        because such things, even a stupid bush doesn’t voice, because the commission’s conclusions are needed, and not the magazine’s conclusions ...
        1. slan
          slan 12 August 2012 14: 38
          -4
          Quote: Stas57
          because such things, even a stupid bush does not sound, because we need the conclusions of the commission

          Yah? Why, then, with the same Komsomolets, we immediately learned that he drowned as a result of a fire, why did we hear preliminary versions about the shuttle and Columbia right away? Maybe because it makes no sense to make a secret out of the truth if you are not going to hide it and replace it with a lie?
          1. Stas57
            Stas57 12 August 2012 15: 00
            +3
            and here the preliminary versions were voiced immediately.
            the official one never voices the first day
            1. slan
              slan 12 August 2012 15: 24
              -2
              Maybe I don’t remember, well, they really messed around for a very long time. Actually from here and doubts at people.
              1. Stas57
                Stas57 12 August 2012 15: 38
                +4
                why did we hear preliminary versions of the shuttle and columbia right away?

                How are you with the English?
                well if that google to help

                tragedy, let me remind you what happened on February 1 2003.
                English wiki
                On august xnumx, the CAIB issued its report on the accident. The report confirmed the immediate cause of the accident was a breach in the leading edge of the left wing, caused by insulating foam shed during launch.
                translation
                26 August CAIB published its accident report. The report confirms that the immediate cause of the accident was a violation in the leading edge of the left wing, ,,,,,.
                half a year ....
                moreover, on December 30 of 2008, NASA released another report on this topic.

                what Bush says
                http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/02/20030201-2.html



                tell me where does he name the reason?
                like this
                1. slan
                  slan 12 August 2012 16: 01
                  -4
                  As if I, being a contemporary of all these events, not in detail, but still remember quite well that a couple of days later I knew for sure that the "shuttle" exploded during takeoff, and the "Columbia" collapsed and burned up during landing, and when Putin asked the notorious question about the Kursk, ordinary people did not really understand anything except "she drowned", although the Norwegians at the same time knew for sure that the boat sank due to an explosion in the bow compartment. The reason and the details are another matter, here of course you need the conclusion of the commission before chatting.
                  That is, the impression was created that simply at that time it was not decided which version to sound in the end.
                  1. Stas57
                    Stas57 12 August 2012 16: 25
                    +3
                    and I’m a contemporary, with the shuttle just a bunch of videos, witnesses and all the same, and still, as always, there is a major version that anything can rub.
                    and it’s more difficult with a boat ...
                    1. slan
                      slan 12 August 2012 16: 35
                      -2
                      And what is more difficult? The very first Norwegian diver, who descended to the Kursk, by its characteristic features could establish whether the boat was underwater or surfaced at the time of the accident, exploded or collapsed, from the inside or from the outside, in the bow or stern compartment ...
                      I have one main question, why is it that they did not hide from the Norwegians, zealously hide from the Russians?
                  2. Aleksys2
                    Aleksys2 12 August 2012 17: 17
                    +4
                    NASA understands why the right accelerator exploded, and why the left one did not explode in the KGB.
                  3. Nubia2
                    Nubia2 12 August 2012 20: 11
                    +4
                    Quote: slan
                    at the "shuttle" the booster exploded during takeoff, and the "Columbia" collapsed and burned up during landing,

                    do you think "shuttle" is the name of a ship? (by the way - a shuttle, not a shuttle) .You are funny.
                    the accelerator exploded not near a ship called "shuttle", but near a ship called Challenger.
                    all the ships built under the Space Transportation System program were called Space Shuttle - the space shuttle.
                    So both of these dead ships were shuttles.
                    1. slan
                      slan 12 August 2012 20: 32
                      -1
                      Of course Challenger))
                      Are you a teacher?
    2. Aleksys2
      Aleksys2 12 August 2012 15: 24
      +1
      Quote: slan
      It is almost obvious that the death of the crew was just waiting.


      After the explosion, only 23 people remained alive in the stern of the boat. They were led by Lieutenant Captain Dmitry Kolesnikov. Together with other surviving officers, he decided: to remain in the 9th compartment, which had not lost its tightness, and wait for help. “There seems to be no chance. 10-20 percent, ”wrote Dmitry Kolesnikov in the dark. The last entry is dated 15.15 on August 12, that is, after 4 hours the field of explosion. Why didn’t they come out? Investigators say they most likely did not have time. In the 9th compartment, another tragic accident occurred - due to the ingress of water, a regeneration plate explodes, which produces oxygen from carbon dioxide. This happens literally in the hands of Kolesnikov, who dies on the spot. According to experts, the rest of the sailors die after seconds from carbon monoxide poisoning.
      1. slan
        slan 12 August 2012 16: 10
        +1
        It was probably impossible to save them, but it was monstrous that no attempt was made.
        Ostensibly because of the secrecy and lack of funds in the navy. However, after the secret they suddenly forget and let the NATO divers go there, while the secrecy continues to be zealously kept exclusively from its own people.
        1. Aleksys2
          Aleksys2 12 August 2012 17: 20
          +1
          London, August 18, 11:30 GMT, 15:30 Moscow time
          According to Russian media reports, it was announced on Friday that the problem of technical compatibility of the emergency hatch of the Russian nuclear submarine Kursk and the docking port of the British mini-submarine LR-5, which is on board the Norwegian Normand Pioneer, has been "practically" solved. heading to the disaster area.

          Meanwhile, another attempt is being made to dock the rescue module with the Kursk hatch. Earlier 10 such attempts were unsuccessful. True, according to official data, in four cases the rescue vehicle "was close to docking," however, a strong underwater current, as in previous days, did not allow this work to be completed.


          Let me remind you that the delivery of LR-5 took a WEEK!
          1. slan
            slan 12 August 2012 17: 35
            0
            Quote: Aleksys2
            18 of August

            the crew was guaranteed dead, soon the hatch miraculously began to open, the coaming area straightened, and the flow stopped, apparently flowing. The corpses began to get like clockwork.
            I can confuse something for memory again, in Google, of course, more reliable information has been preserved. But was it otherwise?
            1. Aleksys2
              Aleksys2 12 August 2012 17: 54
              +1
              At the very beginning of the operation to lift the bodies, when it became clear that the diver could not squeeze in his equipment through the emergency hatch of the 9th compartment, it was decided to cut the technological hole in the eighth compartment and enter the boat through it. The first to descend to Kursk was the commander of the 328th expeditionary unit of the Navy Hero of Russia Andrei Zvyagintsev. During underwater cutting, a small oxygen bubble was suddenly blown up. It seems to be okay, but this microexplosion was enough to damage the respiratory membrane in the diving helmet. Immediately, sea water begins to flow into the helmet, and this, mind you, occurs at a depth of 100 meters and a temperature of about plus 4 Celsius. There was already water in the eyes when Zvyagintsev manages to swim to the diving bell. Five minutes later, after repairing the membrane, the deep-sea boat returns to Kursk again. Foreign colleagues aboard the rescue ship were in shock.

              London, August 20, 22:10 GMT, 02:10 Moscow time

              On Sunday, Russian media reported that Norwegian divers managed to unscrew the hatch valve on the Kursk submarine, but they were unable to lift the cover.

              Divers confirmed the fact that the docking site was severely deformed - so strong that, as Murmansk Region Governor Yury Evdokimov said in an interview with ORT, the British would not be able to dock on the LR-5 rescue vehicle.
        2. Cynic
          Cynic 12 August 2012 17: 47
          +3
          Quote: slan
          but it is monstrous that no attempt was made.

          There were, but at the level of rumors.
          Do not forget it was 2000!
          There was nobody and there was nothing to save then with their own, hence the Norwegians!
          The rescue service was then in full outage, now not in the know.
          1. Aleksys2
            Aleksys2 12 August 2012 18: 02
            +1
            Quote: Cynic
            There was nobody and there was nothing to save then with their own, hence the Norwegians!


            LIE !!!

            London, August 16, 06:35 GMT, 10:35 Moscow time
            A third attempt to rescue the Kursk crew was made this morning. Two rescue underwater shuttles are again trying to moor to the submarine's escape hatch. Weather conditions in the area of ​​operation did not significantly improve. The storm reaches three points, visibility under water, as they say in the headquarters of the Northern Fleet, is zero.

            The previous two attempts to moor the shuttles were unsuccessful. According to the press secretary of the Russian Navy, until Friday on board the Kursk there will be opportunities for air regeneration, and rescue operations, as the commander-in-chief of the Navy promises, will continue "until a result is achieved." Admiral Kuroyedov says that today he believes more in success


            And further:
            Divers confirmed the fact that the docking site was severely deformed - so strong that, as Murmansk Region Governor Yury Evdokimov said in an interview with ORT, the British would not be able to dock on the LR-5 rescue vehicle.
            1. Cynic
              Cynic 12 August 2012 18: 33
              +2
              Quote: Aleksys2
              LIE !!!

              No need to understand b u k v a l n o Something of course remained, but ...
              I would be glad if these words did not correspond to the truth.
              However, if everything was in perfect order, then why would the Norwegians ?! Why wait for them?

              Reason: The story of a person of a relative who was urgently transferred from the Far East to participate in rescue operations.
              1. Aleksys2
                Aleksys2 12 August 2012 18: 38
                +4
                Our devices could not "stick" to the coaming area.
                12 of August
                20.20 minutes received an order of hourly preparedness for rescue ships.
                But in reality, only Rudnitsky can prepare. SS Georgy Titov is experiencing a terrible shortage of personnel and material resources. It looked like he wasn't even wearing a captain. But it has the AC-36, the newest unit in the entire fleet. It is necessary to somehow deliver him to the place of salvation. On Rudnitsky, he no longer fit. As it became clear later, it would be the right decision to transfer it to Rudnitsky, leaving AS-32 on the shore, but they didn’t.

                13 of August
                00.55 An order is received by the operational duty officer on Rudnitsky’s exit to the site of the alleged death of the Kursk nuclear submarine.
                01.04/XNUMX A ship goes to sea
                03.03 Updated coordinates are transmitted to Rudnitsky, Rudnitsky must follow to Kildin Island to meet the rescue tug SB-523.
                08.59 Rudnitsky crosses the southwestern border of the exercises and establishes contact with the Peter the Great TAKR
                09.32 Rudnitsky finally arrives in the area of ​​the death of Kursk.
                10.32 AS-15 ordered to follow in the area of ​​the death of Kursk.
                10.35 "Peter" found at the bottom two magnetic anomalies
                14.50 Popov took over the general leadership of the rescue operation.
                15.41 (15.30) AC-34 is ready for launch
                16.55 AC-34 began the first dive
                18.15 He found flare on the sonar.
                18.32 Maysak (commander of the AC-34) :. “On the move, 2 knots came into contact with an object that has a rubber case. He fell on the screw when he examined the stern, after which he was forced to emerge abnormally. "The coaming site of the aft emergency rescue hatch was observed through the periscope."
                Visually confirmed that this is Kursk. The commander of the electromechanical warhead of the same type as the Kursk K-410 captain of the 2nd rank Butskikh descends on the apparatus. Visually confirmed that this is Kursk. About this second descent, the story goes that the device was able to dock to the coaming site, but when the water began to pump out, the batteries sat down completely.
                20.15 AS-34 was lifted to Rudnitsky. The batteries on it really ran out. Need to charge. But it takes time. What to do if charging is not a quick process? On the civil TINRO-2, it took 19 hours. On Search-2 13-15. On Prize it seems the same. Everyone understands that every minute is important and they start charging, bypassing instructions, in forced mode. Also preparing for the launch of the AC-32. He must assess the degree of damage to the boat and specify in what conditions it lies.
                22.35 AS-32 launched. Meanwhile, the excitement increases to 3 points. Rudnitsky is already difficult to carry out the descent / rise of the speakers. AC-32 lead to the place of the submarine, but he stubbornly does not see her.
    3. Cynic
      Cynic 12 August 2012 17: 55
      +1
      Quote: slan
      From scuba diving records: 225 m (25.04.2010/XNUMX/XNUMX), Natalya Molchanova

      So what ?
      http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%CC%EE%EB%F7%E0%ED%EE%E2%E0,_%CD%E0%F2%E0%EB%FC%FF_
      %C2%E0%E4%E8%EC%EE%E2%ED%E0
    4. Flooding
      Flooding 13 August 2012 12: 05
      0
      Quote: slan
      From scuba diving records: 225 m (25.04.2010/XNUMX/XNUMX), Natalya Molchanova


      Invalid information. A little over 100 meters (record for women)
  13. mar.tira
    mar.tira 12 August 2012 11: 05
    +9
    "The cause of the explosion was the leakage of the components of the torpedo's fuel, specifically hydrogen peroxide" ?????????????. I will add a bit of doubt about the veracity of the version of the State Commission. There is an interview with the developer of the fuel for the allegedly exploded torpedo. According to the technical characteristics, this fuel mixture in the space where it got, as the investigators say, could not explode in any way. It was necessary at least to consult with him, so that the version of the explosion from the "bad" Russian torpedo, and from the actions of the "bad" would be more plausible "Russian sailors. I learned about the tragedy while on the ship, in the company of FSB officers, and tears welling up in my eyes from impotence and despair for the helplessness of all the technical services of the once mighty fleet.
    1. Strashila
      Strashila 12 August 2012 12: 28
      +3
      It’s a leak, in history there are examples when there was a leak of components of intercontinental missiles in the mines on the boat, a fire ... an explosion and the boat sailed on, losing the covers of the mine, only there were tons of components, no kilo ..
  14. Evil Tatar
    Evil Tatar 12 August 2012 11: 45
    +6
    Quote: slan
    From scuba diving records: 225 m (25.04.2010/XNUMX/XNUMX), Natalya Molchanova

    And what does diving without scuba gear have to do with it?

    At a depth of 108 meters, the pressure difference with the surface is 10,8 atm.
    And the ascent without scuba gear, an unambiguous death - will spit out the lungs on the surface, if it is still in consciousness, because nitrogen already boils in the blood ...

    I believe in the version of the Amer’s torpedo, because on the starboard side into the edge of the bulkhead of the 1st compartment, a hole was visible, as from a cumulative charge ... The body was cut off just in the middle of the hole ...
    Yes, and two boats of adversaries, one of which w / w two days got up for repairs in the norwegian. fiords, and the second got to the base in England. or the USA I don’t remember exactly.

    Eternal memory to our Heroes submariners ...
    1. urich
      urich 12 August 2012 11: 55
      +2
      I agree that this is a torpedo hole
      1. Kars
        Kars 12 August 2012 12: 02
        +4
        Quote: urich
        I agree that this is a torpedo hole


        it’s not even close, the most elementary is why the edges are not shaggy.
        1. urich
          urich 12 August 2012 12: 26
          -2
          why should they be shaggy? there are a lot of reports on the Internet that the Amer torpedo of the MK 48 leaves just such traces ...
          1. Stas57
            Stas57 12 August 2012 12: 36
            +6
            and then dissolves in the casing without causing harm?
            Rugged housing not damaged in this place
            1. REPA1963
              REPA1963 12 August 2012 22: 36
              -2
              In the photo is the left side, and the hole on the right
              1. Aleksys2
                Aleksys2 12 August 2012 23: 27
                +6
                But the solid starboard hull is visible, so to speak, "the wrong side". And where is the trace from the torpedo?
          2. Kars
            Kars 12 August 2012 13: 14
            +7
            Because torpedoes explode on contact with a target, or at a certain distance. There are no penetrating torpedoes.
            Quote: urich
            Internet a lot of messages

            There’s a lot of bullshit in it,
            1. REPA1963
              REPA1963 12 August 2012 22: 37
              -4
              Here you are and voice this nonsense
          3. CC-20a
            CC-20a 12 August 2012 18: 09
            +6
            Quote: urich
            there are many reports on the Internet that the Amer torpedo MK 48 leaves just such traces.
            *hand face*


            That's what the Internet is for, so that all sorts of 6-14 year old children express their stupid guesses.
            One thing is clear that even if there was a hole in the form of a rhombus or 6 finite stars, and any most inconceivable form, then all the same figs on the Internet would have been stated that it was some kind of special torpedo that left traces, and most importantly there’s a lot of rubbish a whole bunch of followers and alas, almost the majority of them.
        2. Drednout
          Drednout 12 August 2012 12: 40
          +6
          Quote: Kars
          it’s not even close, the most elementary is why the edges are not shaggy

          I absolutely agree with Kars. I saw with my own eyes the traces of a torpedo (just a caliber of 400 mm) that got into the floating target - nothing similar even from a distance. Sorry no photo. And crap about a visible torpedo hole - from the Ukrainian chupacabra region.
      2. Strashila
        Strashila 12 August 2012 12: 35
        +2
        The area is small, rather a blow.
    2. slan
      slan 12 August 2012 11: 59
      -1
      Quote: Angry Tatar
      And what does diving without scuba gear have to do with it?

      And besides, the depth for divers is just for children. And then, according to all the television programs, they told us that, apart from NATO divers, no one could go down to the boat. What is it for?
      Quote: Angry Tatar
      And the ascent without scuba gear, an unambiguous death - will spit out the lungs on the surface, if it is still in consciousness, because nitrogen is already boiling in the blood.

      Yes? Well, then edit on Wikipedia that the same Natalya Molchanova appears to have surfaced from 225 meters and spat out her lungs or did not emerge at all, and so for the record .. And only Norwegian divers plunged more than once to a depth of one hundred meters.
      1. Evil Tatar
        Evil Tatar 12 August 2012 12: 30
        +4
        Quote: slan
        Yes? Well, then edit on Wikipedia that the same Natalya Molchanova appears to have surfaced from 225 meters and spat out her lungs or did not emerge at all, and so for the record .. And only Norwegian divers plunged more than once to a depth of one hundred meters.

        I am not a specialist, but I also know that diving with air on the surface and diving with compressed air are not the same thing ...

        In other words - breathe in, dive, at least 1000 m, if you have enough health, and you can emerge with the same air ... How do whales, killer whales, who else are large with thick skin ...
        To be underwater, when atmospheric air is pumped to you through a hose and then emerge without stopping for decompression, in my opinion, it is also possible ... It is also possible to go down in the "bell", there you can swim at depth without scuba gear ...
        But with the air taken with you, the story is completely different ...
        Remember the movie "78 meters", when the hero slowly ascended to the surface along the halyard of the buoy, on which there were musings ...
        That is, after each meter set according to the instructions, it is necessary to stop the ascent and carry out decompression ...
        But there is a border depth (it seems like up to 30 m.), When a quick rise in scuba gear does not very much affect the boiling of nitrogen in the blood ...
        If N. Molchanova did not have enough air and she would have used the help of belaying scuba divers to "breathe", then she would have floated up after that in exactly this, slow way ... Otherwise, the lungs, together with the body, would float alongside along the surface of the okiyana sea .. ...

        Something like this ...
        1. slan
          slan 12 August 2012 12: 55
          -2
          On the film "78 meters" to teach materiel?))
          Well, of course, I just didn’t think about holding my breath, I just smiled at the childish absurdity about the lungs. So there are helium mixtures so that blood does not boil and you will be annoyed, but the materiel just says that even with breathing with ordinary air you can go down to depths of up to 100 meters. Of course, decompression requirements become very stringent.
          Still, I don’t understand yet what was your comment? I brought this as an illustration to the fact that even a non-Norwegian woman without special equipment dived at times great depths and did not flatten and burst when she surfaced, and it is obvious that even in the 90s there was equipment left in the navy that allowed working on at a depth of 100 m. I agree, however, that you probably very smart once even know that floating from great depths should be slower the longer you stay there.
          1. Cynic
            Cynic 12 August 2012 17: 59
            +2
            Quote: slan
            it is obvious that even in the 90s there was equipment left in the navy to work at depths of 100 m.

            Who do you want?
            Where does this information come from that everything was good in our Navy rescue service?
            1. slan
              slan 12 August 2012 18: 08
              -2
              Everything was bad of course, but not to the same extent.
        2. Flooding
          Flooding 13 August 2012 12: 13
          +2
          Sports achievements of Natalia Molchanova: 16-time World Champion and holder of 30 world records:
          30. world record: free immersion in depth - 88 m. Greece, Kalamata, freediving world championship, September 24, 2011
          29. world record: deep diving in flippers - 101 m. Greece, Kalamata, freediving world championship, September 22, 2011
          28. world record: diving in depth in flippers - 100 m. Bahamas, Vertical Blue, April 16, 2011
          27. world record: diving in depth with variable weight (VWT) - 125 m. Greece, Kalamata, freediving world cup, June 16, 2010
          26. world record: long diving in fins - 225 m. Moscow. Moscow Open Cup, April 25, 2010

          There can be no talk of any 225 meters in depth. This is her record for diving in length with flippers.
          The men's record for diving in depth without restrictions is 214 meters.
      2. Drednout
        Drednout 12 August 2012 12: 53
        +9
        Quote: slan
        Yes? Well, then edit on Wikipedia that the same Natalya Molchanova appears to have surfaced from 225 meters and spit out her lungs or not at all, and so for the record ..

        Are you sane? This Molchanova is a trained athlete who dived from the surface and breathed in air at normal pressure. Try to imagine what happens to the lungs when diving. The pressure on the depth of the sunken boat is 5 times higher than in the wheels of your car.
        Quote: slan
        And besides, the depth for divers is just for children

        Judging by such a statement, you are not familiar with the diving business.
        A diver can also receive a caisson when lifting from 25 meters without decompression.
        Leave Wikipedia for acne students, for literate people this is .... an authoritative site is not.
        1. slan
          slan 12 August 2012 13: 16
          -3
          Quote: Drednout
          The pressure on the depth of the sunken boat is 5 times higher than in the wheels of your car.

          Quote: Drednout
          Leave Wikipedia for acne students, for literate people this is .... an authoritative site is not

          Another smart guy)))
          Paphos is less, we are on the Internet ifche. And what, in your "scientific" literature, is there an alternative information about diving depths?
          You can catch anything at least in the bathroom, but outside of Norway there were, are and will be trained and untrained people who are able to work at a depth of 100 meters and this requires by no means unique equipment.
          1. Evil Tatar
            Evil Tatar 12 August 2012 14: 55
            +6
            Quote: slan
            slan
            Do not be stupid ...
            If something doesn’t suit you, then sign up for divers courses, there they will explain to you popularly and by your personal example they will be able to show the consequences of your disbelief ...
            1. slan
              slan 12 August 2012 15: 37
              -3
              Quote: Angry Tatar
              Do not be stupid ...

              Do you seriously consider yourself sharp?
              What kind of disbelief will they explain to me on divers courses?
              I don’t just believe, I have no doubt that there are problems with decompression. But what does this have to do with my posts in any way?
              In our country, in addition to women diving for 200 meters without equipment, there are more than one thousand people able to dive 100 meters, using by no means unique equipment. Is something wrong again? Need to add that they would have to surface slowly?
              Are you normal, I'm sorry? I wrote about the ascent speed somewhere?
          2. Drednout
            Drednout 12 August 2012 18: 09
            +4
            Quote: slan
            There is less pathos, we are on the Internet, though.

            The trouble is that on the Internet, there is no way to answer for your own ... My personal scientific literature is just light diving training during my service in the MCHPV and a couple of navigations in Volgopodvodtruboprovod.
            There were no super suits, the usual gk with a "wallet", three-bolts and twelve-bolts, but max. the depth of work in a three-bolt can not exceed 25 meters. Personally, I had to dive and work only in rivers and reservoirs. Appropriate and depth. But they also worked for 6 hours practically by touch.
            So it’s better than staying around about the bath - sit on your Wikipedia, the place is there. Especially if there are no thoughts in essence.
            1. slan
              slan 12 August 2012 18: 15
              0
              Quote: Drednout
              in a three-bolt coat cannot exceed 25 meters

              Your diving training is lousy, but like everything else, apparently. 25 meters just at 12 bolts, at 3 bolts - up to 60 meters, an expert from Volgopodvodtruboprovod ")))
              1. Drednout
                Drednout 12 August 2012 23: 55
                0
                Quote: slan
                as it appears. 25 meters just at 12 bolts, at 3 bolts - up to 60 meters, an expert from Volgopodvodtruboprovod ")))

                Wikipedia subtracted? Well, of course, I did not manage to become a specialist, and the training promised by the employer at the Kiev diving school did not wait. So the preparation may not be very, everything is in practice.
                What can you say about yours?
                1. Drednout
                  Drednout 13 August 2012 01: 38
                  0
                  Yes, you still know how to read?
                  Quote: Drednout
                  I personally had to dive and work only in rivers and reservoirs

                  There was no skill in great depths, and tolerances in general of up to 20 meters at the medical board were given to our divers, you’re our best one. I won’t even deign.
                  1. slan
                    slan 13 August 2012 01: 48
                    0
                    Quote: Drednout
                    I won’t even deign.

                    Oh, you are so generous))
                    You already zaminusite, amuse the affected complexes, it may feel better, you can not keep it))

                    Maybe in the light of newly discovered circumstances we’ll talk about decompression?)) How could we miss that the Russian diver was the first to enter the submarine. Imagine a RUSSIAN diver at a depth of 100 m !!! where the pressure is 5 times higher than in the wheels of my car! But still in the afternoon we could not imagine it. Sweets dreams.
                    It’s a pity I can no longer give you posts where you could put a minus, relieving your soul.
    3. Strashila
      Strashila 12 August 2012 12: 42
      +1
      You can swim, but the rules with delay at certain depths, the crew does not have scuba gear, but there are protective suits with an autonomous regenerative breathing system, but it is designed for a certain depth.
      1. slan
        slan 12 August 2012 13: 21
        -2
        Most likely, a lot of technical problems would not have allowed to save the crew. But the bottom line is that such attempts have not been made. And for some reason they carefully guarded the secret from the Russians, but the NATO divers were the first to examine the boat.
      2. Evil Tatar
        Evil Tatar 12 August 2012 14: 59
        +4
        Quote: Strashila
        You can swim, but the rules with delay at certain depths, the crew does not have scuba gear, but there are protective suits with an autonomous regenerative breathing system, but it is designed for a certain depth.

        The regeneration system is not intended for emergency exit of the boat.
        There are other suits ISP-60 ...
  15. bamboo
    bamboo 12 August 2012 11: 47
    +2
    Eternal memory of the tragically perished sailors of the submarine "Kursk".
  16. urich
    urich 12 August 2012 11: 53
    -5
    That is why no one published these photos in the article and did not rate these photos?

    I am not special in marine matters, but I personally am deeply convinced that such holes can only be from torpedoes. Why will no one prove me otherwise?
    1. lelikas
      lelikas 12 August 2012 12: 21
      +3
      Has it ever occurred to you that such "holes" are formed when a piece of unfinished metal is torn off?
    2. bulgurkhan
      bulgurkhan 12 August 2012 12: 24
      +3
      In this photo you can see that the sturdy case in the region of the hole you indicated was absolutely not damaged.

      1. urich
        urich 12 August 2012 12: 33
        0
        I will not argue with you. Personally, I SEE A FULLY DESTROYED rugged body in the bow! The topic with this hole has repeatedly been raised in the media. WHY NOBODY has yet given a clear explanation of where it came from? Do you have an answer? I will be pleased to get acquainted
        1. Stas57
          Stas57 12 August 2012 14: 28
          0
          Personally, I SEE A FULLY DESTROYED rugged body in the bow!

          sawed it off!
          it’s a shame not to know such things
          1. slas
            slas 12 August 2012 19: 16
            -4
            Quote: Stas57
            sawed it off!
            it’s a shame not to know such things

            I am ashamed here and ask What kind of sawed file dear tell me?
            1. Kars
              Kars 12 August 2012 19: 22
              +1
              Quote: slas
              What kind of sawed file dear tell me?

              Cable car, or cable car.
        2. lotus04
          lotus04 12 August 2012 14: 30
          -4
          Quote: urich
          WHY NOBODY has yet given a clear explanation of where it came from? Do you have an answer? I will be pleased to get acquainted


          Because right after that, Putin met with then-President Pen - got it. And what they were whispering about there, who promised whom and what, is unknown. The fact that the boat was torpedoed, no doubt. When cutting, the hole most likely should have remained in the bow and the case is sewn - covered. But the error in the calculations and the facts are there. Pictures of the side of the boat with the hole were hidden for a long time, but apparently - the secret always becomes apparent - it still works.
          1. lotus04
            lotus04 13 August 2012 02: 40
            0
            Quote: lotus04
            the secret always becomes apparent - it still works.



            Those Russian newspapers that still managed to publish satellite images of a “suspicious foreign” submarine for repairs in the Norwegian port were immediately pressed to the FSB's nail. This submarine really was an American Memphis and it reached Norway for 7 days instead of the usual 2. Another American boat, Toledo, in zigzags, a non-standard course, left for the USA. Two representatives of the Russian military and political leadership Igor Sergeyev and Ilya Klebanov, who did not follow the path and defended the American trail as a public version, were eventually dismissed.

            Some time later (about two weeks after the incident), all of Russia's previous US debt was canceled, and America granted Russia a new loan of $ 10 billion. Each family of sailors who died on the Kursk received unthinkable compensation of $ 25.
            1. Veter
              Veter 13 August 2012 07: 39
              +3
              Quote: lotus04
              Two representatives of the Russian military and political leadership Igor Sergeyev and Ilya Klebanov, who did not follow the path and defended the American trail as a public version, were eventually dismissed.

              The "American trail" was beneficial to them, since with the carelessness that reigned in the fleet, this was the most convenient excuse.
              I repeat: In the collision of two submarines, one of them receives catastrophic damage, explodes and dies, and the other even leaves under its own power? Doesn't it seem strange?
              1. lotus04
                lotus04 13 August 2012 18: 53
                -2
                Quote: Veter
                They benefited from the "American trail"


                Yes Yes. And the electronics of the American torpedo MK-48, which is configured so that it would hit a submarine at the end of the torpedo compartment, in the area of ​​the command post, where control posts and communication posts are concentrated. In the defeat of which the ship becomes helpless even when staying afloat. They also tuned. Or you don’t know where Kursk has a hole that looks like a hole from the MK-48 torpedo. Which has the ability to beat the light and durable hull, explode inside the torpedo compartment. And who told you that the second boat remained intact? Read carefully.
                1. lotus04
                  lotus04 13 August 2012 19: 05
                  -1
                  Quote: lotus04
                  And who told you that the second boat remained intact? Read carefully.


                  To broaden your horizons.
                  1. Veter
                    Veter 20 August 2012 10: 57
                    0
                    Quote: lotus04
                    And who told you that the second boat remained intact?

                    She only has a damaged nose and she OWN reached the base
                    A collision would have far more serious consequences, to say the least, namely that it would remain lying next to Kursk
                2. Delta
                  Delta 13 August 2012 20: 56
                  0
                  it was you who looked at Wikipedia and read there nonsense, composed by some teenager, immediately after the death of the Kursk. On the same Wikipedia, read the same article about the torpedo, only in the English version. our handles did not get there, and there it is indicated for people with brains that this torpedo hits the ship in the immediate vicinity of it (and certainly without getting into it). Separately, it should be said about the command compartment - if you at least turned on the logic, you yourself would have guessed (if you are so far from the submarines) that the location of the command compartment immediately behind the torpedo (ie in the second) is a feature of the Anteyev. And not on all submarine projects, he is in the second. Or was the MK 48 torpedo designed and tuned specifically against the Anteevs?)))))
                  1. lotus04
                    lotus04 14 August 2012 05: 51
                    -1
                    Dear, do not be rude, but you will not be swindled!
                    1. Delta
                      Delta 14 August 2012 10: 07
                      -2
                      But what is rudeness? that poked his nose into ignorance? unpleasant, I understand. But in fact, there is something to answer? or blurted out so ... for the blooper?
            2. Delta
              Delta 13 August 2012 20: 59
              -2
              tell me, who and how tracked the course of "Toledo" and "Memphis"? you didn’t ask yourself this question?

              Such as Sergeyev did not defend the American trail, but their skins, because the tragedy revealed for many what happened in the Navy for many years
              1. lotus04
                lotus04 14 August 2012 05: 35
                0
                Quote: Delta
                Such as Sergeyev did not defend the American trace, but their skins


                Of course of course! Sergeyev is to blame for everything. Well, who else? After all, Putin at that time was resting in Sochi. And Sergeyev managed to steal the entire fleet! Indeed, in the rest of the army and aviation, we have complete order. And of course, how could we then think of the Americans ?! They were then in our best friends! At their request, so much good did the army! So many promising developments prosrali and gave them! What is only one F-35 worth, which is made in the image and likeness of the Yak - 140th, practically gifted to them.
                1. Delta
                  Delta 14 August 2012 10: 09
                  0
                  all the people are to blame. And since this people has leaders, they must answer. In this case, the leaders of the fleet. Do you think everyone should stay with their own? Incidentally, of the 11 officials directly responsible for the disaster, not one was injured. Dismissed admirals moved to new, even warmer posts. And even some fell into deputies
                  1. lotus04
                    lotus04 14 August 2012 15: 49
                    0
                    Quote: Delta
                    And since this people has leaders, they must answer.


                    Dear, I have not seen a government in this country since the times of the USSR! I have seen and see only managers and brokers parasitizing on the remnants of the industry from Soviet times. - "To whom the gas! To whom the oil! Come in cheaper!" Urrrryayaya !!!
                    1. Delta
                      Delta 14 August 2012 18: 11
                      -1
                      and if so, what do you suggest? no one to answer for anything? it was just about responsibility
          2. Delta
            Delta 13 August 2012 21: 00
            -2
            can you find out where the information about the meeting of presidents immediately after the tragedy?
            1. lotus04
              lotus04 14 August 2012 05: 08
              0
              Well, since you are so smart and read Wikipedia, then justify this gesture of "goodwill" by the state, which considers Russia to be enemy number 1 and which is considered the biggest debtor in the world.

              Some time later (about two weeks after the incident), all of Russia's previous US debt was canceled, and America granted Russia a new loan of $ 10 billion. Each family of sailors who died on the Kursk received unthinkable compensation of $ 25.
              1. Delta
                Delta 14 August 2012 10: 11
                -1
                no, smart here only you and any event of course will tie to that disaster. Do you have concrete evidence? Of course not. And leave your speculations prompted by magazine readers
                1. lotus04
                  lotus04 14 August 2012 15: 44
                  0
                  Quote: Delta
                  Do you have concrete evidence?


                  I will listen to yours with great pleasure. I wonder what kind of magazine bells inspired your arguments! I would like to read the full list of perpetrators of the Kursk disaster. Please announce the names of all 11 people.
                  1. Delta
                    Delta 14 August 2012 18: 14
                    -1
                    my evidence? evidence of what? the fact that it was not torpedoed ??? this means that I will have to refute the non-existent, which is almost impossible. Or prove to you that debt relief and tragedy are not connected? and I can’t prove it, but I don’t bind it together, but you. So prove that these two events are directly related and if connected, then where did you get this information.
                    Regarding the 11 perpetrators, given that you gave the exact number, you yourself are familiar with the official conclusions of the commission and the actions that followed. However, since I was asked, I will bring those who are more or less guilty, the people who in August 2000 held the following posts in the Navy:

                    - Acting Chief of the General Staff of the Navy;
                    - Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the Navy for Operation and Repair;
                    - Deputy chief of combat training of the Navy;
                    - head of the Navy anti-submarine weapons department;
                    - Chief of Staff of the Northern Fleet;
                    - Deputy Commander of the Northern Fleet for operation and maintenance;
                    - Chief of combat training of the Northern Fleet;
                    - Head of the Mine and Torpedo Directorate of the Northern Fleet;
                    - Commander of the 1st Fleet of Submarines of the Northern Fleet;
                    - Chief of Staff of the 1st Northern Fleet Submarine Flotilla;
                    - Deputy Commander of the 1st Flotilla of Submarines for Operation and Repair;
                    - the flagship specialist of mine-torpedo business of the 1st submarine flotilla;
                    - commander of the 7th division of the 1st flotilla of submarines;
                    - Deputy Commander of the 7th Division of the 1st Flotilla of Submarines.

                    Hopefully, do not force to justify the degree of guilt of everyone - a multi-book will work out. The main culprit - Popov became a deputy after resignation. Cool resignation.
                    1. Aleksys2
                      Aleksys2 14 August 2012 18: 43
                      0
                      Quote: Delta
                      The main culprit is Popov


                      What is his fault?
                      1. Delta
                        Delta 14 August 2012 18: 49
                        0
                        Yes, nothing. In general, no business. That's it, the conversation is over, for there is no point
      2. Reddragon
        Reddragon 12 August 2012 19: 15
        0
        Quote: bulgurkhan
        In this photo you can see that the sturdy case in the region of the hole you indicated was absolutely not damaged.

        In this photo you can see that that part is already cut. Or scroll down 50 comments and look at the picture ...
      3. REPA1963
        REPA1963 12 August 2012 22: 40
        -5
        Once again for medveput, on the left photo and a hole on the starboard side
      4. lotus04
        lotus04 13 August 2012 06: 16
        +1
        Quote: bulgurkhan
        This photo shows


        God forbid at least one Pen - Dos boat to be seen in this form. As on our "bones" these ubl - yudki (selling skins) love to dance, and at the same time and to earn extra money.
      5. crazyrom
        crazyrom 16 August 2012 05: 43
        0
        Quote: bulgurkhan
        absolutely not hurt.


        And so it seems to me ...
    3. dmitreach
      dmitreach 12 August 2012 14: 03
      +1
      It was believed that this is a technological cut made by divers when raising a cruiser
      1. slas
        slas 13 August 2012 00: 50
        +1
        those holes that turned in the hull of the submarine to lift it - they are all located on the upper plane of the submarine and have no relation to the inlet. These holes for lifting are not even visible in the picture, not a single one, and they were made on the upper deck of 26 holes. And this hole in the "Kursk" is located even below the centerline in the direction of the rear - obliquely forward and could not have anything to do with the rise of Kursk.
    4. Kars
      Kars 12 August 2012 14: 51
      0
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaKM35osvnM
      Quote: urich
      that such holes can only be from torpedoes

      aha
    5. Kars
      Kars 12 August 2012 14: 52
      +5
      Quote: urich
      that such holes can only be from torpedoes.

      aha
      1. Stas57
        Stas57 12 August 2012 15: 18
        +3
        exactly right that way
        wassat

      2. Reddragon
        Reddragon 12 August 2012 19: 42
        -3
        Quote: Kars
        aha

        Didn’t his nose rip to shreds?
        1. Kars
          Kars 12 August 2012 19: 46
          +6
          Who should he? If you see Kursk Tokak on the photos shown, the evidence of the torpedo strike is not a torn sheathing, but a rather tidy hole with swarmed edges, round in shape.
    6. REPA1963
      REPA1963 12 August 2012 22: 38
      -7
      Well done plus you, how did you putinoids
  17. Maks111
    Maks111 12 August 2012 12: 04
    0
    I think that after all there was a place of clash with the Americans. A torpedo attack is unlikely, the Americans, at least dudes, but they would have decided on such a thing. Rather, they spied on ours and accidentally collided, which caused a torpedo explosion. It was more like that. Not without reason, after all, then immediately officials of the American defense industry came to us. Yes, and some kind of toli was issued to us.
    1. lotus04
      lotus04 13 August 2012 02: 50
      -1
      Quote: Max111
      I think that after all there was a place of clash with the Americans


      They showed that there were two American submarines in the area of ​​maneuvers. They were on special missions, following the maneuvers. One Memphis submarine was sailing under cover of another Toledo boat in the shade. It seems like the only one on the screens of all radars and sonars. Then, Memphis emerged from under its leading boat in order to better explore the launch of a ballistic missile from the Kursk without calculating the course and distance. The Americans were on a collision course and collided head-on with ours. They walked with their whole body through the most vulnerable second compartment of the Kursk. But the worst happened later. On the second American boat, Toledo, watching the whole picture, the captain decided that the Russians somehow attacked the Memphis and without hesitation, fired a torpedo at the Kursk. The torpedo hit directly in the weakened part at the junction of the second and third compartments and exploded inside. Our planes, in fresh tracks, were fixed oil stains on the water at the rate of a foreign submarine leaving the scene.

      It turns out that ours drove these two American submarines to all events and knew for sure that they were Americans on observation. After the collision and attack on the Kursk, Minister of Defense Sergeyev took two anti-submarine squadrons into the air. Reported south to Putin immediately. And at the same time, the Americans got in touch with Putin. After liaising with the Americans, Putin recalled the planes and, in the end, Putin (or his team) decided to stay in the south so as not to provoke tension. Everything, it turns out, was on the edge of the abyss.

      The CIA director arrived in Moscow urgently for consultations. All this time, Putin was constantly in touch with Bill Clinton.

      As a result, no one was allowed into the boat, although the whole world was offering qualified help. After all, we all thought that you could save someone. A few days later, we agreed to let the Danes go, but with a strict order not to swim to the bow of the boat. The Danes managed to open the hatch in the eighth compartment, found several posthumous records, and confirmed that no one survived inside the boat. After that, the work of our divers continued. They no longer cared about the boat itself, its reactor and the dead sailors. It turns out that from the bottom near the Kursk, pieces and fragments of the American Memphis were urgently removed.
      1. Delta
        Delta 13 August 2012 21: 02
        0
        Bravo for fantasy. For knowledge, the unit so far
        1. slas
          slas 14 August 2012 18: 59
          -1
          case
          Quote: Delta
          Bravo for fantasy. For knowledge, the unit so far

          Do you have reinforced concrete data as it really was?
          1. Delta
            Delta 14 August 2012 19: 07
            0
            no reinforced concrete. There are believable
            1. slas
              slas 14 August 2012 19: 11
              0
              Quote: Delta
              There are believable

              If there is please bring pzhlst And leave the minus ball to myself I do not accept on Tuesdays
              1. Delta
                Delta 14 August 2012 19: 35
                0
                and I don’t serve on Tuesdays - read Valery Ryazantsev "In the wake of death". A professional submariner who was on the government commission substantiated his arguments both from a technical point of view and from a logical point of view. He also described the prerequisites that led or could lead to the disaster. And no fantasies. I agree with him 100%, and therefore it will be superfluous to quote him.

                By the way, about the cons - are you sure I was minus? Did you receive a notification about this? that's how you got used to - to judge something unfounded and peremptorily. As for the topic of the article
                1. slas
                  slas 14 August 2012 20: 06
                  0
                  Quote: Delta
                  read Valery Ryazantsev "In wake formation after death".

                  thanks I will read, I will answer (if it is interesting to continue)
                  Quote: Delta
                  that's how you got used to - to judge something unfounded and peremptorily.

                  100 percent refers to you (no offense) I also receive information both from the media from the press and books, and also from friends of people who own information about this tragedy too. Well, something like this
                  1. Delta
                    Delta 14 August 2012 20: 13
                    0
                    in what? I was talking about "backing tracks", but what are you talking about? justify specifically
                    1. slas
                      slas 14 August 2012 20: 48
                      0
                      Quote: Delta
                      I was talking about "backing tracks
                      if so then a confusion occurred --- I apologize
  18. Strashila
    Strashila 12 August 2012 12: 18
    +2
    The fact that the official version is complete nonsense, no one needs to prove. To detonate the ammunition is not so easy. 2 minutes of fire, this is a pretty decent time to make a decision. It turns out that the crew was smoking and didn’t do anything, automatic fire extinguishing The main postulates of the case, the torpedo, the boat was in a bow-to-ground position. Let's even assume that everything started with a torpedo, the torpedo tube remained in the open position (it was turned around by an explosion, the commission says) inside the boat. The compartment should be in position closed, the bulkhead is designed for pressure from the outside. The conclusion is that during the explosion of the main ammunition it was supposed to take out the cover of the dashboard from the outside, from the inside it was in the open position. And part of the explosion was supposed to go outside ... and this is not such a quiet bunch under water, and they want to assure us that not a single sonar speaker heard anything. But what brought the boat to the fore position in the ground is no answer, and this is the main reason explosion in the back of the boat. But the combination of a blow to the hull of the boat from the outside with another boat (the trail was shown in underwater shooting) could lead to loss of control and, as a result, an impact on the ground, into which it simply buried its bow. This coincided with the moment of loading the torpedo , it did not catch fire, but detonated, rather close to thermobaric ignition, given the fuel, which led to the detonation of the main ammunition.
    1. Alexander K.
      Alexander K. 12 August 2012 18: 37
      +3
      Reread the version of Vice Admiral Ryazantsev in the article.
      I happened to communicate with knowledgeable people from the Northern Fleet, they said exactly the same thing, with one "but" - there is a difference of opinion about the cause of the torpedo explosion in the TA. Collision? Perhaps harmless in a normal situation, at the time of firing a potentially faulty torpedo from a TA, it played a fatal role.
      And then everything is more or less clear - the explosion of a torpedo in the TA, the flow of water, the trim on the nose (there is no control anymore), the impact on the ground, the detonation of the entire ammunition, the catastrophic destruction of several compartments, the remains of the boat on the ground that survived are collected in the 9th compartment , some time there, maybe hope for salvation, maybe get ready for the exit, and then a fire for the most commonplace in the submarine fleet reason - chemical regeneration + oil.
      Eternal memory to sailors.
      1. dmitreach
        dmitreach 12 August 2012 20: 48
        0
        Alexander K., so he decided to count in the comments the people who read Ryazantsev ... There are more teenagers - adherents of conspiracy theories and people with Faith in the Loch Ness monsters ...
        Eternal memory to sailors.
  19. Urion
    Urion 12 August 2012 12: 23
    -5
    The Americans of the dog drowned Kursk, and ours most likely demanded some kind of economic concessions. Under the USSR, they would simply drown one boat of amers
    1. gennadi
      gennadi 12 August 2012 15: 16
      0
      I'm afraid you are right.
  20. Stas57
    Stas57 12 August 2012 12: 30
    +4
    slan
    Obviously, the subsequent babble about the possibility of carrying out work exclusively by Norwegian (obviously military at the main duty station of NATO) divers is an absurd and miserable lie


    And besides, the depth for divers is just for children. And then, according to all the television programs, they told us that, apart from NATO divers, no one could go down to the boat. What is it for?

    deep-sea divers have always been piece goods.
    To maintain qualifications, they must have at least 15 deep-sea descents to depths from 60 to 100 m per year.

    and now you have a question, how many in the 2000 year in the Northern Fleet, there were divers divers authorized to work.
    how much in the country?
    How much can they be assembled and delivered?
    Who did not give such an order?
    Where did the best school of deep-sea divers in the Northern Fleet in 2000 go?

    and then we’ll see who is to blame, Yeltsin, Putin, admirals, Americans ..
    1. slan
      slan 12 August 2012 13: 26
      -4
      Yes, 100 meters, it’s not good news what deep-sea. For the sake of maintaining military secrets, one could sacrifice non-compliance with formal standards. But what if 15 turns around the earth per year were necessary to maintain the astronaut’s qualifications according to standards? Would you wait for the Norwegians to fly into space.?
      1. Stas57
        Stas57 12 August 2012 15: 23
        +2
        Of course, of course, you probably have all 500?

        For the sake of maintaining military secrets, one could sacrifice non-compliance with formal standards.

        what are you talking about?

        But what if 15 turns around the earth per year were necessary to maintain the astronaut’s qualifications according to the standards? Would you wait for the Norwegians to fly into space.?


        what are you talking about?
        1. slan
          slan 12 August 2012 16: 31
          -2
          Quote: Stas57
          what are you talking about?

          It was possible to carry out work without attracting foreign divers. Less effective, later, more expensive, but possible and quite uncomplicated. Since 100 meters for diving operations, the depth is never difficult.
          Quote: Stas57
          Of course, of course, you probably have all 500?

          Why not 600? In fact, can you speak up?
          1. Cynic
            Cynic 12 August 2012 18: 15
            +1
            Quote: slan
            Like 100 meters for diving, the depth is never difficult.

            What is your specialty?
            1. slan
              slan 12 August 2012 19: 09
              -2
              Quote: Cynic
              What is your specialty?

              That is, not being a loader, I have no right to talk about the difficulty of unloading a carload loaded with 70 kg bags. Is this possible in Russia, or do Norwegian movers certainly need?
              1. Cynic
                Cynic 13 August 2012 16: 40
                +1
                Quote: slan
                I have no right to reason

                You have to argue, no to judge.
    2. Alexander K.
      Alexander K. 12 August 2012 18: 50
      +1
      And what could a diver do ???

      The only hope was for the rescue apparatus, which could not hermetically "stick" to the coaming of the 9th compartment hatch ... and not because the comms were damaged.
      Although, according to eyewitnesses, at the time of the operation with unsuccessful attempts to dock, there were no one alive.
      1. slan
        slan 12 August 2012 19: 05
        0
        There is a diving bell for this, and a diver, open the hatch or help the same device dock. The bottom line is that we were then announced that the technical means of salvation, including we don’t have divers. Then the truth suddenly turned out that there were devices, but the platform bent and even divers in Russia, capable of diving 100 meters, were found a miracle.
        There were just too many lies. Personally, the official version is more likely for me. Nevertheless, all the damage is really localized in the first compartment, and the boat would hardly have sank so sharply at such a depth if it had been in the surface position when it got into the nose. Collision detonation also seems unlikely. But there were too many lies.
        1. Alexander K.
          Alexander K. 12 August 2012 19: 32
          +6
          Personally, I stick to Ryazantsev’s version - the explosion of a torpedo in a TA and detonation after hitting the ground. About the American torpedoes and the Flurry from Peter the Great, the versions are simply funny, designed for the layman.

          I confess that for many years I believed that the site was bent until just recently I heard a refutation from a participant in the events. No divers could help the device dock, if the design of the docking station does not provide tightness.
          1. slan
            slan 12 August 2012 19: 58
            +1
            I wrote that I don’t really believe that it was possible to save someone. But I am outraged that the first days did not try to do this, and through state channels announced the impossibility of even an elementary immersion in the submarine.
            And once again I will notice about the diving bell, there the tightness of the dock is not needed, it seems.
            Well, about the divers, I’ll remind you once again, I mentioned because I remember very well Putin’s powerful propaganda in the early days of the tragedy, that there are no divers in our country who can go down to the sunken submarine to stupidly relegate with the surviving crew, not to mention the vehicles . Very similar to the fact that they were just waiting for everyone to die. Then the apparatus and divers even appeared, but 2-3 people, the rest are racially faithful Norwegians. The question is why?
            Here is a typical clipping from an article from that year:
            So what happened to the Northern Fleet rescuers? Where are they now? The "MK" correspondent managed to meet with one of those who resigned from "Altai" several years ago - Valery Laizans. This person has experience working at a depth of 376 meters.

            “When officials say on TV that we don’t have specialists in our country who can work at a depth of 100 meters, I’m just shocked,” says Laizans.

            It turns out that if you do not take into account the people who still wear marine epaulets, then there are about five thousand retirees in the country who have the necessary experience working underwater. Everyone who even served as a deep-sea diver and worked without problems at a depth of 160 meters

            Nevertheless, I did not dream that we were driven around by the ears about the impossibility of the work of Russian divers at a depth of 100m. Therefore, I am indignant at such a blatant and frank lie, and there is no faith in the official version, although it is the most plausible.
            1. Aleksys2
              Aleksys2 12 August 2012 23: 52
              -1
              Quote: slan
              But I am outraged that the first days did not try to do it


              Chukchi is not a reader, Chukchi is a writer.
              Especially for you I will repeat:

              12 of August
              20.20 minutes received an order of hourly preparedness for rescue ships.

              13 of August
              00.55 An order is received by the operational duty officer on Rudnitsky’s exit to the site of the alleged death of the Kursk nuclear submarine.
              01.04/XNUMX A ship goes to sea
              09.32 Rudnitsky finally arrives in the area of ​​the death of Kursk.
              10.35 "Peter" found at the bottom two magnetic anomalies
              15.41 (15.30) AC-34 is ready for launch
              16.55 AC-34 began the first dive

              About divers. Tell me, what could divers do in this case to save the crew?

              AC-32-The purpose of an autonomous underwater working apparatus is: rescue personnel of sunken submarines and carry out the necessary work in the baffles of emergency-rescue devices together with the SPS pr. 1837 and other ships; installation and fixing of means for indicating the location of the sunken submarine and equipment for various purposes; point of various flooded objects for lifting by cargo vehicles of the carrier vessel and lifting goods weighing up to 500 kg (due to its own buoyancy); destruction of sunken objects or the failure of their equipment; additional search of sunken submarines or other objects after detection by search forces and their inspection ..
              1. slan
                slan 13 August 2012 00: 25
                -3
                Quote: Aleksys2
                Chukchi is not a reader, Chukchi is a writer.

                It is about you. I am already tired of repeating each of the putinoids:
                In the early days of the tragedy, the Russian leadership, represented by the media under control, launched an information campaign about the inability to not only save the crew, but also to conduct an elementary inspection of the boat without involving NATO specialists. A few days later. when the crew was guaranteed to die suddenly there were deep-sea vehicles and even those same Russian divers whose extinction we were hammered with from all the media. I am very glad that you learned to copy-paste, I hope, someday learn to comprehend the selected text.
                Find and ask someone close to you to explain (if you yourself are not able) what information the widows of the victims were given at that very moment, not to mention information for the people. Maybe then it will finally come and there are divers and whether they tried to save someone there or just quietly examined the damage, waited for the knocking to stop, after which the platform suddenly straightened and the hatch opened. Why was it at the highest level to lie that there were no means of salvation? Yes, because there was no rescue operation, they did not ask for help not only abroad, but also inside the country, they did not try to look for funds, but immediately announced the impossibility of working at "such" depth. And the depth turned out to be funny.
                1. Aleksys2
                  Aleksys2 13 August 2012 00: 33
                  -1
                  RESCUE WORKS STARTED AUGUST 13 !!
                  Quote: slan
                  In the early days of the tragedy, the Russian leadership, represented by the media under control, launched an information campaign about the inability to not only save the crew, but also to conduct an elementary inspection of the boat without involving NATO specialists.


                  Give an example of publications!

                  Air Force, London, August 16, 18:35 GMT, 22:35 Moscow time
                  A Kremlin spokesman said Putin had held talks with Clinton about the fate of the Kursk submarine sailors. The two presidents 'conversation lasted about 25 minutes, and, according to Reuters, Clinton reaffirmed the United States' willingness to help Russia in the rescue operation.

                  Immediately after the end of these telephone conversations, Putin gave orders to accept any help in saving the submariners, no matter who they came from. Earlier, the command of the Russian fleet claimed to be able to do on its own.

                  Hopes that the crew is still alive reappeared after Vice-Admiral Vladislav Ilyin, First Deputy Chief of the Navy General Staff, said live on RTR television channel that the submariners were again responding to rescue signals.

                  Tonight, the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy, Admiral Kuroyedov, announced that the supply of oxygen on board the boat should be sufficient until 25 August. The admiral is confident that the crew is "alive and fighting for the ship's buoyancy."

                  Other statements were less optimistic. Russian Navy press secretary Igor Dygalo explained in an interview with ORT that the difficulties in rescuing the Kursk's crew were caused by "non-standard damage" to the boat. That is, it is already obvious that the submariners will not be able to get out on their own, and salvation can only come from outside.

                  At the same time, at the time of preparation of this material, the British rescue boat LR5 was still in Norway, since it was not clear how best to deliver it to the Kursk. If the LR5 travels under its own power, it will approach the accident site only after two days. And then, apparently, it might be too late.


                  Apparently, you read only what you write, other comments, by definition, do not interest you. And then, where did you get the idea that I am Putin? The fact that I catch you on not knowing the issue does not apply me to the faithful Putiners. Once again, you need to be more thorough, more thorough, and Google will help you.
                  1. slan
                    slan 13 August 2012 00: 49
                    -2
                    And, of course, you are 13 years old. It explains everything. I don't need to google and copy-paste, I remember these events very well. First, they announced that the crew is alive and well, they are being given oxygen and tomorrow they will be raised, then they announced that we were joking at you, neither of us nor the diver has a single remaining in the country, not only technology, but "worlds"? ? ", and the" worlds "are not suitable for this, they were made for Spielberg and we have no idea what happened to this boat, either we found it, or our rusty instruments are buggy. A few days later, "okay, we still agree to allow our overseas masters to save our cattle-subjects if there is anyone else left." NATO servicemen came under the guise of peaceful Norwegian divers and took out the corpses, the first compartment was thoroughly destroyed with a control detonation and finally the version was announced to us.
                    Something like that, young man, it was.
                    1. Aleksys2
                      Aleksys2 13 August 2012 00: 59
                      0
                      Quote: slan
                      Something like that, young man, it was.

                      You flatter me, I’m far from being a boy. I also remember everything perfectly. And Dygalo’s statements too. But after that, I talked a lot with the participants in the events, and surface and submariners. And to say that the crew did not try to save, to put it mildly, is not correct. If you carefully read my posts (which I doubt), you noticed that our Diver was the first to board Kursk, both our and Norwegian divers worked.
                      1. slan
                        slan 13 August 2012 01: 09
                        -1
                        You see, you remember. Of course they tried, but how could people be forbidden to try? I'm talking about leadership behavior. Why was all this lie about the absence of divers and equipment in the country? Look at how people got it into their heads then, how many comments they wrote to me with this decompression. And it turns out that hours after the tragedy, underwater vehicles descended to the Kursk, and the divers must have descended, but at that very time all of us and even the widows of the dead were lied to something completely different. And Putin sneered with "she drowned" when everything was clear for a long time, except perhaps without details. The boat then stranded, in fact, sank among its own fleet, and we were presented with this as a kind of great secret that only the best NATO specialists can uncover.
                2. Drednout
                  Drednout 13 August 2012 01: 20
                  +1
                  Quote: slan
                  Maybe then the divers finally get there and whether they tried to save someone there or just quietly examined the damage, waited for the cessation of knocks, after which the platform suddenly straightened and the hatch opened. Why at the highest level was to lie that there is no means of salvation?

                  It is somehow necessary to be a diver, something to calmly climb around the boat, waiting for the cessation of knocks !! ?? Maybe I myself am certainly not an ace, but I can’t imagine any of the divers - specialists who have personally known to me that from Kronstadt, that from Sevastopol, who are inactive over the hatch, for which the submariners die !!!
                  Here certainly bend sir!
                  Quote: slan
                  I am already tired of repeating each of the putinoids

                  For information - I have an attitude to Putin, like the Russian Orthodox Church, to abortion.
                  1. slan
                    slan 13 August 2012 01: 35
                    -2
                    Quote: Drednout
                    but I can’t imagine any of the divers

                    Yes, I’m just about the fact that it was not by chance that they announced to us that we suddenly do not have divers. By the way, do you believe that the FSB did not have full-time deep-sea divers, at least to inspect communication cables, or do you think the government communications collapsed in the 90s?
                    Can you imagine that people fight in war and execute sentences and people dropped the bomb on Hiroshima and not robots?
                    1. Drednout
                      Drednout 13 August 2012 12: 43
                      +1
                      Quote: slan
                      By the way, do you believe that the FSB did not have full-time deep-sea divers, at least to inspect communication cables, or do you think the government communications collapsed in the 90s?

                      Fighting swimmers are for sure, as well as bombers, but rescuers are only naval and they are incapable of such vileness.
                      Do not look for a black cat in a dark room.
                3. Cynic
                  Cynic 13 August 2012 16: 36
                  +1
                  Quote: slan
                  the leadership of the Russian Federation in the face of controlled media

                  This case is not about the echo of Moscow and others like them?
                  Yes
                  waited for the cessation of knocks

                  I do not advise you to meet with those who are waiting for the cessation of knocks firsthand. I do not advise .
              2. Drednout
                Drednout 13 August 2012 01: 24
                +1
                Quote: Aleksys2
                About divers. Tell me, what could divers do in this case to save the crew?

                Alexei, you need to have your namesake Ruswolfa wait for comments. He’s just on a quiet diving. Real ocean. Explains this can more clearly. I have only emotions left.
                1. slan
                  slan 13 August 2012 01: 40
                  -1
                  I was tired of repeating that they probably would not have saved anyone, but at least gave more detailed information about the inspection than underwater vehicles.
                  Well, the diving bell, again, does not require sealing, like, I'm not an expert of course.
                  So still, the question is not this, but why was this a lie?
  21. 37dmds
    37dmds 12 August 2012 12: 39
    +3
    Article plus. But Lyachin was a commander. Captains on VolgaBalt and tugboats.
    1. Drednout
      Drednout 12 August 2012 13: 13
      +2
      Good memory to the guys!
  22. mar.tira
    mar.tira 12 August 2012 12: 48
    +3
    Torpedo developers do not agree with the conclusions of the commission and believe that the cause of the torpedo explosion is external impact

    The explosion of the fuel components of the 65-76 torpedo, which killed the Kursk nuclear submarine, could have occurred only as a result of external impact on the torpedo, Stanislav Proshkin, director of the Gidropribor Central Research Institute, told Interfax.

    "We objectively believe that there was an external impact on the torpedo," he said. "There is information that it could have been a local fire."

    In particular, noted Proshkin, "on top of the torpedo in front of the ballast tank there are changes in the structure of the metal from the temperature effect." According to a study carried out by the Central Research Institute "Prometey", which has the most competent specialists in the field of materials science, "clear estimates of this temperature - 550-570 degrees Celsius" were obtained.

    The nuclear submarine "Kursk" had two autonomous, independent control systems. "And any event associated with an increase in pressure inside the tank compartment, an increase in the temperature of peroxide, an increase in the level of oxygen in the gap between the torpedo and the torpedo tube is recorded," Proshkin added.

    “If an increase in temperature is noted in the torpedo tube or on the rack, the crew has six hours to cope with this emergency,” he said. “Including using a special system for draining peroxide overboard if an increase in the temperature of the torpedo on the rack is noted. In the event of a fire, the boat has a powerful fire extinguishing system that instantly drops tens of tons of water. If a torpedo is in a torpedo tube, it is simply fired and the water environment localizes it. "

    The head of Gidropribor also called an absurd version that the cause of the torpedo's thermal explosion could have been a breach of its tightness as a result of a fall that allegedly occurred during loading. "When testing torpedoes, we throw such a torpedo from a height of 10 meters onto a plate, a rail and a pin," he noted, "and there were no emergency situations."

    In the course of the investigation into the case of the Kursk sinking, 18 versions were put forward
  23. ivanovbg
    ivanovbg 12 August 2012 12: 52
    +2
    I read Ryazantsev's book "In wake formation after death". Much has become clear, and alas, the explosion is quite logical and inevitable.
    Read this book, it explains a lot.
    1. dmitreach
      dmitreach 12 August 2012 20: 31
      0
      The third comment on the book "In the wake of death" and no discussion. And this is with 7 views of the article! People, this is not an advertisement for a book, I don’t get copyrights, but they would ask! Everything is stated there in clear language.
  24. derk365
    derk365 12 August 2012 12: 53
    +1
    Everlasting memory !!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=5voSKV-nEwE

    After what happened, they will lie for a long time.
    Will tell if the commission how difficult it is to die. !!!
  25. vostok-47
    vostok-47 12 August 2012 12: 55
    -11
    I have a slightly different theory ... In my opinion, we simply blew up the shipmarine without a crew, so as not to damage the reactors ... You ask why? And do you think a boat is worth the state debt of Russia ??? How did we force the US to pay it? Very simple! For starters, we attracted the attention of Americans, so that at the time of the tests, there were Chinese together with Putin (the sale of the Flurry to the Chinese would greatly undermine the American fighting spirit in the vastness of the Pacific Ocean). And then we provoked an American submarine to attack and from above just clicked on a button ... and there is neither Kursk nor public debt .. The crew most likely lives now somewhere in the vastness of our homeland.
    What brought me to this idea? The answer is very simple: an interview with Putin with how he was there - Stephen King if I am not mistaken ... What kind of person will go to America, knowing what he will be asked about ??? His answer to the question "What happened to Kursk" he answered "She drowned" with a certain grin .... Ambiguously not true?
    1. lelikas
      lelikas 12 August 2012 13: 05
      +5
      I would-only - For, but I saw the widows of the crew, unfortunately you are wrong.
  26. mar.tira
    mar.tira 12 August 2012 13: 06
    +3
    And besides, in the case there are results of experiments conducted by specialists of the RSC “Applied Chemistry”. And they show that: “... ignition in a torpedo tube occurs only in the case of a drop of spillage of hydrogen peroxide,” and further: “... maintaining a fire in a confined space of a torpedo tube is possible only when a peroxide is spilled at a speed of about 200 grams per give me a sec".
    And the point here is that a more powerful jet simply extinguishes the fire, and with a lower pressure of hydrogen peroxide, the Fire itself suffocates - there is enough air inside the torpedo tube for only 1,5 seconds of burning. And here you do not need to be either a deputy prime minister or a prosecutor general, but you need enough knowledge in chemistry for the 5th grade: regular oxidant supply is required to maintain combustion in a confined space.

    , during the experiments it was also found out that the fuel in our torpedoes is very resistant to high temperature and even with strong heating it does not explode for a very long time (which one is to be kept quiet so as not to tempt foreign intelligence). And that means, if you seriously adhere to the official version, it should be imagined that at the time of the Kursk accident, a fire in the 4th torpedo tube blasts, fire sirens roar, sensors flash, but none of the crew lead with their ears, and the sailors in this time they calmly light cigarettes from the red-hot torpedo tube cover ... Something is awkward so far with official conclusions. It seems that this is not a torpedo, and the official version flows at all seams

    Well, this is for a lover of Western advanced technology. , during the experiments it was also found out that the fuel in our torpedoes is very resistant to high temperature and even with strong heating it does not explode for a very long time (which one is to be kept quiet so as not to tempt foreign intelligence). And that means, if you seriously adhere to the official version, it should be imagined that at the time of the Kursk accident, a fire in the 4th torpedo tube blasts, fire sirens roar, sensors flash, but none of the crew lead with their ears, and the sailors in this time they calmly light cigarettes from the red-hot torpedo tube cover ... Something is awkward so far with official conclusions. It seems that this is not a torpedo, and the official version flows at all seams
  27. Prosto vovochka
    Prosto vovochka 12 August 2012 13: 09
    +5
    two of the most terrible and groinish professions are submariners and miners. The bottom and the dungeon are all to them.
  28. mar.tira
    mar.tira 12 August 2012 13: 16
    +1
    Here is a link about an independent disaster investigation: -http: //left.ru/2002/leto/kursk.html. Anyone interested to read.
    1. Eraser
      Eraser 12 August 2012 13: 47
      -1
      I recommend turning on the brain and re-reading this pearl of the journalist's thought, namely the chapter "The Mysterious Spot".
    2. dmitreach
      dmitreach 13 August 2012 16: 57
      +1
      From the above "independent nonsense" it follows that the 314th Indians sank Kursk, thus planning to remove from the armament of the Russian Navy, a torpedo that the American admirals fear. Big delirium can only be called a film by French journalist.
  29. andrei332809
    andrei332809 12 August 2012 13: 39
    +1
    everlasting memory.
    some told me how they had been collected and told: to be ready for hostilities and wait for the order. After a few hours, the order would end, and some kind of agrarian debt was written off from Russia
  30. Vorchun
    Vorchun 12 August 2012 14: 04
    +2
    The filthiness of the rulers in hushing up the causes of the tragedy "Kursk" twelve years ago is superimposed on today's silence and distraction of the celebration of the hundredth anniversary of the Air Force. I am not against 100 years of the Air Force (I myself flew 15 years on the Il-28 and An-12), but to push our heads together and slip a holiday instead of a tragedy - I call this filth.
    1. Vorchun
      Vorchun 12 August 2012 14: 34
      +2
      Why am I writing?
      I congratulate my comrade on the Air Force holiday (he lives in A-Ata), and he answers me - today is the memorial day of Kursk, and we celebrate the Air Force day on August 18, regardless of the weekend. Like this.
  31. 6o6er
    6o6er 12 August 2012 14: 15
    +1
    All of this is one big reason for the foolishness in the armed forces and in the country as a whole. What did a boat 150 meters long do in the area where the depth is 100 ??? What X was put on the boat an abnormal torpedo of caliber 650, which the crew saw for the first time in their eyes, but at the same time there were specialists from the dagdiesel on the boat ...
    Why did the search for the boat begin so late, did the speakers on the ships hear a big boom? It was clear to everyone that there were only a few divers in the country, and there wasn’t anyone able to do anything in the Navy. Why didn’t they immediately accept help from Amers and Norwegians? people could be saved ... many questions and the answer is the same, and I already wrote about it ...
    1. Aleksys2
      Aleksys2 12 August 2012 15: 45
      +1
      Quote: 6o6er
      Why did the search for the boat begin so late? Acoustics on the ships heard a big boom


      The speakers on ships and boats did not hear the big boom. They began to look late because before that they were looking for a torpedo "lost" by another boat, which also fired practical torpedoes, and they began to search for "Kursk" when it expired two communication sessions.
      1. Cynic
        Cynic 12 August 2012 18: 18
        0
        Quote: Aleksys2
        They began to search too late because before that they were looking for a torpedo "lost" by another boat, which also fired practical torpedoes,

        Doesn’t tell anyone about anything?
        1. Aleksys2
          Aleksys2 12 August 2012 18: 31
          -1
          It was very far from Kursk
    2. loader
      loader 12 August 2012 16: 38
      0
      One thing is clear - in such fights innocent people always die ... even during the Second World War, authorities said that they say take care of the tanks, and we still give birth to people. So it is here. For Putin, you see, these submariners are also meat.
      1. Aleksys2
        Aleksys2 12 August 2012 17: 22
        0
        Quote: Loader
        Even during the Second World War, authorities said that they say take care of the tanks, and we will give birth to people.


        Who spoke? When did you speak? Facts to the studio !!
        1. slan
          slan 12 August 2012 17: 51
          -1
          Quote: Aleksys2
          Who spoke? When did you speak? Facts to the studio !!

          free exposition of a well-known quote attributed to G.K.Zhukov
          Do not worry, it looks silly.
          1. Aleksys2
            Aleksys2 12 August 2012 18: 33
            -1
            Quote: slan
            Do not worry, it looks silly.


            What looks stupid?
            Zhukov did not say that.
            Zhukov on punishment for excessive losses was punished.
            1. slan
              slan 12 August 2012 18: 41
              -1
              And I write that I did not say, but they attribute to him.
              It is foolish when they begin to demand evidence, references, and the justification of widespread, albeit misconceptions.
              1. Aleksys2
                Aleksys2 12 August 2012 18: 43
                0
                Misconceptions must be fought!
      2. Delta
        Delta 13 August 2012 15: 20
        +1
        Actually, this is Apraksin’s phrase. And not about tanks, but about horses
  32. gennadi
    gennadi 12 August 2012 15: 14
    +3
    Unfortunately, the version of Le Carré looks the most justified, and the fact that human life can be measured in money is the most disappointing discovery.
  33. loader
    loader 12 August 2012 16: 34
    +2
    Stas57, Question - WHY Sawed Off?
    1. slan
      slan 12 August 2012 16: 59
      0
      So that the remains do not fall off when climbing.
      The good question is, why was it so thoroughly destroyed after that without raising a fragment and showing it to no one but the Norwegians?
      The original working method of the commission of inquiry, isn't it?
      1. Aleksys2
        Aleksys2 12 August 2012 17: 27
        +1
        Quote: slan
        why did they then destroy him so carefully without raising a fragment and showing them to no one but the Norwegians?


        If you are not up to speed, then it is better to remain silent than to show your incompetence. When the operation to lift the bodies was carried out, what was left of the first compartment, several tons of fragments, rose in parallel.
        1. slan
          slan 12 August 2012 18: 01
          -4
          I see a torpedo from the first compartment here in the comments. Maybe something like that was lifted up like the cover of a torpedo tube, but not fragments of the compartment, by the nature of the destruction of which it would be possible to judge the nature of the explosion, were thoroughly blown up at the bottom, that's about it. Isn't that the most glorious thing. what should be raised and investigated? Or maybe you google photos on which destruction would be visible? For some reason, photos that show the construction of the raised part of the submarine as much as you want. We have no secrets from anyone now with this. But for some reason, the discreet first compartment is a mystery, but not for Norwegian divers.
          So, I also remember very well how this very first compartment should have been raised. Then, after talking about it, we waited for the cooling of attention to this tragedy and quietly and peacefully blew everything up at the bottom.
          Be quiet better yourself with your advice, you are our competent.
          1. slan
            slan 12 August 2012 20: 17
            -2
            Putintsy, so where are the photographs of the destroyed first compartment, proving the explosion of torpedoes without external influence?
            Are these photos more secret than all that was shown to the Norwegian intelligence agents?
            Or can you only troll and minus?
      2. loader
        loader 13 August 2012 01: 00
        +1
        Well, in my opinion, everything is clear here - the Kursk nuclear submarine is a secret development of the Russian Navy
  34. Yuri11076
    Yuri11076 12 August 2012 17: 09
    +1
    We will always remember you ...

    Rest in peace.
  35. Samovar
    Samovar 12 August 2012 17: 32
    0
    But what's the point now about the reasons to argue? You can’t bring the guys back anyway. Eternal memory to them ...
    1. Aleksys2
      Aleksys2 12 August 2012 18: 14
      0
      Quote: Samovar
      But what's the point now about the reasons to argue? You can’t bring the guys back anyway.


      That would not destroy others !!
  36. Archer
    Archer 12 August 2012 17: 35
    +3
    The kingdom of heaven to all those who died at sea for Russia!
  37. ward
    ward 12 August 2012 17: 54
    -1
    Hello ... New Year ... There the faucet was two hours away ... we push ... we hook ... we raise ... here is the answer ... the truth is so disgusting ... that the story of recruiting GDP German intelligence comparing the grandfather's garden for a walk ...
    1. Aleksys2
      Aleksys2 13 August 2012 06: 31
      0
      Quote: ward
      There the faucet at two o’clock was ... pushing ... catching ... lifting ...


      What are we clinging to? And how do we raise it? What is the crane capacity?

      Sunday, August 13th:
      11.30. The chief of staff of the Federation Council ordered the PK-7500 floating cranes with the autonomous shell AS-36 on board and the sea tug MB-100 to be prepared for access to the area.
      Monday August 14th:
      16.00 p.m. The PK-100 floating crane (captain-cranemeister A. Porubailo) arrived in the search and rescue area in tug MB-7500 with an autonomous shell AS-36 on board. Due to weather deterioration (wind - up to 10 meters per second, sea - 3 points), the AS-36 could not be unloaded. It was decided to send the PK-7500 with the AS-36 on board to the shelter point - Porchnikha Bay for unloading the AS-36 into the water and then towing it to the accident site.
      Payload PK-7500 500 tons
      1. ward
        ward 14 August 2012 00: 00
        -2
        You are online ... like ... I needed it, I looked ...
        1. Aleksys2
          Aleksys2 14 August 2012 01: 01
          0
          Quote: ward
          I needed it, I looked ...


          A reference, if not difficult.
          For there were no "faucets" two hours away.
          1. ward
            ward 14 August 2012 21: 51
            -2
            In no case ... find yourself what and when they overtook it .... tired ...
            1. Aleksys2
              Aleksys2 15 August 2012 07: 02
              0
              Quote: ward
              In no case ... find yourself what and when they overtook it .... tired ...

              What are you tired of? If you have no idea what a training ground is, then these are your difficulties. If you use dubious information, then this is also your problem. I have not seen on the Internet a mention of the "faucet" located two hours away, but there are many references that the floating crane was driven from the base, and it came to the scene of the tragedy a day after leaving. I denied your post, you didn’t bring anything as proof, from here the conclusion is “to trend, not to roll bags”. Tired of him ..
  38. Isk1984
    Isk1984 12 August 2012 17: 57
    +4
    EVERLASTING MEMORY......
    The song Captain Kolesnikov .... takes the soul as you imagine, write in the dark ... men who are so lacking in the country
  39. Cesar_Xnumx
    Cesar_Xnumx 12 August 2012 18: 22
    0
    Putin forever burn in hell for the boys ... Earth you rest in peace guys!
  40. SlavaP
    SlavaP 12 August 2012 18: 30
    +2
    Everlasting memory..
    And it's a shame that we never know the truth.
  41. Arsen
    Arsen 12 August 2012 19: 20
    0
    After WWII, the British fleet tried to work with German hydrogen peroxide technology. The result was summed up by a certain British admiral - "the best thing that can be done with technologies based on hydrogen peroxide is to try to interest your potential enemy in them."
    1. Raven1972
      Raven1972 12 August 2012 21: 34
      0
      Arsen, by the way, they didn’t believe in the FAA until they started pouring on their heads .... The British figured out how much gunpowder it would take for such a rocket to fly and said it was impossible ... And the Americans were only 90 -s were able to figure out the FW-190 control system .... So they are far from being an authority ...
    2. IRBIS
      IRBIS 13 August 2012 17: 02
      0
      Well done! I've been waiting for such a comment for a long time. That's exactly what the British did! Many people got the technology of the Germans, and from time to time there were accidents on submarines. The British "delicately" kept silent about their own and conducted misinformation about the continuation of the work.
  42. Voin sveta82
    Voin sveta82 12 August 2012 19: 21
    0
    .... Putin ... at that time shitty showed himself ..... - passed his ....)))) I will never forgive him this bitch trick ....)))) It's a pity for the boys and officers - waited until the last and no one came to the aid on time ..... eh .... damn ....- would tear to shreds those who are involved in this ... suckers ....
  43. Nubia2
    Nubia2 12 August 2012 19: 43
    +2
    Quote: Specialist -
    Americans fucked and flooded - 100%

    here is your opinion during the investigation, and did not take into account ..
    you would immediately tell everything as it was))))
  44. mind1954
    mind1954 12 August 2012 21: 00
    0
    Most of all I was shocked by the ratio of boat length and depth!
    And that her stern could not be picked up on any "pontoons" ?!
    And why was it so long sought in a famous area at such a depth?
    And why all these submarine detection aircraft?

    However, recalling the chaos that was then in the country, I do not wait for an answer
    to these questions. Yes, and from the fleet, even then, a wet spot remained.
    And besides, do not forget that in 1998 it was implemented
    coup and citizen Putin only did that he swore allegiance
    west and everything was trying to meet Clinton, who ignored him!
    So, in such an atmosphere could be anything !!!
    1. slan
      slan 12 August 2012 21: 52
      -3
      Yes, the fact of the matter is that there were no problems to find, inspect and raise. There was only one problem - they could not tell the truth.
      And there are very reasonable doubts that what we heard at the end of the "work of the commission" is true. Otherwise, why was it worth so absurdly lying and clumsily destroying evidence at the bottom (first compartment) without even taking photos?
    2. Cynic
      Cynic 13 August 2012 16: 28
      0
      Quote: mind1954
      However, recalling the chaos that was then in the country, I do not wait for an answer
      to these questions. Yes, and from the fleet, even then, a wet spot remained.

      Yes, WE ALL VERY FAST FORGOTTEN what Russia of 2000 was like.
      Very fast . not good.
  45. 16
    16 12 August 2012 22: 27
    0
    eternal memory !!!!!!!! and what they write --- During the investigation, it was found that the Bullfinch tape recorder was turned off on the boat, which was supposed to record the crew’s conversations over the speakerphone, corresponding to its inclusion was in the off position. According to the regulations, during the preparation of the training attack, this equipment should have been turned on. In addition, it was found that the emergency buoy alarm was not turned on at the Kursk nuclear submarine and for several years the emergency antenna ejection system was turned off. The factory mounting device, which simply did not allow the buoy to surface, was not removed from the emergency buoy -------- nonsense !!!! the crew and the commander specifically were excellent and they knew their job !!!!!!!! !!!! there was a ------------ attack of another boat !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  46. REPA1963
    REPA1963 12 August 2012 22: 44
    -5
    Judging by the discussion, fans of medveputov, as they say, "at least a piss in the eye is still God's dew"
    1. thatupac
      thatupac 12 August 2012 23: 24
      +2
      But you do not have authority in our mouth e..t which, hehe ...
  47. not good
    not good 12 August 2012 23: 36
    +2
    Information for consideration:
    - BZO "fat woman" is equipped with FS (high power). This explosive is phlegmatized with appropriate additives and withstands the hit of a 30 mm projectile without a volumetric explosion, but only with a local flash.
    - a torpedo fuse has up to 3 degrees of protection and independently, without a torpedo exit from a TA, it is not technically possible to get into a combat state;
    - during the operation of hydrogen peroxide torpedoes, there were several contingencies related including with a leak of hydrogen peroxide, but not one did not lead to the explosion of a torpedo.
    And yet, some time after the death of the Kursk, the automatic torpedo attack system was disabled on the American nuclear submarines.
    1. Delta
      Delta 13 August 2012 15: 23
      0
      I'm waiting for information about disabling such a system on the US nuclear submarine
  48. suharev-52
    suharev-52 12 August 2012 23: 37
    +1
    I don't believe in the official conclusions. The country's leadership did not want to raise the Kursk. The truth could be established by the nature of the explosion, so the first compartment was sawed off and destroyed on the spot. The truth will emerge only after the departure of all those involved from the power structures, and judging by the fact that the LADY is going to change places with the GDP in 6 years, this will not happen soon. Eternal memory to the guys. Sincerely.
    1. thatupac
      thatupac 13 August 2012 00: 25
      0
      The death of Kursk is a conspiracy of a backstage Zionist gebni. So let's write it down.
  49. Drednout
    Drednout 13 August 2012 00: 16
    +3
    I would like to read the comments of the divers themselves. Preferably with warhead 3 and sonar.
    1. max-02215
      max-02215 13 August 2012 04: 54
      +3
      Of course, I am not a great specialist, but all the same, I have a notion about mine and torpedo armament, since we were seriously trained as commanders of the BC-3 in a sailor, so torpedoes and RSL have several degrees of protection, completely excluding a spontaneous explosion, we gave an example - on the TFR 50 pr, managed to make a shot from the TA in the stowed position, and so, the torpedo pierced the superstructure and nothing ... until the last stage is removed, there will be no explosion, especially since the explosive is not banal TNT, but sea ​​mix,. Well, this is what it was necessary to apply on the TA, so that the torpedo detonated, but a direct hit from a torpedo is quite likely, especially since it "arrives" just between the first and second compartments.
      At the expense of degrees, as far as I can’t remember exactly, something like this: the first one is taken off when entering data, the second when leaving the TA, the next one at the first turn (so as not to get into oneself) then at the second turn, and then I don’t remember, but it seemed to be a couple
  50. Aleksys2
    Aleksys2 13 August 2012 00: 49
    0
    By chance, the author of these lines had to deal with the death of “Kursk” from the moment of the first official announcement on August 13 that “the boat lay on the ground”, and up to the moment of lifting the remains of the missile carrier and placing it in the Roslyakovo dock. All this time I kept the official website Kursk.ru, where online information about the rescue operation appeared online. After that, in another publication, he wrote another year about the progress of the investigation. At the end of 2004, an unexpected proposal appeared from the Prosecutor General’s Office to write a script and make a film based on the book by the Prosecutor General Vladimir Ustinov “The Truth About Kursk”. At the first meeting, I honestly said that I did not completely trust the official version of the absence of those responsible for this disaster, and I believe that the prosecutor's office has something to hide. The senior investigator for particularly important cases of the Chief Military Prosecutor’s Office, Arthur Egiev, did not convince me of anything, brought to his office all 118 volumes of the case and a couple dozen volumes with video applications and said: “That's it - study it and draw conclusions yourself.” I doubted again - the matter can be falsified. Yes, it is possible, Yegiev agreed, but only when one person leads him. A team of almost 50 investigators worked right there, hundreds of experts from various organizations from military to forensic and civilian experts conducted examinations, and almost 1000 witnesses gave testimonies. If someone had hidden something, then sooner or later it would have surfaced.