Western media recalled the incident with the collision of the Soviet and British nuclear submarines in the Barents Sea

57
Western media recalled the incident with the collision of the Soviet and British nuclear submarines in the Barents Sea

The Western media decided to recall the incident with the Soviet submarine. This is an incident that occurred on May 23, 1981 in the Barents Sea. For a long time it was strictly classified, and some of its details have not been disclosed to this day. The Soviet nuclear submarine K-211 "Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky", armed with 16 ballistic missiles P-29P, was on alert, moving at a depth of about 50 m at a speed of 9 knots.

Columnist Sebastian Roblin writes that the mission of this submarine was to move inconspicuously for several months in anticipation of a signal about the possible start of a nuclear war. If ordered, the nuclear submarine was to unleash all its nuclear power on military bases and other enemy targets located at a distance of up to 4 thousand nautical miles.



Naturally, such submarines were a priority target for the West, which sent its low-noise nuclear-powered "hunting submarines" to track down Soviet nuclear submarines and torpedo them in the event of a global confrontation.

Keeping in mind the aforementioned threat, the K-211 commander stopped his submarine and turned it around so that the MGK-400 Rubicon bow sonar unit could detect the submarines sneaking behind it in the “blind zone”. At that time, the equipment did not report any danger.

However, after a few minutes, the Soviet submarine received three powerful glancing blows from behind and from below. Then the K-211 sonar caught the propeller noise. The object was identified as a submarine, but contact was lost again after a few minutes.

Later, the crew of the Soviet submarine discovered damage to the vertical rudder and rubber sound-absorbing tiles at the stern. In addition, shards of metal, no doubt from the western submarine, got stuck in the right propeller and even punctured the ballast tank.

A Soviet investigation subsequently concluded that the metal found likely belonged to a US Navy submarine. However, later in the same year, the Western press published material about the collision of the British "submarine-hunter" Scepter, or SS-104, with an iceberg in the Barents Sea.

It is easy to guess that Scepter then "crashed" into a Soviet K-211, not an ice block. However, this became known only 10 years later thanks to the story of a former officer who served on the SS-104.

As it turned out, in May 1981, Scepter had been tracking the K-211 for some time using its Type 2001 sonar, which had an underwater detection range of 25 to 30 nautical miles, or 6 to 17 miles when moving fast.

Suddenly, the "APL-Hunter" lost contact (apparently when the K-211 made a U-turn), but continued to move forward and its nose crashed into the tail of the "Petropavlovsk" from below.

One of the propellers of a Soviet submarine “ripped through” the front part of the Scepter's hull, beating off a piece over 7 m long from its nose and tearing off the front part of the conning tower. Typically, such damage would have caused the submarine's reactor to automatically shut down, but the commander manually disabled the safety system and moved his submarine away from the scene.

The collision of the Soviet and British nuclear submarines in the Barents Sea could lead to tragedy, but, fortunately, nothing happened. Both submarines returned to service after repairs and served for a long time: K-211 until 2013, and Scepter until 2010.

However, after the incident, the latter could no longer “boast” of the notorious low noise. Trash from the K-211 got into its power plant, which made it more noisy in certain operating modes.
57 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. The comment was deleted.
    2. +30
      27 July 2021 18: 38
      American and British attack submarines were constantly loitering near the Soviet naval bases. when a Soviet submarine was discovered, they were “attached” in its “dead zone” behind the stern.

      There, NATO nuclear submarines were inaccessible to Soviet sonars - the noise of their own propellers interfered with the identification of the enemy.
      However, the Russian sailors, knowing this, developed a countermeasure tactic - sharply slowing down, the submarine turned around and "probed" by sonar the zones that were previously inaccessible.

      Our submariners called this maneuver "clearing the dead zone", and the Americans respectfully nicknamed it "Crazy Ivan".
      1. +1
        28 July 2021 02: 05
        Quote: Atlant-1164
        American and British attack submarines were constantly loitering near the Soviet naval bases. when a Soviet submarine was discovered, they were “attached” in its “dead zone” behind the stern.

        There, NATO nuclear submarines were inaccessible to Soviet sonars - the noise of their own propellers interfered with the identification of the enemy.

        Question: what prevented the towing of acoustic antennas for the rear view?
      2. +2
        28 July 2021 07: 07
        Sonar is an active transmission for the purpose of receiving an echo. These parcels are heard all over the sea, so they do not use sonar for tracking control !!!
    3. The comment was deleted.
      1. The comment was deleted.
  2. +1
    27 July 2021 18: 37
    Even not docking, when the British lost our boat and in general they saw it?
    1. PN
      +21
      27 July 2021 20: 12
      Lost when she turned her nose to them. The propellers (as the biggest source of noise) were "covered" by the boat's hull. And they went to meet each other, ours a little higher, theirs a little lower.
      1. +3
        27 July 2021 20: 16
        This is another matter, they explained it. Thank you! hi
  3. +1
    27 July 2021 18: 50
    I read and remembered our "Kursk". hi ..Because it was sunk and hushed up, Russia was then weak and it was difficult to prove everything. And it was impossible especially. Because this would mean war. ... hi
    Now the bastards are already afraid and are doing the right thing.
    1. +2
      27 July 2021 18: 57
      Quote: Utes
      I read and remembered our "Kursk". ..Because it was sunk and hushed up

      That's for sure, but maybe in 50 years the truth will be revealed
      But I wonder what it was that Westerners suddenly remembered about this incident? Have you watched the parade and lost sleep? Want to show that Russian submarines are vulnerable?
      1. +14
        27 July 2021 19: 11
        maybe in 50 years the truth will be revealed "

        May be. But I think the whole truth is in the accident on board. Dagdizel engineers were on Kursk, testing of either a new or a modernized torpedo was planned. I think this is the case, otherwise they have nothing to do there. Everything else is the speculation of lovers of conspiracy theories and interplanetary conspiracies.
        1. -14
          27 July 2021 19: 52
          believe on TV
        2. +5
          27 July 2021 20: 43
          Oleg, since when have torpedoes, even new ones, even modernized ones, been tested during exercises? Secondly, according to the "official" version, the "old" torpedo exploded. Personally, even if it is declassified in 50 years, I will not live to see it. If you saw how I worried about those guys ... I was only 33 years old ... Those guys will never be more than they were then ...
      2. The comment was deleted.
    2. +14
      27 July 2021 19: 56
      . "After all, he was sunk and hushed up" (c)

      Who sank and where did the information come from? Give me a link. hi
      1. +9
        27 July 2021 20: 02
        Quote: Sea Cat

        Who sank and where did the information come from? Give me a link.

        By the way, you are asking Meehan's next reincarnation.
        1. +11
          27 July 2021 20: 07
          thanks for the warning smile , was not aware. hi
      2. +4
        27 July 2021 20: 22
        After all, he was sunk and hushed up

        as usual, there will be no links after such statements hi
      3. 0
        31 July 2021 00: 54
        Quote: Sea Cat
        Who sank and where did the information come from? Give me a link.
        yes herself
        , with a round sunken dent in the side ... let me think of the outboard water I will collect more, so that even in Norway a couple "bursts of noise" (by growing seismologists) .... and from hundreds of times proven torpedo ... belay .. THE MAIN THING IS NOT outward, BUT INSIDE !!! ...
        all to be honest ... and a green NATO buoy was then accidentally found ... and the external debt was forgiven and immediately !!! ... so that the press would not focus on this aspect ... and [b] Toledo [/ b] hotly found in Norway, but footage with a tent over the place of the lost buoy "was advised not to cover it in the media" ...
        "Random hectare - random coincidences" .... Yes, exactly everything ... exactly ...
        1. 0
          31 July 2021 03: 52
          Vladimir hi , and in more detail you can and, preferably, where the information comes from.
    3. +3
      27 July 2021 20: 22
      Quote: Utes
      I read and remembered our "Kursk". ..Because it was sunk and hushed up, Russia was weak then and it was difficult to prove everything And it was impossible especially. Because this would mean a war

      During this incident in 1981, the USSR was practically at the peak of military power, but everything was classified and released on the brakes. Most likely, the USSR naval attaché sat in a pub over a glass of good ale with a representative of the British Navy and decided not to make a fuss lol And there were several similar incidents during the Soviet era, but no one started the war, although the Union had enough strength then.
      1. -1
        29 July 2021 00: 06
        And that it was necessary to start a war due to the fact that two boats collided?

        And what did the USSR have the strength to do?

        Your logic is simply surprising.

        In 1981, at the peak of its power, the USSR bought 40-45 million tons of grain each, because it itself could not feed its population.

        Ten years later, the USSR collapsed without a war, because the "mighty" Soviet leaders brought the people to poverty without a war.

        Now try to imagine if back in 1981 they started a war against Britain, in fact, against NATO.

        What would then be left of the USSR?

        War is an extreme measure, and therefore, without any gatherings with mugs of ale, no one chatted too much.
  4. +9
    27 July 2021 19: 43
    The Scepter has experienced several severe accidents during its career. On May 23, 1981, she collided with a Soviet submarine (K-211) and her reactor protection system performed an automatic emergency shutdown (scrammed of the reactor), but her captain turned off the safety mechanisms (battleshort on). The crew was told that they hit an iceberg. The incident came to light when David Forghan, a former officer on the boat, gave a television interview that aired on September 19, 1991.

    "Scepter" SS-104
  5. +20
    27 July 2021 19: 51
    One of the propellers of a Soviet submarine “ripped through” the front part of the Scepter's hull, beating off a piece over 7 m long from its nose and tearing off the front part of the conning tower.

    True, the last one after the incident could no longer "boast" of the notorious low noise. Trash from K-211 got into her power plant, which is why it became more noisy in certain operating modes.

    Colleagues! I am far from being a submariner, but how could this accident have affected the low noise of an English boat and how did the "garbage" get into its power plant?
    1. +15
      27 July 2021 20: 02
      The same question arose. Rubbish, into the reactor, how?
    2. +15
      27 July 2021 21: 33
      No way. The last paragraph is the wildest game, at the kindergarten level.
      It is a pity that the military review publishes these lines.
  6. 0
    27 July 2021 20: 15
    served for quite a long time: K-211 until 2013, and Scepter until 2010.
    However, after the incident, the latter could no longer “boast” of the notorious low noise. Trash from the K-211 got into its power plant, which made it more noisy in certain operating modes.
    (C)
    Our sailors acted on the principle - I will eat as much as I can, I will bite the rest. If not drowned, then they brought problems for the rest of their lives laughing
    1. +6
      27 July 2021 20: 29
      However, after the incident, the latter could no longer “boast” of the notorious low noise. Trash from the K-211 got into its power plant, which made it more noisy in certain operating modes.
      here I agree - nonsense. HOW (???) through a strong hull, upon breaking through which the boat practically khan (at least would lay on the ground when the compartments of the power plant were flooded) could get into the power plant ??? Well, perhaps, from the impact, some mechanisms were displaced from the foundations, the alignment of some shafts was disturbed. .But all this is treated in the database, as it were ...
      1. 0
        27 July 2021 20: 35
        The Englishwoman's water jet was damaged.
        1. +8
          27 July 2021 20: 37
          well, this is not quite what the news says -
          Trash from K-211 got into her power plant
          And the jet engine is actually not an engine but mover.
          And the engine (turbine, diesel, VNEU) is what rotates the propeller - the propeller, paddle wheel, propeller ... hi I'm talking about the "article" and not in fact
          1. +7
            27 July 2021 21: 04
            Quote: Region-25.rus
            I'm talking about the "article" and not in fact

            In the article on VO, a jet engine was originally written. There are comments rubbed at the beginning. It was a crooked translation from English. Then they changed it to the power plant. And the meaning is completely lost.
            1. +1
              27 July 2021 21: 07
              "there it is sho Mikhalych." Now it is clear! Thanks to! drinks
            2. +1
              27 July 2021 21: 09
              Then they changed to the power plant
              well ... not a fountain either
              1. +4
                27 July 2021 21: 16
                In 2020, the nuclear-powered submarine K-211 of project 667bdr was split into JSC DVZ Zvezda (Bolshoy Kamen).

                1. +18
                  27 July 2021 21: 34
                  And I still went to sea on it ...
                  1. +3
                    27 July 2021 21: 45
                    Photo of K-211 at the pier for February 2020


                2. +2
                  28 July 2021 05: 21

                  Bashkirkhan
                  Yesterday, 21: 16
                  NEW

                  +4
                  In 2020, the nuclear-powered submarine K-211 of project 667bdr was cut to JSC DVZ Zvezda (Bolshoy Kamen)
                  This is not OJSC "DVZ Zvezda", Bolshoy Kamen. I can tell you where the boat was cut. But only in a personal or by l / phone. hi
                  1. -1
                    28 July 2021 06: 48
                    Quote: aszzz888
                    I can tell you where the boat was cut. But only in a personal or by l / phone.

                    You are right, this is Chazhma Bay, Danube village, BPD-41. The group in the VK "Russian subplav" mistakenly indicated Bolshoi Kamen.
                    1. +1
                      28 July 2021 09: 09

                      Bashkirkhan
                      Today, 06: 48
                      NEW

                      0
                      Quote: aszzz888
                      I can tell you where the boat was cut. But only in a personal or by l / phone.

                      You are right, this is Chazhma Bay, Danube village,
                      Yes.
            3. +4
              27 July 2021 21: 32
              Bashkirkhan
              ... In the article on VO, a jet engine was originally written. There are comments rubbed at the beginning. It was a crooked translation from English. Then they changed it to the power plant. And the meaning is lost altogether.

              hi So I didn't understand why, for the sake of even more nonsense, then my harmless comment was deleted only with the assumption that, probably, we are talking about a jet propulsion from the "Englishwoman"! what
              1. +2
                27 July 2021 21: 48
                Quote: pishchak
                for the sake of even more nonsense, then my harmless comment was deleted only with the assumption that, probably, we are talking about a jet propulsion from the "Englishwoman"!

                And they could have been banned.
                1. +3
                  27 July 2021 21: 54
                  hi Thank you for the photos of "K-211" and a friendly reminder! good
                  I already "swam" - I know! wink

                  By the way, in the early 1990s, the Modelist-Konstruktor magazine published drawings of the model of the Project 667 submarine missile carrier.
        2. +9
          27 July 2021 23: 54
          Quote: Bashkirkhan
          The Englishwoman's water jet was damaged.

          The Englishwoman belonged to the SWIFTSHUR class, and they were still without a water cannon.
          Quote: tralflot1832
          Did the British lose our boat and did they see it in general?
          Apparently they kept it to the limit, because after losing contact, they climbed under the K-211 in half an hour.
          Quote: Atlant-1164
          sharply slowing down, the submarine turned around and “Probed” the zones with a sonar, previously unavailable.
          Our submariners called this maneuver "clearing the dead zone", and the Americans respectfully nicknamed it "Crazy Ivan".

          A couple of remarks.
          1. No one on the BS sonar probes the zones "previously inaccessible". ID mode - only before torpedo firing, and even then it is unlikely ...
          2. The maneuver you are describing is dubious, but possible. Usually, the non-tracking check was done differently. Not the point.
          But "crazy Ivan" is when, the boat turned 180 * and jerked to close the distance from the vis-a-vis. The calculation is for the enemy to change the mode of movement or course (g / a cross-section of the target), as well as to reduce the distance in order to still hook the adversary with his ShP (GAK).
          Something like this, however.
          AHA.
          1. -4
            28 July 2021 06: 50
            Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
            The Englishwoman belonged to the SWIFTSHUR class, and they were still without a water cannon.

            Specifically, the "Scepter" was like a water jet.

          2. 0
            28 July 2021 19: 01
            Also a model of a Swiftshur class submarine. A water jet is written on the English-language forum.

            1. +1
              28 July 2021 21: 14
              The drawing given by me in the post is OFFICIAL. Yes, I have come across a mention of the fact that PLa t. SWIFTSHUR was the first on which water cannons were installed. But this was in the course of modernization when replacing the reactor core.
              Illustration of a series boat "Swiftshur". (see above)
              It is a official drawing f. Vickers shipbuilding and engineering. It was published in Friedman's book Submarine Design and Development ...

              Best regards, hi
            2. +1
              28 July 2021 22: 01
              Quote: Bashkirkhan
              A water jet is written on the English-language forum.

              You're right. But there are also English-language illustrations ...

              They are very often confused with another TRAFALGAR-type submarine, which carries a water cannon from birth.

              Therefore, it is difficult to say anything unambiguously ...
              1. 0
                29 July 2021 17: 42
                Quote: Boa constrictor KAA

                Therefore, it is difficult to say anything unambiguously ...

                I agree. Photos of a submarine in dry or floating dock can only provide an answer to this question. And that is desirable in good quality on the part of the rudder group. Here is a photo of the sweatshirt for example, but the most interesting part is not captured.
                1. +1
                  29 July 2021 21: 11
                  Quote: Bashkirkhan
                  Photos of a submarine in dry or floating dock

                  Thanks for the photo. But I have already left the topic.
                  When I was flipping through I-no, I saw a photo of SWIFT in dry dock when setting up for modernization. There the screws were covered with tarpaulin, but in the corners you can see that this is not a round casing of a water cannon.
                  Sincerely.
  7. +5
    27 July 2021 20: 24
    "Trash from the K-211 got into its power plant, which made it more noisy in certain operating modes." - some kind of nonsense! How could debris get into the power plant? fool fool negative
    1. +1
      27 July 2021 20: 49
      Nikolay, well, everything is simple!
  8. 0
    27 July 2021 22: 15
    Trash from the K-211 got into its power plant, which made it more noisy in certain operating modes.
    I don’t understand what that means. Explain, please, who can, how can "get trash from K-211" into a nuclear power plant ?! Sorry, at first I wrote, then I read that it was not only me that inspired! laughing
    1. +9
      28 July 2021 00: 50
      How can trash from K-211 get into a nuclear power plant ?!


      Debris can get into the cooling system of the reactor in the corresponding circuit. The boat takes intake water by pumps, sends it for heat exchange, and throws it back out already "warmed up". If any debris could get into it, it was only into this cooling system. Well, "strum" there. Or wrinkle the "impeller" of the pump, change the geometry. From here, noise level changes are possible.
      The intake device is somewhat similar to the "ears" of a Zaporozhets. It protrudes above the body and has a decent size. There are grilles at the entrance to prevent the entry of foreign objects.
      The reactor has several cooling circuits. Garbage cannot get from one to another. Therefore, in this case, mechanical damage does not threaten the reactor directly.
      The heating medium is the first circuit. Water in the steam generator and waste steam in the main condenser - secondary circuit. Then the third circuit is the water that cools the condenser. All this water is of high purity. And only in the last, fourth circuit, outboard water circulates, taking heat from the third circuit and taking it out, creating a heat trail at the same time. By the way, we tried to land the nuclear submarine on the ground. A decent slick of warm water formed. Unmasked the nuclear submarine.

      I hope I clearly understood?
      1. +1
        28 July 2021 10: 02
        By the way, we tried to land the nuclear submarine on the ground. A decent slick of warm water formed. Unmasked the nuclear submarine.

        It's clear about unmasking. I heard that a nuclear submarine cannot technically lie at the bottom. Is that so?
        1. +2
          28 July 2021 15: 26
          ... a nuclear submarine cannot technically lie at the bottom. Is that so?


          Quite right. It is precisely due to the fact that when laying on the ground, in particular, the water intake devices for cooling the reactor will be clogged.

          The efficiency of the reactor is very low. Let's compare with a steam locomotive. The vast majority of energy is wasted outside. In the absence of cooling, it will be necessary to urgently "take out the reactor" and take measures to cool it down. Otherwise, the core may fail due to the lack of heat removal. There, and not far from a nuclear accident.

          This all concerns the "conventional" nuclear submarines. If you carry out special events and training, then you can lie on the ground. Such things have taken place. But they were found to be inappropriate. There is a lot of trouble, and there is no point.
          1. +1
            31 July 2021 01: 17
            Quote: Podvodnik
            ... a nuclear submarine cannot technically lie at the bottom. Is that so?


            Quite right. It is precisely due to the fact that when laying on the ground, in particular, the water intake devices for cooling the reactor will be clogged.

            I apologize for interrupting, but your explanations seemed the most logical (at least for a layman, from an engineering point of view) ... The question arises, is this "thus it turns out to be a more constructive problem" ..? !! None of our boats have water intakes in the upper (at least the middle, shifted up) part of the hull ...? !!!
            It is this circumstance that does not yet allow the creation of an MCSAP (hunter), in dimensions of 3000-5000 tons (according to VI), like Karp or even Varshavyanka, but for example with the small RITM-2000 reactor ... There some insurmountable design problems ...? !!
            How do you personally think ...? !!
            1. 0
              31 July 2021 07: 56
              There are some insurmountable design problems ...? !!


              Yes, there are no insurmountable problems. Intakes are really in the lower third of the hull, the vertical rudder sticks out because of the dimensions, by the way, and the displacement is decent. When laying, you can "crumple stupidly".
              The nuclear submarines are still not coastal, like diesel people. They work at great depths. It makes no sense to lie down not on the ground. What for? The task was not set, the designer was not provided.
  9. PPD
    +3
    27 July 2021 23: 25
    Eh, Kostroma met Button Rouge so that now at the wheelhouse there is a legal number 1 in the star.
  10. +3
    28 July 2021 04: 55
    RPK SN "K-211" in September - November 1984 made an under-ice, transarctic passage along the route Olenya Guba - Kamchatka - Krasheninnikov Bay. Joined the 25th submarine division of the 2nd submarine flotilla KTOF, the city of Vilyuchinsk. On September 15, 1998 RPK K-211 was given the name "Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky".
    According to the recollections of the command staff:
    "Collision of RPK SN" K-211 "(SF) with a foreign submarine on May 23, 1981." K-211 "667BDR" Kalmar "(" Delta-3 "class). The nuclear submarine was on its way to the base from the training ground. The boat was at a depth of 50 meters and was moving at a speed of 9,5 knots and a course of 180 °. The commander of the Soviet nuclear-powered ship formally checked the lack of tracking of his ship and only at 19:30 ordered to measure the level of hydroacoustic noise. -19 "unexpectedly felt three consecutive short-term impacts / jolts lasting up to 51 seconds. The commander of the Soviet submarine decided to ascend to periscope depth, but during the ascent received a hydroacoustics report about the noise of propellers at the 211 ° course angle of the port side. The acoustician classified the underwater target as nuclear submarine At 10 hours 127 minutes on the "K-19" turned to the right of the intended target and two minutes later contact with the foreign nuclear submarine was lost. At 58 hours 211 minutes "K-20" surfaced but neither visually, nor on the radar screen, surface targets were not detected. Inspection of the boat's hull in the base showed the presence of minor damage to the rubber coating of the Soviet nuclear-powered ship's hull from a sliding collision. "

    "Our boat surfaced, and under its own power came to the base. Here it was awaited by a commission consisting of specialists from the fleet, industry, science and a designer. The commission, having simulated the situation of the maneuver of two boats, having examined the places of damage, established that the American boat was following our As soon as our boat changed course, the American boat lost contact and blindly crashed with its wheelhouse into the stern of the Soviet boat. She was docked, and there, upon examination, holes were found in two aft tanks of the main ballast , damage to the blades of the right propeller and the horizontal stabilizer. In the damaged tanks of the main ballast bolts with countersunk heads, pieces of metal and plexus from the cabin of an American submarine were found. Moreover, according to separate details, the commission was able to establish that the collision took place with a submarine of the Sturgeon class ", which was later confirmed by the appearance in Holy Lough of a boat with a damaged the cabin of this class. "


    On November 16, 2010, at 18:20 local time (Kamchatka), RPK Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky set out on its last journey, in Primorye, for cutting.
  11. The comment was deleted.
  12. 0
    28 July 2021 16: 11
    Quote: Podvodnik
    I hope I clearly understood?

    Absolutely, colleague! Thank you very much for the sensible and detailed post! The use of seawater is understandable, but even the water used on motor ships is very well filtered before entering the cooling system and particles that can damage the pump blades should be rather large. Thanks anyway! hi
  13. The comment was deleted.