Military Review

Why do Americans "drown" our submarines?

199
Why do Americans "drown" our submarines?



According to our unofficial statistics, during the Cold War and the confrontation of the USSR and the USA in the ocean, there were about 25 cases of collisions of submarines of the USSR, Russia and submarines of foreign states (mainly the USA). At the same time, we believe that 12 cases of collisions occurred near our territorial waters. Of 12 cases, 9 clashes occurred in the North navy, 3 - in the Pacific Fleet. According to the same unofficial statistics, as a result of such collisions, 3 nuclear submarines of the USSR and Russia were sunk (K-129, K-219, K-141 Kursk). According to official statistics, which is confirmed by factual evidence, for the entire period of the Cold War and the post-Soviet period, there were only 3 collisions of our submarines with American ones. (K-108 (Pacific Fleet) collided with the American Totog submarine in 1970, K-276 (SF) collided with the Baton Rouge in 1992, K-407 (SF) collided with the US PLA in 1993 Grayling "). All other, in our version, nuclear submarine collisions with foreign submarines are not supported by facts. Often, such information is taken from foreign media, which are everywhere looking for a sensation. Example: in 1968, the US Navy's Scorpion submarine perished in the ocean. The US government commission did not establish the exact causes of the death of the submarine. Some American newspapers immediately published sensational information that the Scorpion was sunk by a Soviet submarine, allegedly in revenge for the death of the K-129. Allegedly, the Soviet K-129 in March 1968 was sunk by the US Swordfish submarine. Our experts and journalists immediately supported the version of American journalists that the K-129 drowned an American submarine. And they built the “iron” logic of evidence that this was so.

Why did the Americans find the place of the death of K-129, but we did not find it? Our version: because they knew exactly the coordinates of the Suordfish submarine collision with the K-129. We did not take into account the fact that the Americans had a global system of hydroacoustic observation in the Pacific Ocean SUSUS, which allowed us to accurately determine the location of various underwater objects.

Why, when the Americans lifted K-129 in 1974, it broke almost in half and the stern was not raised? Our version: because as a result of a collision with the Suordfish submarine, the K-129 got a hole in the middle part of the hull and from this, when it was raised, the submarine body broke. The fact that in the process of falling to a depth of more than 4000 meters, the submarine K-129 subway crashed into the ground at the speed of an express train and could cause damage to the hull from this, we did not take into account.

Why did the Suordfish submarine enter the Japanese port with hull damage? Our version: Because she faced K-129. The fact that K-129 sank in the area of ​​the Hawaiian Islands and the Suordfish submarine, if it ran into it, would have been closer to repair to the main US naval base in Hawaii, and not to Japan, we did not take into account .

It is from such arguments of our large and small military commanders of the Navy and some citizens that we still believe that the Americans sank K-129 and the Scorpion sank in response. We have no evidence of involvement in the death of the K-129 of the American PLA.

During the investigation of the K-219 catastrophe in 1986, rumors and versions were again born that the US Navy "Augusta" was involved in this catastrophe. These rumors were spread by foreign media, the command of the Northern Fleet and the crew of the SSB-K-219, and the Navy leadership supported them. From what logic of their reasoning was this version born?

The Americans did not make much noise, despite the fact that K-219 sank near their coast, and this happened on the eve of the talks between the presidents of the United States and the USSR. So the US did not want to advertise the involvement of its PLA in this catastrophe.

On the body of the K-219 there was a silver trail from some external influence. So, it was a trace from the keel of the PLN Augusta, which destroyed the 6 rocket mine. As a result, the rocket was crushed by outboard pressure, an explosion of fuel and oxidant occurred. The fact that still at the stage of preparation for the march, and then, throughout the entire voyage, rocket shaft No. 6 was caused by the failure of the mining equipment due to malfunctioning of the mine equipment, and the personnel concealed this fact into account. And the fact that “Augusta” “delicately” destroyed exactly the faulty rocket mine No. 6, and the neighboring mines remained intact, it didn’t surprise anyone in the Northern Fleet and in the Navy Headquarters.

When towing the K-219 SSBN, the towing cables were torn, which means that the Augusta specially passed at a periscope depth between the emergency submarine and the towing vehicle, and the hauling cable was cut off. The fact that not a single competent commander of a submarine, of any state, would have done so because of the danger of damage to the hull of his submarine and its outboard devices by the towing cable, our “experts” did not take into account. The fact that such actions at sea, in peacetime, are a violation of the sovereign rights of the USSR, and not a single commander of a warship, of any state, will act this way, our high-ranking leaders did not embarrass.

And today, this crazy version of the involvement of the American Augusta PLA in drowning the K-219 continues to "walk" in the vast book, magazine, newspaper and television information fields and in the heads of the "best specialists in the underwater business."

In 2000, the Kursk submarine K-141 crashed. Despite the fact that the government commission did not find evidence of involvement of foreign submarines in the death of the Kursk, most of our citizens believe the statements of certain officials of the Northern Fleet, the Navy Headquarters, and submariner veterans that Kursk died from -for the collision (was torpedoed) with the US Navy's Memphis submarines.

What is the logic of such judgments?

1. In the area of ​​the exercise, the ships of the Northern Fleet were 3 submarines of foreign countries (US 2 submarines and 1-UK). The fact that these submarines were not detected by the forces of the Northern Fleet, as they were outside the area closed to other vessels, is not surprising to anyone.

2. The Memphis submarine arrived at the Norwegian port with hull damage, and the Americans refused to let our specialists inspect the Memphis and Toledo submarines. There is a snapshot of a reconnaissance satellite, which clearly shows damage to the Memphis PLA. The fact that this snapshot of an American submarine with a damaged hull is many years old and belongs to a completely different US submarine, our interpreters of the collision version did not convince of the fallacy of such a judgment.

3. On the starboard side in the K-141 “Kursk” submarine light submarine, in the 2 compartment, there is a round hole. So this is a trace of the American torpedo Mk-48 with a depleted uranium tip, which pierced a solid hull and exploded in the 2 compartment, hitting the personnel of the Kursk main command post. The fact that the torpedoes with "tips" never, in any state, was and never will be, our "soothsayers" do not realize. The fact that the durable hull of the submarine against this hole is not damaged does not bother anyone either. The fact that the torpedoes, in contact with the object of attack, immediately explode, and do not pierce holes, many of our “specialists of the underwater business” cannot understand. In peacetime, in stories the submarine fleet of all countries of the world, there was not a single case of attacks from submarines of both surface and submarine targets, our "latter-day Jules Verne" do not know.

4. The Americans were unambiguously involved in the death of the Kursk nuclear submarine, because after its death the president of the Russian Federation and the president of the United States talked for a long time on the phone, and the director of the CIA and Russia immediately flew into Moscow to negotiate a huge financial debt. According to the logic of our military and civilians, the leaders of the states should not talk for a long time on the phone, and the director of the CIA cannot discuss the existing problems of relations between Russia and the United States in Moscow. In addition, the IMF and the IBRD cannot implement interstate regulation of monetary and credit relations. And if they do, it is only with some intention (in this case, so that Russia does not make a fuss about the involvement of the American PLA in the sinking of the Kursk).

5. When the submarine "Kursk" was raised to the surface, the remnants of the 1 compartment were cut off and left on the ground. So, according to the logic of many of our “best specialists of the underwater service,” the Russian rescue team did this intentionally to hide the evidence of the torpedoing (collision) of the American submarine of our submarine. The justification of the rescuers that when the submarine was lifted to the surface, the destroyed 1 compartment could fall off and disrupt the alignment of the load distribution to the cable accessories of the lifting mechanisms, no one believed. Many people on 148% were convinced that once they sawed the 1 compartment, they wanted to hide the causes of the disaster.

As of today, Russian specialists do not have any actual evidence that would confirm the fact of a collision or torpedoing of the Kursk submarine of an American submarine. Nevertheless, over the years 12, our and foreign media have been publishing “sensational exposures and interviews”, shooting “horror films”, staging plays about the torpedoing of the Kursk submarines by Americans. The latest publications of journalist G. Nazarov in the newspaper “Russkiy Vestnik” for August and December of 2012 in the form of interviews with “courageous and fearless officers of the Navy”, as if “summed up” this ugly, long-standing lie. Who are these “brave officers” who revealed to the journalist the “secret of the death of the submarine Kursk?” These are captains of stock rank 1 A.P. Ilyushkin, former commander of the submarine, and V.I. Akimenko, deputy head of the mine-torpedo armament cycle of the Navy Training Center, member of the governmental commission for the investigation of the nuclear submarine K-141 Kursk. Here are some of the answers from V.I. Akimenko on the questions of the journalist "Russian Herald":

“According to the Kursk nuclear submarine, many books and articles have been written in which the authors try to show the uterine truth from their position. As a rule, these authors are incompetent, do not know the essence of the problem, nor the technology ... They use rumors, other people's thoughts, heard at the table or on the sidelines, "..." ... only those who investigated the cause of the catastrophe can be interviewed , have truthful information from reliable sources, photo and video data, is a specialist miner engaged in the operation of this type of torpedoes. In my answers, I focus your attention on what I know well, "..." At the time of the investigation into the causes of the Kursk catastrophe, I was the deputy head of the mine-torpedo armament cycle at the Navy Training Center. L.G. Osipenko (Obninsk). Previously, he served 7,5 for years on the submarine of the same project as the Kursk as a flagship miner, tested torpedoes (referred to) and worked with Sadko equipment (equipment for monitoring the decomposition of hydrogen peroxide in torpedo tanks). From the Directorate of anti-submarine weapons of the Navy, I was assigned to the commission to investigate the causes of the death of the Kursk, since there were no submariner specialists of this project. ”

“Hydrogen peroxide when mixed with kerosene is not explosive - the 9 class chemistry of the Soviet school”, “In the 2 compartment of the bulkhead, the back cover could not be boiled, because the bulkheads of the first four compartments were completely destroyed ...” ... “Ustinov’s statement that the gases formed during the explosion, they torn off the back cover of the torpedo tube, simply absurdly ”, ... Large Izhera showed under what conditions a hydrogen peroxide reservoir could explode. We had to put more than 4 kg of TNT under it before it exploded. ”

“Unlike Ustinov, my opinion is completely different. Presumably - the occasional torpedoing of the “Kursk” by the American submarine “Memphis”, who was watching our boat. In the main command post of the American PL, an instrument was installed which, when approaching at a distance of less than 20 cable (approximately 3,7 km), takes control of the use of torpedo tubes. weaponsif the CICS (combat information management system) and the torpedo complex operate in combat mode. Apparently, the operator of the BIUS, the watch officer or the commander of the “Memphis” forgot to turn it off when they lost contact with the submarine “Kursk” after its ascent to the periscope depth. This assumption was developed in conjunction with representatives of the cycle of the Radio Engineering Service of the Training Center. L. Osipenko ... According to the analysis of pieces of the hull and torpedoes, racks after the rise of the Kursk, the first American MK-48 torpedo allegedly entered the left boulevard, it was thrown into the 2 compartment by an explosion, respectively, destroyed the torpedo case No. 4 at the bottom of the training torpedo. This is where the remnants of the group hydraulic torpedo tube and part of the torpedo are located at the point of the Kursk at the periscope depth. ... The second torpedo allegedly pierced the hull of the boat in the area of ​​the 12 th frame, between the second and sixth torpedo tubes, snatched a piece of the hull of 2,2 x X 3,0 size, weighing about 6 tons and threw it onto the left side of the 2 compartment of the square. At the same time, the torpedoes located on the left-side racks were detonated, which was shown by the results of the inspection of the 2 compartment ... "The hole in the starboard in the area of ​​the 2 compartment is a technological hole made by divers during the first inspection of the Kursk.

At the beginning, I would like to inform this “well all knowledgeable specialist” that there are no flagship mineral posts on any submarines. On all types of submarines there is a post of commander of a mine-torpedo warhead. The position of the flagship mineral is only in the headquarters of divisions, brigades, divisions of ships. And now there are questions to Mr. V. Akimenko: “Where has he served 7,5 for years? On which Kursk-type submarine (949A of the project) did he test 65-76А torpedoes and Sadko equipment as a flagship miner? Why does he not know what type of torpedo tubes on the submarine, where he served 7,5 for years, stating that there are torpedo tubes of a hydraulic type, although in fact they are pneumohydraulic? And this, as they say in Odessa, is two big differences. What office appointed him to the “commission investigating the causes of Kursk’s death?” In the Navy there is no "Anti-submarine weapons control", there is a MANAGEMENT OF UNDERWATER ARMAMENT. I admit that an officer of a non-mine-torpedo specialty does not know the correct name of all Navy directorates. But an officer with the rank of captain 1, who has a mine education and does his entire service in a mine-torpedo business, does not know the correct name of his MAIN administration, does not know the correct name of his position on the nuclear submarine, does not know his material part, this is from the category “You can’t think of anything deliberately!” Hair stands on end when you think that Mr. Akimenko was appointed to the government commission as the best mineral expert! Then what other miner specialists represent is not the best?

This “torpedo weapon specialist” claims that a mixture of hydrogen peroxide and kerosene is not explosive. Then how to understand the requirements of factory instructions, which categorically prohibit the use of non-fat tools and air hoses when working with highly concentrated hydrogen peroxide? How to understand the approval of the textbook for high school "General and inorganic chemistry", that poorly purified highly concentrated hydrogen peroxide is explosive? How to understand the statement of the manufacturer's instructions for the use of peroxide torpedoes that if organic oils, dirt, metal and other objects get into highly concentrated hydrogen peroxide, hydrogen peroxide may explode?

Hydrogen peroxide when mixed with kerosene begins to rapidly decompose with the release of large amounts of heat. When 1 decomposes kg of hydrogen peroxide, 197,5 kilojoules of heat are released. If such a reaction takes place in a closed volume with a large amount of hydrogen peroxide, there is an instant decomposition of a huge mass of peroxide and an instantaneous release of a large amount of thermal (chemical) energy. There is an explosion that creates a shock wave.

The combination of hydrogen peroxide with kerosene in the practical 65-76 PV torpedo on the Kursk submarine caused an explosion of these substances and the destruction of the torpedo. The explosion of these substances "gave birth" to a shock wave. The shock wave, not the gases, destroyed the back and front covers of the torpedo tube No. 4, as well as the torpedo tube in the interbelt space and elements of the light body in the nose. The shock wave propagates from the epicenter of the explosion evenly in all directions. The epicenter was in the middle of the torpedo tube № 4. With the explosion of hydrogen peroxide, the pressure in the front of the shock wave was of the order of 5-8 kg / cm². The area of ​​the back cover is about 350 000 cm². Thus, the back cover, with great speed, was impacted by a huge pressure impulse. From such a load, the lid was torn off along with the kremalerny lock and "welded" into the nasal bulkhead of the 2 -th compartment. But Mr. Akimenko doesn’t understand this, since he doesn’t even understand that at the time of the 1 explosion, all the bulkheads of the 2,3,4 compartments were intact, not destroyed. The bulkheads of these compartments collapsed after a second, more powerful explosion. When identifying the causes of the hydrogen peroxide explosion, Mr. Akimenko and other members of the same commission, the peroxide reservoir was blown up with TNT. Of course, it did not explode, since there was no instantaneous reaction of decomposition of peroxide and the release of a large amount of chemical energy. If these gentlemen had blown up a structure made of hydrogen peroxide, aviation kerosene, high-pressure air cylinder 200 kg / cm², placed in a tight confined volume (as in a real torpedo), or a real torpedo, they would have learned how hydrogen peroxide explodes. What is the explosive hexogen? From components of ammonium nitrate and aluminum powder. If you blow up ammonium nitrate and aluminum powder separately, there will be no explosion. But if these substances are combined together and blown up, we get an explosion of tremendous power. But V. Akimenko, “a major specialist in peroxide torpedoes of the 949A submarine of the project,” cannot understand this.

What “left bull entered the American torpedo”? The word "bul" comes from the English "bulges" - bulge, bulging. In the pre-war Navy of the USSR, this word had two meanings: for surface ships, the word “boules” meant special bulges in the underwater part of the ship hull. The bulges had internal cavities. When a torpedo or mines hit the ship's hull, these prominent structures were primarily destroyed, thereby protecting the ship's hull from destruction. It was a kind of constructive protection of the ship from the torpedo and mine weapons. For submarines, the word “boules” had a meaning and significance, as the light hull of a submarine of a one-and-a-half structure. That is, such submarines did not have a solid light hull, and there was a light hull only in the middle part of the submarine. Ballast and fuel tanks were housed in this lightweight hull. Look at the sign "Submarine Commander". In the middle of the sign of the submarine there are bulges. This is the boule, i.e. part of the light body. But it was all on surface ships and submarines of pre-war construction. On modern surface ships and submarines there are no such devices and bulges. [...]

Not a single nuclear submarine in the United States has an instrument for the automatic use of torpedo and other weapons. All warships, including US nuclear submarines, provide automatic pre-launch preparation of weapons for use. But the team at the beginning of pre-launch preparation and the use of any weapon always gives the captain (in wartime, a watch officer can give such a command). There was no computer robot that would give a command to use weapons on US warships, no, and I am sure it will not.

And now I will try to translate this nonsense of the “brave naval officer” into the public human language. So, my translation of Mr. Akimenko’s words: “American nuclear submarine Memphis watched the submarine Kursk. While tracking, the combat information control system (CICS) and the torpedo-missile system worked in combat mode, since the American submarine commander believed that he could be attacked by a Russian submarine. As a result of bad watch keeping by American submariners, Memfis moved closer to Kursk at an unacceptable distance of less than 20 cables. At that moment, the submarine "Kursk" surfaced to the periscope depth and the Americans lost hydroacoustic contact with it. As a result of the confusion or forgetfulness of the American submariners, they forgot to turn off the automatic attack system at the main command post. The system turned on and fired two torpedoes, the Mk-48, without the knowledge of the submarine commander.

The Americans, at the time of the shooting, did not have hydroacoustic contact with the submarine "Kursk" and did not know where it was located. The CICS still gave the command to launch torpedoes and torpedoes found our submarine. The first American torpedo MK-48 allegedly entered the left ballast tank, the explosion of the ballast tank thrown into the 2-th compartment. The body of the torpedo tube No. 4, which is located in the inter-sided space at the very top of the strong case, next to which there are two more bodies of the torpedo tubes No. 2 and No. 6, collapsed only at the bottom. Torpedo tubes No. 2 and No. 6 were not affected. The second torpedo, like a shaped-charge projectile, pierced the submarine hull in the 12 area of ​​the frame, tore off the steel sheet of the robust hull of 2,2 x 3,0 m size and threw it into the left side of the 2 compartment. The accuracy of the shooting was amazing, both torpedoes hit almost the same place as the Kursk submarine, as when shooting an optical rifle. This happened because on the American torpedo tubes are top secret development of "fiber-optic fiber gravity sights."


That is the meaning of Mr. Akimenko’s statements. Anyone who understands something in the marine service will say that this is a nonsense of a sick person. But this is said by a mine and torpedo specialist, a rank 1 captain, a teacher at the Navy Training Center cycle, a member of the government commission to investigate the causes of the death of the Kursk nuclear submarine. It says a person who "knows everything well." The most striking thing is that they believe this crazy stuff.

Here are the statements on this issue of A.P. Ilushkin, another “brave officer”.

“The torpedo launched at Kursk pierced the light and durable hull of the boat and exploded inside the 2 compartment. This is an indisputable fact. But this explosion could not destroy the other compartments of the boat. They were destroyed by the second explosion - after the explosion of the entire ammunition torpedoes, which was located on the "Kursk". This is the second indisputable fact. The third fact follows from here - two torpedoes were fired at the Kursk

The first indisputable fact is that behind the stern, located at the bottom of the Kursk nuclear submarine, at a distance of 80 - 150 meters, there were fragments of the nose section of the submarine's lightweight hull, hydroacoustic antenna, torpedo tube number 4, practical torpedo 65-76 PV. How, according to Ilyushkin, did they get there if the first American torpedo exploded in the 2 compartment? Or were these fragments for the stern of the sunk submarine suffered by the Americans, who attacked the Kursk? Or maybe all these explosions of American torpedoes are the fruit of Mr. Ilyushkin's utter fantasy? Torpedoes never "stitch" a durable and lightweight submarine hull. Torpedoes, both ours and the Americans, have non-contact and contact fuses. These fuses will detonate the torpedo's ammunition if it passes near the submarine at a distance of 5-8 meters or just comes into contact with the submarine's hull. The torpedo itself cannot penetrate the robust hull of modern submarines. It can only penetrate an explosive explosion. The second indisputable fact is that no one from the government commission and the investigative team discovered the destruction of a solid hull in the 2 compartment, either from a torpedo “flashing”, or a torpedo explosion. And the third indisputable fact is that all the arguments of Mr. Ilyushkin about the torpedoing of the Kursk nuclear submarine are no more nothing less than his elementary ignorance in matters of maritime service. The saddest thing about this is that many of our citizens believe the statements of this "illiterate science fiction." [...]


It’s a pity I don’t live to see this tragedy our descendants remember the years through 50. What will they say about it? Surely, the archives will find today's delusional statements and assumptions about this catastrophe. Of course, the fact of the torpedoing of our submarines of the American submarine is much more attractive than the fact of the destruction of our submarine due to the low reliability of military equipment and insufficient crew training. The fact of the torpedoing (collision) of our submarine by the Americans is much more sacrificial and heroic than the fact of drowning their submarine due to the mistakes of the crew. Therefore, I am sure of this, and through 50, and through 100 for years, our descendants will speak about the drowning of the K-141 "Kursk" NPS by the Americans. All these myths over the course of many years of history will be overgrown with “new and new details,” which will be expressed by “specialists”, like today's Ilyushkin and Akimenkov. Only from all these speculations neither the combat skills of our nuclear submarine crews, the design development of combat weapons and equipment, nor the reliability of our combat ships will improve. These myths will be a sedative for our future sailors, for designers of naval weapons and equipment, for shipbuilders and ship repairmen, for the leaders of the Russian military department. Our weapons and equipment are reliable, the ships are modern and the best in the world. Our sailors are the best marine specialists. Approximately so our descendants will argue after the next disaster of the Russian warship. They will also look for the involvement of foreigners in this next tragedy. After all, they will be sure that in the past the “crazy Yankees” in peacetime, in impudent, drowned our ships.

Of the 25 cases of allegedly colliding our submarines with foreign submarines, the 22 cases are unknown foreign submarines (not installed). We have no evidence of these collisions. Why most of these "collisions" occurred in the Northern Fleet? Because the Northern Fleet operates in the Arctic basin, where ice fields are present all year round in the sea, icebergs and ice hummocks are carried to the open seas. Accurately track their location is difficult. Yes, and map the situation of the exact location of the drifting ice and iceberg problematic. Therefore, always, before going out to sea, the commander of the ship was instructed approximately like this: “When sailing in the sea, be careful, you can meet with icebergs and ice fields”. Therefore, when at sea the submarine collided with ice or fishing trawls and received damage to the hull, there was somehow getting out of this unpleasant situation. A collision with ice, iceberg or fishing trawl is a navigational incident for which the navigator and commander of the ship are responsible. This is where the saving thought of a collision with an unidentified foreign submarine comes. Such a clash did not entail punitive measures against the commander and navigator. Everyone knew that our hydroacoustics were inferior in technical capabilities to American ones. Everyone knew that our submarines exceeded US submarines in terms of noise and acoustic noise. And if this is so, it means, objectively, our submarine commander could not prevent a collision with a foreign submarine. The commander will be rewarded by the commanders for "an accidental collision with a foreign submarine", especially since there have been isolated instances of actual collisions, will require "strengthening" observation at sea, and this will end the "repression" against the submarine commander. And they will “write off” another navigational incident on “illiterate Americans”. It is almost impossible to prove that the submarine collided with ice, hummocks, iceberg or trawl. The hull is damaged, the ice has melted, from the trawl can only be a trace of the cable, which can be classified as you like. So - this is an unidentified foreign submarine. Submarine collisions cannot be hidden. There will always be physical evidence of such a collision. The remains of “alien” paint, “alien” metal, rubber objects will always be found on the damaged hull of our submarine. So where are the 22 evidence of "clashes with unidentified foreign submarines"? They are not. And if they exist and the leadership of the Navy or fleets hides them, then this is an official crime. Where are our international applications for all these 22 collisions? They are not, as there is no material evidence of this. Where are the international statements and notes of protest on the facts of the "drowning" by the Americans of our submarines K-129, K-219, K-141 Kursk? They are not, and can not be, because there is no evidence of these cases. We invite Americans to develop regulatory documents to prevent underwater collisions. At the same time, in these regulatory documents we offer Americans such actions and obligations of the parties that completely deprive Americans of the advantages in submarine shipbuilding, in the technical and tactical capabilities of nuclear submarines that they have today. So the Americans will go for it?

Why did actual submarines collide with American U-boats? Americans from the middle of the 60 of the 20 century began to create a card file of the noise of our warships. On all American submarines were installed onboard noise classifiers. The filing card in use allowed us to accurately classify the object of noise, its nationality, and what it does in the process of sailing (to detect the beginning of prelaunch preparation, weapon launches, changes in the parameters of working mechanisms, etc.) In order to create such a card file, it was necessary to collect noise our ships from different distances, from different course angles, at different speeds of course, when our ships perform various combat training tasks. This was especially true of our missile nuclear submarines. Therefore, the Americans climbed almost under the "belly" of our submarines. And with the sudden maneuvering of our submarine, in such a situation, the Americans lost their sonar contact and a collision occurred. An illustrative example of such a collision is the collision of the K-314 submarine of the Pacific Fleet with the American aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk in the Sea of ​​Japan. Only in this case, our submarine "climbed under the belly" of the American aircraft carrier. K-314 watched the actions of the AVI Kitty Hawk being in the center of the order. At some point, the sonar contact was lost with the aircraft carrier. The commander decided to ascend to the periscope depth to clarify the situation. When surfacing, the acoustics reported to the commander that there was a group target in the feed sector, presumably with an aircraft carrier. The commander did not take this hydroacoustics report into account and continued to ascend. At the periscope depth, the commander violated the rules for inspecting the water surface and after 3 minutes there was a powerful blow to the aft stabilizer of the submarine. At the speed of 10-12, the nodes of an aircraft carrier with the right cheekbone hit the propeller and the left aft stabilizer K-314. The submarine lost its course and surfaced under surface propulsion. The aircraft carrier did not even feel that he ran into someone. Only after the ascent of our nuclear submarine and the detection of leakage of aviation fuel from its punctured fuel tank, did the Kitty Hawk realize that they were facing a Soviet nuclear submarine. The entire anti-submarine defense of the aircraft carrier did not detect the presence in the center of the order and right along the Kitty Hawk course of the tracking Soviet submarine. Well, and the crew of the K-314 nuclear submarine, due to the ignorance of the commander, was in 20 seconds from his death. If the submarine surfaced 20 seconds later, the aircraft carrier would have cut it in half. Lucky! In this case, our submarine commander had information about the aircraft carrier, but the Americans did not find the submarine, but the collision happened anyway. And in the case when neither we hear an American, nor an American cannot hear us, collisions at short tracking distances are inevitable. Although our submarine commanders have the opinion that the American submarine commander has the technical ability to determine the depth of the submarine submersion, it does not save them from actual collision.

Submarines of all countries of the world, where they exist, as they performed in peacetime reconnaissance missions in the past, as they perform them today, and will fulfill them in the future. The technical capabilities of submarines are constantly being improved. Today's Russian and US submarines have relatively equal opportunities to detect submarines in the near zone of self-defense. With proper maneuvering, this zone provides the possibility of avoidance of collision in any conditions of navigation. With proper observation and timely response of the crew to the changing situation in the navigation area, none of the submarines, both tracking and monitored, will not collide. With relatively equal technical capabilities, the probability of a submarine collision in a submerged position will depend on the maritime and professional training of submarine crews. If our submarine commanders, while tracking an object, will put the question of the secrecy of navigation and secretive monitoring at the center, and the safety of navigation will not be ensured, then such tracking in peacetime should be prohibited. This provision should also be proposed to our potential adversaries in the maritime negotiations. If we cannot provide proper underwater, surface and air surveillance in our nearby seas, near territorial waters, this does not mean that there will be no other warships there. It means, first of all, it is necessary to create such effective observation in these seas, which will allow our forces to immediately respond to “intruders”, to constantly know their position and intentions. Then, in principle, there should be no prerequisites at all for submarine clashes in the nearby seas of submarines. Then we can secure our maritime borders.

From the foregoing, we can draw conclusions:

1. No matter how perfect today's military equipment is, it will not be able, in peacetime, to ensure the safety of navigation with weak professional training of crews of warships;

2. Professional training of submariners should be such as to exclude in peacetime dangerous maneuvering under water under various conditions of navigation and the performance of various combat training tasks.

3. Stop creating and developing myths about the involvement of American submarines in the death of our submarines K-129, K-219, K-141 Kursk. These myths prevent us from objectively assessing our own capabilities and the fighting qualities of our ships. Americans have nothing to do with these disasters. The causes of these disasters should be sought in paragraph 1 of these findings.

All that is stated above is only a personal opinion of the retired Vice-Admiral V. Ryazantsev.

Evaluation of the Soviet Navy S.Gorshkov
Author:
Originator:
http://www.avtonomka.org/vospominaniya/1080-pochemu-amerikantsy-topyat-nashi-podvodnye-lodki.html
199 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Same lech
    Same lech 14 December 2013 08: 42
    -7
    I remember there was an accident on a submarine when the fire extinguishing system worked (the dangerous substance Freon-114-B2 was used as a reagent) - 20 people died.

    How can such substances be used on a ship full of people, there is a disregard for people's lives.
    1. rolik2
      rolik2 14 December 2013 09: 24
      17
      Quote: The same LYOKHA
      How can such substances be used on a ship full of people

      There is a choice - or ALL will die or several.
    2. pl675
      pl675 14 December 2013 22: 49
      -4
      Quote: The same Lech
      I remember there was an accident on a submarine when the fire extinguishing system worked (the dangerous substance Freon-114-B2 was used as a reagent) - 20 people died.

      How can such substances be used on a ship full of people, there is a disregard for people's lives.


      this question should be addressed to contractors-suppliers, and factory workers of "seals" - why there was a deadly gas ???
      business is hushed up. no traces.
      twenty corpses? - so women still give birth.
      and all because everyone is on ** th.
      1. bencion
        bencion 14 January 2019 08: 21
        0
        The problem was that it was not freon.
    3. Genry
      Genry 14 December 2013 23: 24
      +6
      Quote: The same LYOKHA
      How can such substances be used on a ship full of people, there is a disregard for people's lives.

      Yes, even with carbon dioxide or nitrogen carcasses, there will still be nothing to breathe.
      Freon is easier to store.
      1. Lesnik
        Lesnik 14 December 2013 23: 28
        +3
        Do you know the respected survivability control procedure? and what does l / s breathe during an emergency?
        1. Denis
          Denis 15 December 2013 06: 40
          +2
          Quote: Forestman
          you know the procedure for the struggle for survivability?
          Of course, they saw in the movie!
          The cries are mostly "experts"
          IDA, then they only have a name, and AES only letters
    4. Corsair
      Corsair 15 December 2013 05: 16
      +4
      Quote: The same LYOKHA
      I remember there was an accident on a submarine when the fire extinguishing system worked (the dangerous substance Freon-114-B2 was used as a reagent) - 20 people died.

      How can such substances be used on a ship full of people, there is a disregard for people's lives.

      Better and more efficient than the "LOH" system (in which freon is used), until nothing has been created in the world. The essence of the system is in a sufficiently rapid displacement of oxygen from the combustion zone, as a result of which there is a real probability of the death of the drug compartment that is not included in the PI ...
      In addition, due to the decomposition of freon in the high temperature zone, phosgene gas is also formed, which is also a certain danger.
      But all this is a payment for SAFETY, however paradoxical it may sound yes
    5. stjrm
      stjrm 19 December 2013 12: 43
      +2
      Stew with cakes, mushrooms ...... And delicious for the crew ....

      I’ll tell you a secret, service on a submarine (any and any state) is generally not entirely beneficial for health, yes.
    6. mpa945
      mpa945 3 January 2014 12: 42
      0
      freon 114 B2 - tetrachloro dibromo ethane, in this case, "effective menagers" bought a less expensive substance - tetrafluoro dibromo ethylene, which is never a freon and a fire extinguisher (but what is it called)
  2. Igor39
    Igor39 14 December 2013 08: 43
    +1
    There are too many accidents at our sailors.
    1. Canep
      Canep 14 December 2013 20: 43
      +1
      If you think about it, if our boat collided and got damaged, then the American boat should suffer, but we don’t have such statistics on their boats, either because they damage the damage to their boats, or because there were no such collisions.
    2. ruton
      ruton 14 December 2013 22: 29
      +5
      I did not understand the point of writing an article .. 2/3 of which are devoted to Kursk .. Why is the author worried that we will think that the United States is to blame? Is he their lawyer?
      1. Sirocco
        Sirocco 15 December 2013 04: 35
        +1
        What is hexogen explosive composed of? Of the components of ammonium nitrate and aluminum powder.
        But I didn’t understand, this phrase, the author smashes others to smithereens, but he didn’t bother to ask what is RDX and what it is eaten with. Dear author, nitrate is hygroscopic, and this is the most important thing in our case. I think that our sub-melting is not in the mine, and not in the quarries.
      2. bif
        bif 16 December 2013 00: 25
        -1
        The author is not convincing, others hate - he messes up himself ... I consider it a betrayal, at least, to accuse his own people of "carelessness" and to consider equipment as emergency, shielding the potentially guilty from the states or other NATO countries.
        1. stjrm
          stjrm 19 December 2013 12: 55
          0
          The author is a very competent special. and generally respected in the Navy (for those who really SERVED in the Navy).

          There were several people in the aft compartment of Kursk. They spent some time there. Some believe that they could be saved, but destroyed so that no one would know the truth. And then they were removed from the compartment to the surface ........ What was he dressed with l / s?
          Cover sloppiness this is betrayal, at least.
    3. Alexey K.
      Alexey K. 16 December 2013 00: 38
      +2
      ETERNAL MEMORY OF DIED DIPPERS!
  3. Fox
    Fox 14 December 2013 08: 46
    12
    so, according to Kursk, I understood that the carelessness and stupidity of the crew led to a tragedy ?! no, "retired vice admiral" - rub this crap in the ears of the rams! minusanul ...
    1. PSih2097
      PSih2097 14 December 2013 09: 22
      11
      let's hope that someday the information will be declassified, there is too much of everything there, and the return of aircraft PLO to the airport, when they have already reached the search area for the nuclear submarines and the instant credit tranche, etc.
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 15 December 2013 01: 08
        +7
        Quote: PSih2097
        let's hope that someday information will be declassified, there are too many

        In 50 years we will find out the truth? How did it happen with the death of Novorossiysk (the former Italian LK Giulio Cesare), when in 68 there were witnesses with one foot standing at the edge of the grave, and documents confirming the preparation of the action by officers of the 10th flotilla of the Italian Navy. And a story like "Nazi No. 2 - G. Gesa" can happen. The British saw that World War II could be interpreted differently and that it was possible to turn from an ally into an accomplice and a separatist - and they classified the materials for another 2 years. And the elderly Ges was hanged, having feigned suicide, so as not to blurt out too much.
        Yes severity of the problem for new generations of compatriots it will not be the same as for us, contemporaries. And you will not call anyone to answer. And to spit on graves, even enemies, an ungrateful and low occupation in essence. It is necessary to give due in life - alive. For the edification of posterity.
        1. Lesnik
          Lesnik 15 December 2013 01: 11
          0
          good.... drinks. hi.
    2. Boris55
      Boris55 14 December 2013 09: 34
      +4
      Why did the Kursk nuclear submarine sink? Zaznobin.



      More details with photos: http://www.kpe.ru/biblioteka/konceptualnye-znaniya/1767-60-gibel-apl-kyrsk
      1. Far East
        Far East 14 December 2013 12: 24
        +5
        Quote: Boris55
        Why did the Kursk nuclear submarine sink? Zaznobin.

        my personal opinion Kursk was drowned due to negligence! let the experts understand. Americans are not stupid even though it was in (zero). And this is the phrase "There would have been a thermonuclear war," which means the Americans were not afraid and we are for .... Ali! RAVE!!!! wassat
        1. Boris55
          Boris55 14 December 2013 14: 13
          -7
          Quote: Far East
          americos were not afraid

          Exercises were going on. A training torpedo was fired. The Ame'ra took it personally and fought back in full.
          They pissed, not us.
          1. clidon
            clidon 14 December 2013 14: 31
            12
            Well, yes, the Americans go to the exercise zone and take the preparation for launching the missiles at their own expense. Well, stupid.
            1. Boris55
              Boris55 14 December 2013 14: 43
              -3
              Quote: clidon
              and take preparations for the launch of missiles at their own expense

              Not training, and not rockets, but the actual launch of a training torpedo against a conditional enemy. The teachings were on.
              The Americans were on her way ...
              The exercises are monitored from both sides and not always with a notification of their presence.
              1. clidon
                clidon 14 December 2013 16: 45
                +2
                Well, even if a torpedo. That is, there are exercises, Americans are aware of this. And then the launch of a scientific torpedo, and they bang and so on, they randomly fired, without thinking that they were shooting at exercises. )
              2. rolik2
                rolik2 14 December 2013 17: 00
                0
                Quote: Boris55
                and the actual launch of a training torpedo on a conditional enemy

                And what was the threat in launching the TRAINING torpedo for an American boat?
                1. Boris55
                  Boris55 14 December 2013 18: 32
                  -12 qualifying.
                  And how did they know that the training torpedo? On exercises it happens and they shoot combat.
                  1. clidon
                    clidon 14 December 2013 18: 53
                    +7
                    An interesting reaction - we went to the shooting range, stood near the targets and opened fire on those who are training? )
                  2. stjrm
                    stjrm 19 December 2013 13: 01
                    0
                    Combat torpedoes in the Kuz?
        2. stjrm
          stjrm 19 December 2013 12: 59
          0
          Coincidence, plus negligence .....
      2. Alexey K.
        Alexey K. 14 December 2013 23: 54
        +1
        I recommend reading the book Shigin Vladimir - APRK "Kursk". 10 years later. Facts and Versions: Different versions are sorted out but more believable - a clash with the American nuclear submarine.
        "Version number 6." Kursk "became a victim of a ramming of a foreign submarine. There is also a version of a torpedo attack on" Kursk ". This interpretation of events was voiced on television by General Valery Manilov at one time, it was admitted to a certain extent by the Minister of Defense, the Commander-in-Chief of the Navy and the Commander of the Northern Fleet, many other professionals.What are the facts that allow us to consider this version, if not proven, then the most preferred over all others?
        Firstly, already during the initial survey of the Kursk sinking area, two metal anomalies were found at the bottom close to each other. It must be said that this area (the so-called Yuzhnomurmanskaya bank) is a long-term training ground for the Northern Fleet's combat training, and therefore has been studied long ago up and down. Where did the two anomalies come from? As it turned out later, one anomaly is the Kursk lying at the bottom. And the second one? The second, quite possibly, could have been a damaged foreign submarine lying nearby.
        In a conversation with the author of the book, the commander of the Northern Fleet, Admiral Vyacheslav Popov, confirmed that the "anomaly" was giving international SOS signals, the knocks inside it were clearly audible, and that, apparently, her crew was fighting for survivability. Perhaps these were precisely the very knocks about which there was so much talk at one time. These knocks, it turns out, were actually, but, alas, not where we would like so much. In just a few days, the tape recordings of these knocks will be submitted for examination. Experts will study them and say that it was not people who knocked, but an automatic mechanism. Information about the mechanical nature of knocks will be confirmed in a television speech by Deputy Prime Minister Ilya Klebanov, Chairman of the Government Commission. But the equipment that would automatically transmit the SOS signal was not and is not on our submarines, any submariner will tell you about this.
        And then the second anomaly disappeared somewhere. It could not dissolve and dissolve, and it could not evaporate either. So where the hell did she go? There is nothing special to guess here. The unknown boat, having licked the wounds suffered from the battering ram, might well have slowly crawled away. The following caveat should be made here. The fact is that the design features of our domestic nuclear-powered ships do not allow them to lie down on the ground. If our nuclear submarine goes down, it means that things are bad, it will not surface on its own. The American and British nuclear submarines, unlike ours, can lie on the ground. "
        Here is the link:
        http://profismart.org/web/bookreader-125918-38.php
    3. clidon
      clidon 14 December 2013 09: 50
      +8
      Why immediately "carelessness and stupidity"? Negligence, Russian perhaps (in the navy, he gets along well with the severity of the regulations), fear of the authorities (exercises on the nose, then doubled attention), plus in itself is not the safest weapon and a tragic coincidence.
      Although of course it is most pleasant to blame everything on the Yankees. However, the Kursk crew has long been all the same. The living and the benefit and propaganda are shared and benefited.
      1. cdrt
        cdrt 14 December 2013 17: 32
        +1
        Quote: clidon
        Why immediately "carelessness and stupidity"? Negligence, Russian perhaps (in the navy, he gets along well with the severity of the regulations), fear of the authorities (exercises on the nose, then doubled attention), plus in itself is not the safest weapon and a tragic coincidence.
        Although of course it is most pleasant to blame everything on the Yankees. However, the Kursk crew has long been all the same. The living and the benefit and propaganda are shared and benefited.


        100500
        As there Klyuchevsky described our national character - 3 A: Avos, Avral, Artel
      2. Lesnik
        Lesnik 14 December 2013 19: 00
        0
        Maybe it’s in your PERSONAL FLEET on the nuclear submarines that are slobs and drunks, but in the Russian situation
        1. vlrosch
          vlrosch 14 December 2013 23: 55
          +5
          It was. And now you can bring women to the Premier League. The boat died due to the classic sloppiness. When the boat floats to the periscope depth, all compartments are lifted up, and here everything was wide open. And such trifles will be typed not a little. We learned to blame others.
        2. Delta
          Delta 15 December 2013 00: 14
          +3
          Quote: Forestman
          Maybe it’s in your PERSONAL FLEET on the nuclear submarines that are slobs and drunks, but in the Russian situation


          you do not like to look at things soberly. There are probably no more respected people in the submarine fleet than Osipenko, Mormul, Zhiltsov. These are the people who stood at the origins of the nuclear submarine fleet, people who raised it on their hands. At one time they wrote the book "The Atomic Underwater Epic". Read it. It is difficult to suspect them of being unpatriotic or incompetent. In their book, among other things, it is mentioned more than once about stupidity and sloppiness and many other things that hindered and hinder. And it's about THAT FLEET !. What can we say about modernity ...
          1. Lesnik
            Lesnik 15 December 2013 00: 24
            -1
            Quote: Delta

            In their book, among other things, it is mentioned more than once about stupidity and sloppiness and much more, which hindered and hinders. And this is about that fleet !. What to say about the present ...


            That is, I see only positive examples from the memoirs of these unconditionally respected commanders, and you are only chernukha? With this formulation of the question, I certainly agree, and you? You who position yourself as a submariner with experience! How can you discuss the deceased who cannot protect themselves for well-known reasons?
            1. Delta
              Delta 15 December 2013 00: 32
              +2
              Quote: Forestman
              That is, I see only positive examples from the memoirs of these unconditionally respected commanders, and you are only chernukha?


              No, I just see EVERYTHING. And you are biased looking at things. That is why the Americans are definitely to blame, although you have no evidence.

              Quote: Forestman
              How can you discuss the deceased who cannot protect themselves for well-known reasons?


              interesting, but how to discuss the death of the submarine and crew, if not to talk about mistakes? Do you know that all instructions are written in blood? K-429, too, the Americans drowned? and K-8? and S-178? mass examples
              1. Lesnik
                Lesnik 15 December 2013 00: 40
                0
                Quote: Delta


                No, I just see EVERYTHING. And you are biased looking at things. That is why the Americans are definitely to blame, although you have no evidence.


                Did I write something about amers? Where? again your speculation negative

                Quote: Forestman
                How can you discuss the deceased who cannot protect themselves for well-known reasons?


                Quote: Delta
                interesting, but how to discuss the death of the submarine and crew, if not to talk about mistakes? Do you know that all instructions are written in blood? K-429, too, the Americans drowned? and K-8? and S-178? mass examples


                What kind of mistakes? You are probably an internationally recognized recognized expert to so categorically blame the dead? Or were you present? Your opinion is subjective like mine, but at least I don’t dance on the bones of guys
                1. Delta
                  Delta 15 December 2013 00: 46
                  0
                  Quote: Forestman
                  Did I write something about amers? Where? again your speculation


                  well, at least

                  Quote: Forestman
                  And what do you see a different picture? The nose compartment is completely destroyed !!!!

                  I understand the position of officials on this issue. None of these people will ever admit that there was a fact of a military conflict in peacetime. Otherwise, voters will not understand - as a result of a span in the next election. Recognizing FACT means being required to respond adequately


                  Quote: Forestman
                  What kind of mistakes?


                  I have given you a small part of accidents and disasters in which the human factor played a key role. Who do you think is responsible for the deaths of most of our submarines? the same "Komsomolets", the same K-429. Are magnetic storms to blame? And I'm not an expert. Everything has long been described by other experts, I just have to repeat
                  1. Lesnik
                    Lesnik 15 December 2013 00: 53
                    -4
                    Americans where are you? ay I wrote about you ... maybe? or can not? if maybe where? Funny you delta or provocateur


                    Quote: Forestman
                    What kind of mistakes? What kind of mistakes? You are probably an internationally recognized recognized expert to so categorically blame the dead? Or were you present? Your opinion is subjective like mine, but at least I don’t dance on the bones of guys

                    So I have respect for the deceased, unlike you

                    Quote: Delta
                    I have given you a small part of accidents and disasters in which the human factor played a key role. Who do you think is responsible for the deaths of most of our submarines? the same "Komsomolets", the same K-429. Are magnetic storms to blame? And I'm not an expert. Everything has long been described by other experts, I just have to repeat


                    What kind of experts? probably like Yatsenyuk? beloved by you Evropeets laughing
                    Facts to the studio! will see laughing
                    1. Delta
                      Delta 15 December 2013 01: 03
                      +1
                      Quote: Forestman
                      Americans where are you? ay I wrote about you ... maybe? or can not? if maybe where?


                      hmm ... it's called - moved out. And stupidly. Either you talked about torpedoing, or you didn’t write about Americans. And ... did the Turks torpedo?

                      Quote: Forestman
                      What kind of experts? probably like Yatsenyuk? beloved by you Evropeets


                      and where did it come from and how does this relate to the topic? anyhow blurt out?
                      what are the facts? you are not in the subject, apparently, but the facts about the deaths and accidents of our boats have long been known. Well, educate yourself, I don’t give lectures
                      1. Lesnik
                        Lesnik 15 December 2013 01: 06
                        -4
                        Quote: Delta

                        and where did it come from and how does this relate to the topic? anyhow blurt out?
                        what are the facts? you are not in the subject, apparently, but the facts about the deaths and accidents of our boats have long been known. Well, educate yourself, I don’t give lectures

                        Again blah blah blah visible dermocratic school laughing
                      2. Delta
                        Delta 15 December 2013 01: 18
                        0
                        Quote: Forestman
                        Again blah blah blah visible dermocratic school


                        just about, I said - an empty talker. Not a single question was answered. And at the end of the "arguments" (if you can call it that) - the transition to flags, countries, politics, emotions ...
                        If you undertake to discuss such topics and argue in them, take care of the knowledge base. Otherwise, you will look sorry like today
                      3. Lesnik
                        Lesnik 15 December 2013 01: 25
                        -2
                        Probably since you ... not a single fact .... one thing that you dump onto our fleet .... and deceased sailors .... well, the Americans understand the sample for you dermocrats. And about the base on which you were taught I don’t know anything. I didn’t study propaganda in Amer’s special schools. laughing
                    2. doktor_alex
                      doktor_alex 16 December 2013 23: 48
                      +1
                      YES. Romanov, The tragedy of the submarine "Komsomolets" - read! Your hair will stand on end! Not knowing how the rescue equipment works on your boat and blowing the VVD into the burning compartment is another thing to try! The book contains the facts! Romanov ZGK for the nuclear submarine Komsomolets in Rubin! One of his co-authors Vybornykh was ZGK for nuclear submarine Komsomolets in PKB PO "Sevmash", I had a chance to work with him personally, he is an expert, he was entrusted with complex projects in PKB. And you master only "blah blah blak". Read the experts, and think, think deeply.
                      ZY I doubt that you will master the book, so for you I will quote a phrase that I heard from one of the old installers of Ts.42 who built the whole point of it: "Such a boat, oh **, was, they could not drive it under water during tests, but these bl * they drowned her ..... "And this is in the USSR!
            2. stjrm
              stjrm 19 December 2013 13: 10
              0
              And no one dances on "bones".
              You just have to face the truth. To draw conclusions and work on mistakes, so that from now on our guys do not die in vain.
          2. ytqnhfk
            ytqnhfk 16 December 2013 03: 02
            -1
            Delta and the video this comment for you! I would like to ask you reasoning logically.1 If this is the slovenliness of our sailors (no matter the authorities or the crew), then why was everything classified and "buried"? There were a lot of exposing articles in those days and later, and worse than this! 2 Why, then, did your beloved striped woman bustle so coolly around this event? Why such gestures? To us that every year the CIA officers come and even of such ranks? 3 As long as I can remember, the Americans are not very willing to write off our debts to them, and if they do it, always look at what they are behind, so alas and oh, they are questions and conclusions !!!
          3. stjrm
            stjrm 19 December 2013 13: 07
            0
            In, especially 429 ....... with TWO times
  • StolzSS
    StolzSS 14 December 2013 10: 43
    -3
    No, Kursk was definitely drowned. And then they came up with a fairy tale and the film was shot ...
  • Canep
    Canep 14 December 2013 20: 02
    -1
    It’s useless to argue, we don’t know much, our descendants will learn the truth. What Lyachin and his crew know what really happened there, but they won’t tell us anything. The version of torpedoing from existing open sources does not hold water. The strong case in the area of ​​the round hole is intact, and it itself was formed probably from the impact of the nasal rudder of depth on the ground, as a result, it folded along the hull and pierced the light hull with its end. And Putin loans could get skillfully taking advantage of the situation, and possibly blackmailing mattresses with other results of the investigation, it is POSSIBLE. We can only speak with confidence that the boat drowned, and there are materials from the investigation and the conclusion of the commission of inquiry, everything else is kept secret both by us and by us. About the hole inside:
    Outer sheathing:
    Previously, I also believed that the K-141 was torpedoed, but now I'm not sure about that.
    1. Canep
      Canep 14 December 2013 20: 30
      +3
      If you draw a mental line from the center of the hole to the solid casing, then it intersects with the casing of the solid casing 3-5 meters from the cut plane in the direction of the 3rd compartment. In the photo inside the boat there are no holes in this place. A good reference is the missile launcher’s body, the lower photo shows its upper part in brown, the hole is located 2-3 m from the hatch closer to the stern, the upper photo clearly shows that there are no holes in the sturdy case at this point. It should be 1-1.5 meters from some structural element that stands out on the inner skin of the hull and is visible as a lighter point first from the gap plane.
    2. stjrm
      stjrm 19 December 2013 13: 14
      0
      The outer skin is at the barn.
      Lightweight body - it will be more correct. smile
  • Ihrek
    Ihrek 14 December 2013 09: 12
    -2
    The Americans are unambiguously involved in the downing of the Kursk.
  • makarov
    makarov 14 December 2013 09: 29
    15
    sound material and expert opinion. people were not afraid to go against the system .. respect to the author.
  • Enot-poloskun
    Enot-poloskun 14 December 2013 09: 53
    13
    We need to "quietly" drown a couple of American submarines.

    It is known that U.S. submarines loved to swim in the Arctic Ocean.

    Evil tongues say that under Yeltsin, Americans even sailed to the mouths of Siberian rivers, for example, to the Ob.

    And this is the territorial waters of Russia. It is necessary to sink in territorial waters. Americans will not stink in the press. Because the question arises: what did they do in territorial waters?

    And we will always find an excuse))) The foreign submarine collided with the underwater part of the iceberg. The new Titanic ...
    1. clidon
      clidon 14 December 2013 10: 35
      +3
      You can drown in the terraces. Here are just evil tongues we like to waggle with them more than speak.
      1. Igor39
        Igor39 14 December 2013 12: 31
        18
        Note in the newspaper "Pravda" in the USSR
        "In the Arctic Ocean, an American submarine collided with an iceberg and sank. The iceberg team was awarded orders and medals."
      2. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 15 December 2013 01: 19
        +3
        Quote: clidon
        You can drown in the cords.

        According to the law of the sea - it is impossible. You must bring the boat to the surface. But you can be persecuted if the persecution began in your own waters. But when you "torture" him, and he will use a weapon against you (you can cheat and start the simulator to write a torpedo on the ship in the watchhouse), then you can safely use the WEAPON FOR SELF-DEFENSE. But this will pass, if there are no witnesses, the records in the documents will confirm the evasion from TO (Evasion MANEUVER - changes in course, speed, commands, etc., G / A records ...). BUT senior bosses will never agree to this: the war and mn complications are not needed by anyone.
        1. clidon
          clidon 15 December 2013 08: 35
          +1
          Well, we understand that "raising the boat to the surface" can be overdone. After all, it will be raised by firing small caliber GBs.
        2. stjrm
          stjrm 19 December 2013 18: 26
          +1
          Why drown?

          On the map (on theirs too) it is registered, for example, the area closed for swimming. Torpedo shooting area. It does not have to be in our Ter. waters. Truth?
          If you, for example, in this area and suddenly do not hear RTM, but HIS? How would they wail? But my commander was gasping. Almost punched holes in the tunic. Well, why, I climbed into the area closed for swimming, without permission, which is required if it’s already locked.
          And after all, a torpedo was launched (the war would have been, krant moose). The torpedo went through the analysis very close to its stern. Well, screws would be removed, maybe feathers. I managed to dive bastard and wash off. Surfaced as cute. The year seems 1988-89. This is when they came up with the idea that strategists should shoot at the feed sectors.
          And on the "mountain", they got not weak people and were sent with the KBR RTM to draw the "correct" maneuvering. So they said, "Now, if you hit him, you would have orders in the holes, and so x .. you ass ..." Well at least the shooting was counted.
          Senior bosses do not need complexity, that's for sure.
    2. gispanec
      gispanec 14 December 2013 14: 53
      +2
      Quote: Enot-poloskun
      Evil tongues say that under Yeltsin, Americans even sailed to the mouths of Siberian rivers, for example, to the Ob.

      and good languages ​​say that Obama .... this is Vyasya Vasechkin, only after cosmetic surgery ....
      1. Enot-poloskun
        Enot-poloskun 15 December 2013 09: 10
        +1
        I think the time will come when the American president will be asked: "What happened to our ultra-modern submarine? - And he will answer:" She drowned. "
      2. stjrm
        stjrm 19 December 2013 18: 32
        0
        How can an Uzbek be Vasya?
  • faraon
    faraon 14 December 2013 10: 07
    0
    I read an article, very good material that allows you to look at this topic from the opposite side. Read the opinions of specialists. And indeed it turned out precisely because of a crew error. Eternal memory to the submariners from Kursk.
    1. Boris55
      Boris55 14 December 2013 11: 12
      -10 qualifying.
      Quote: faraon
      It turned out precisely because of a crew error

      Four torpedoes were fired at the Kursk. Look at the inlet. Dent inside!

      1. Koryak
        Koryak 14 December 2013 12: 59
        0
        Water bursting through the hole into the compartment, in which direction should its edges turn out?
        1. m262
          m262 14 December 2013 16: 38
          +7
          There was recently an article about the vulnerability of Arlie Berkov, look how torpedo holes actually look like, these are "holes" tens of square meters in size! The explosion of 200-300 kilograms of explosives under water does not make neat holes in the side of the boat, but an eerie mess of crumpled and torn metal.
          1. rolik2
            rolik2 14 December 2013 16: 54
            +2
            The cruiser Seydlitz in the dock after the battle of Jutland. View of damage from hitting a torpedo from a British destroyer


            Damage to the American battleship North Caroline from a Japanese torpedo


            USS West Virginia


            Depth Bomb Damage


            Torpedoed "Liberty"
            1. ytqnhfk
              ytqnhfk 16 December 2013 03: 08
              -1
              Video THIS IS Above-water ships sorry, but the apl class is another "floating craft" besides the fact that your photos are 70 years old! The difference in metal and technology, etc., etc.!
          2. Lesnik
            Lesnik 14 December 2013 17: 08
            0
            And what do you see a different picture? The nose compartment is completely destroyed !!!!

            I understand the position of officials on this issue. None of these people will ever admit that there was a fact of a military conflict in peacetime. Otherwise, voters will not understand - as a result of a span in the next election. Recognizing FACT means being required to respond adequately soldier
            1. rolik2
              rolik2 14 December 2013 17: 12
              0
              The nose compartment is not destroyed at the point of impact of the so-called torpedo, but in front of it, at the point of impact, even a sturdy hull is not broken (see photo below)
            2. Lesnik
              Lesnik 14 December 2013 17: 24
              0
              Quote: Forestman
              And what do you see a different picture? The nose compartment is completely destroyed !!!!

              I understand the position of officials on this issue. None of these people will ever admit that there was a fact of a military conflict in peacetime. Otherwise, voters will not understand - as a result of a span in the next election. Recognizing FACT means being required to respond adequately soldier


              Explosion of explosives (torpedoes) occurred OUTSIDE
              1. rolik2
                rolik2 14 December 2013 17: 27
                0
                Quote: Forestman
                Explosion of explosives (torpedoes) occurred OUTSIDE


                And the hole is from a torpedo why is it a whole?
                1. Lesnik
                  Lesnik 14 December 2013 17: 32
                  0
                  Quote: rolik2
                  And the hole is from a torpedo why is it a whole?

                  Well, firstly, not a "hole" but a hole, and secondly, ask WHEN and for what reason the "hole" appeared
          3. Rurikovich
            Rurikovich 14 December 2013 19: 12
            +4
            I dare to assume that at different times there were and are different types of ammunition. In the artillery battles of the first half of the twentieth century, the most vital parts of a large warship were armored. Depending on the schools of shipbuilding, the booking was carried out on the principle of "all or nothing" (American school), or differentially, depending on the importance of the covered area (European school). Therefore, to hit these parts of the ship, armor-piercing shells were used (with "Makarov" caps made of soft steel, with various retarders). the projectile had to penetrate the armor belt in order to inflict maximum damage.
            Further. Torpedo weapons are used to damage the underwater hull. it was not armored and there is no need to overcome the armor layer, contact-type torpedo fuses. Consequently, the magnitude of the torpedo charge plays a big role to give greater destruction to the attacked enemy. As shown in the photographs rolik2. In contrast, anti-torpedo protection was used, which ate a certain reserve of displacement and protected, depending on the thickness and size of the ship, from rare hits (1,2, maximum three) When it gets into the armored side only paint suffered from the explosion. I won’t touch on specific cases - it will take place and time.
            Now about my personal opinion. Soviet boats are double hull. Given the dimensions of the K-141, the thickness of the space between the light and durable body, modern means of combating flooding (in particular, a very short time to shut down the compartment), it is not a fact that an explosion near the body or even one hit would be enough to guarantee the destruction of K-141. When entering the body with subsequent detonation, a series of sealed bulkheads is destroyed due to the propagation of an explosive wave in a confined space, and the presence of only an inlet from the ammunition is sufficient for water to enter and uncontrolled flooding. The presence of a mythical uranium core is not necessary, since the speed is 50 knots multiplied it’s enough to weigh 1,5 tons and a small (533 mm) diameter to flash a light and durable case and explode inside. This, perhaps, indicates the presence of a strange a hole in the starboard side of K-141. The turmoil with delaying the crew’s salvage, America’s numerous concessions at that time suggest that it’s not so simple as various experts and admirals try to suck in. Falsification of a flight to the Moon, which resulted in numerous preferences of the USSR on the part of the United States (i.e., conspiracy), an investigation of Kennedy’s death similar to two drops of water (it’s proved that this is a conspiracy of special services in a compartment with Vice President L. Johnson, and they’re giving us some solitude, plus ignoring very difficult arguments in this case and retracting the witnesses), a very dark story of the death of K-141 - if the links of one chain in politics, in which the pawns are ordinary people It is my personal opinion?. And it seems to me that officially the truth, if it comes up, it won’t come soon ... For those who think there is where to think in search of truth, for the rest the people will have enough noodles that are hung on their ears by zombies hi
        2. Lesnik
          Lesnik 14 December 2013 17: 02
          0
          Cool do you consider the resistance of the metal or not? or double plasticine case?
          1. rolik2
            rolik2 14 December 2013 17: 06
            -1
            Quote: Forestman
            Cool do you consider the resistance of the metal or not? or double plasticine case?

            What are you about???
            1. Lesnik
              Lesnik 14 December 2013 17: 46
              0
              About the pressure that supposedly according to your version was able to deploy a solid nuclear submarine inside
          2. Lesnik
            Lesnik 14 December 2013 17: 11
            -2
            Water bursting through the hole into the compartment, in which direction should its edges turn out?
      2. Delta
        Delta 14 December 2013 15: 51
        11
        Quote: Boris55
        4 torpedoes were fired at Kursk


        not 4, but 8. The rest already flew into the holes and flew from the opposite side
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. rolik2
        rolik2 14 December 2013 16: 57
        0
        Quote: Boris55
        Look at the inlet. Dent inward!


        In your photo we see a hole in the light hull of the boat. We do not know whether it appeared before the accident, during the accident or after the accident. The rugged case is not visible in the photographs. If there is a hole in the sturdy hull too, then the hole could have formed during the accident, water could have entered through it and drowned the boat. If the solid hull in this place is intact, then the hole is not related to the death of the boat. Through it, only water can enter the inter-chamber space, and we already have it there.

        The place of the durable case, opposite which is the hole in the light case, is circled. So, the strong hull is intact, therefore, the hole in the lung could not be the cause of the death of the boat.

        1. Boris55
          Boris55 14 December 2013 17: 10
          0
          Quote: rolik2
          In your photo we see a hole in the light hull of the boat.

          More details with photos:
          http://www.kpe.ru/biblioteka/konceptualnye-znaniya/1767-60-gibel-apl-kyrsk





          1. rolik2
            rolik2 14 December 2013 17: 16
            0
            Quote: Boris55
            More details with photos:
            http://www.kpe.ru/biblioteka/konceptualnye-znaniya/1767-60-gibel-apl-kyrsk


            American submarines are armed with Mk-48 torpedoes with an explosive mass of about 300kg. This explosive (PBXN-105) is more powerful than TNT, i.e. the power of an American torpedo explosion is equivalent to an explosion of approx. 530-550 kg in TNT equivalent.

            With the explosion of such an amount of explosives in the side there will be a gap of 10 * 10 meters in size, and not a small round hole for which you are so stubbornly hooked.
            1. Boris55
              Boris55 14 December 2013 17: 32
              -1
              I haven’t said anything about this little round hole.
              I'm in that photo more interested in what is to her right.
              1. rolik2
                rolik2 14 December 2013 17: 40
                -4
                Quote: Boris55
                I'm in that photo more interested in what is to her right.

                And what is so interesting there? Dented constructions that could appear while cutting the bow compartment and raising the boat?
                1. Boris55
                  Boris55 14 December 2013 17: 49
                  +2
                  Quote: rolik2
                  Dented constructions that could appear while cutting the bow compartment and raising the boat?

                  They are not turned out.
                  Do you even imagine the thickness of the metal? This is not a can that you can crush with your hands.



                  Yes, and why are you so worried about the Americans that you do not multiply even the very assumption of their guilt? Do they have content?
                  1. rolik2
                    rolik2 14 December 2013 17: 55
                    0
                    Quote: Boris55
                    They are not turned out.

                    With an explosion of 300 kg of TNT there would be a hole 10 * 10 meters
                    1. Boris55
                      Boris55 14 December 2013 17: 59
                      +3
                      Quote: rolik2
                      With an explosion of 300 kg of TNT there would be a hole 10 * 10 meters

                      The nose was cut along the line of the explosion. "10x10" remained at the bottom.
                      1. rolik2
                        rolik2 14 December 2013 18: 03
                        0
                        Quote: Boris55
                        "10x10" remained at the bottom.

                        Then why is the hole from the torpedo left?
                      2. Lesnik
                        Lesnik 14 December 2013 18: 09
                        +1
                        The hole remained because it was specially cut out AFTER the submarine was lifted in order to examine the condition of the hulls.
                        Further, the torpedo detonation occurs near the nuclear submarine and not with direct contact, and the nuclear submarine is defeated due to the explosive action of an explosive, and your pictures relate to the last century - then yes - the fuse was fired from a strike
                      3. Lesnik
                        Lesnik 14 December 2013 18: 13
                        0
                        I see the arguments are over - there are minuses laughing
                      4. rolik2
                        rolik2 14 December 2013 18: 21
                        +1
                        Quote: Forestman
                        cons remained

                        Yeah me, too, someone is not sickly minusanul -250
                      5. Lesnik
                        Lesnik 14 December 2013 18: 23
                        +1
                        laughing I have a similar situation laughing but I'm not worried about it
                  2. rolik2
                    rolik2 14 December 2013 18: 16
                    0
                    Then what do you base your version of torpedoing on?
                  3. Lesnik
                    Lesnik 14 December 2013 18: 17
                    0
                    On the nature of the damage
                  4. Cat
                    Cat 14 December 2013 18: 48
                    +2
                    Quote: Forestman
                    On the nature of the damage

                    to draw conclusions based on the nature of the damage - you need to know a great many nuances, especially regarding the movement and position of the boat. For example, if at the time of the torpedo explosion under the keel was 70 meters - the picture will be one, but if only 7 feet - then completely different. Plus the speed and trim of the boat, which affects damage in contact with the ground: if a fool with a length of 150 m and a displacement of 23 thousand tons drifts to the bottom even at 10 knots, then the hull will corrode without any explosions in full, and if the speed is still more? Moreover, the damage will be from external exposure. And there are such nuances - a carriage and a small cart, only information on them is hardly available in open, or even not very open sources. If at all there were crowds of onlookers, with cameras and smartphones, at the time of the accident, there was somehow no evidence of the state of the flight recorders and the data on them, too, rumors, even to the extent that some of the systems were deliberately turned off.
                    In general, all these conclusions based on indirect data - have approximately the same reliability as fortune telling on coffee grounds.
                  5. Lesnik
                    Lesnik 14 December 2013 18: 57
                    -1
                    That is - a solid body wrapped in as a result of a nuclear submarine strike on the ground? The question is why did the submarine enter the ground with the right cheekbone? what is the state of the steering position and, in general, ALL DUTY CHANGE of the conning tower in order not to notice a change in the pitch of the submarine? Do you believe that yourself? negative
                  6. Cat
                    Cat 14 December 2013 20: 28
                    0
                    Quote: Forestman
                    That is - a solid body wrapped in as a result of a nuclear submarine strike on the ground? The question is why did the submarine enter the ground with the right cheekbone? what is the state of the steering position and, in general, ALL DUTY CHANGE of the conning tower in order not to notice a change in the pitch of the submarine? Do you believe that yourself?

                    the depth at the accident site is 108 m, even if the boat is above the surface, only 99 meters remain to the bottom. But the boat goes under water, for example, at 30 meters, to the bottom 60, the length of the boat is 154, let it be 8 knots. In the event of an emergency in the first compartment with the flooding thereof and the occurrence of trim, for example, by 15 ° - how many seconds will horizontal people have to level the boat? We take the calculator and count. And do not forget about the inertia of 23000 tons.
                    And the bottom topography - it is not perfectly even, there may be holes or sticking stones - which, in turn, will also affect the nature of the damage (even if the submarine enters the ground without a roll)
                  7. Lesnik
                    Lesnik 14 December 2013 22: 11
                    0
                    It’s only correct if the crew could not start the struggle for survivability due to the death of the crew from the combat control post and the condition of the submarine is explained, that is, critical damage WAS APPLIED BEFORE THE APPLIANCE LAY ON THE GROUND hi
                  8. Cat
                    Cat 14 December 2013 23: 45
                    0
                    Quote: Forestman
                    that is, critical damage WAS APPLIED BEFORE THE APPLIANCE LAY ON THE GROUND

                    not necessary. Some damage (albeit not fatal), but as a result of which there is trim on the nose, a blow to the ground - and, as a result, the destruction and detonation of torpedoes. After that, it is useless to fight for survivability, and there is nobody ...

                    By the way, what I personally do not understand in the story of Kursk: the explosion of the torpedo occurred either during the shot, or during the preparation process. Can any of the submariners name the range of depths and speeds that are accepted as standard for torpedo firing from Anteevs? I do not know these data, and without them it is unrealistic to estimate the probability of this or that maneuver (at least approximately, not for official statements and disclosures - just for my own interest)))
                    Again, after a salvo, a submarine necessarily performs an evasion maneuver - but how to perform it in cramped conditions, when the slightest error with rudders of depth or ballast leads to impact on the ground? And what did K-141 do in such a shallow place for her?
                    If any of the specialists can provide information, or share a link to it, I will be very grateful =)
                  9. Delta
                    Delta 14 December 2013 23: 52
                    0
                    Quote: Cat
                    Again, after a salvo, the submarine necessarily carries out an evasion maneuver


                    it is in a combat setting. In the greenhouse conditions of modern teachings, no one does it

                    Quote: Cat
                    And what did K-141 do in such a shallow place for her?

                    and it is necessary to ask Popov, Motsak .....
                  10. stjrm
                    stjrm 19 December 2013 15: 42
                    0
                    only if? Just do not ask some .....
          2. Zeus
            Zeus 14 December 2013 20: 47
            +3
            All crew members in the command compartment were disconnected after a strong concussion from the first explosion.
          3. stjrm
            stjrm 19 December 2013 13: 29
            0
            Waha does not rush in the "conning tower".
            The control of the ship (PL is a ship, I’m just explaining) takes place with the emergency control room (main Command Post), on this project it is almost half the compartment.
            A submarine does not have pitch ....... DIFFERENT remember, this is the name of what you are talking about.
            Apparently you saw the submarines only in the picture, well, maybe you went on an excursion to which diesel engine from time immemorial.
            Why talk about absolute zero?
        2. stjrm
          stjrm 19 December 2013 18: 01
          0
          The impact on the ground was such that the shafts entered the PC but 40 centimeters .....
          Why did water enter the compartment .....
          If we assume that for leaving the periscope, a greater than 3-5 degrees of trim was created, a greater move was made and taken in quick, then here is a meeting with the ground. We take into account that there is a torpedo on board ....
          A blow to the ground, an explosion of a fat woman and the detonation of several torpedoes ...... That's all ...
          By the way, the commander could not have imagined that under him at the time of leaving the re-scope only about a hundred meters ....
          I haven’t seen the map, but the bottom of the ocean is not even. Here it can be 250, 300 meters, and here it can already be 98. If we assume that the ship was actively maneuvering, choosing a position for firing, it popped up, sank, spun along the course, changed the course mode. It's very easy to lose the exact place, well, plus or minus. If the depths of the polygon were all for 300-400 meters, then maybe a tragedy of this magnitude did not happen. The rights of the KAA, many circumstances came together at the same time for this crew. Of course it's a pity guys.
  • Boris55
    Boris55 14 December 2013 18: 10
    +2
    Quote: rolik2
    Then why is the hole from the torpedo left?

    I don’t think this is a torpedo hole. This is something else.
  • Delta
    Delta 14 December 2013 17: 58
    +5
    Quote: Boris55
    Yes, and why are you so worried about the Americans that you do not multiply even the very assumption of their guilt? Do they have content?


    just about when even such arguments end, the accusations of insufficient patriotism and work for the US special services begin)))
  • Cat
    Cat 14 December 2013 17: 16
    -10 qualifying.
    Quote: rolik2
    The place of the durable case, opposite which is the hole in the light case, is circled. So, the strong hull is intact, therefore, the hole in the lung could not be the cause of the death of the boat.

    You obviously inattentively delved into the arguments, and did not bother to compare the facts - and it is clearly written about the "depleted uranium torpedo tip". That is, we are dealing with the newest secret tandem torpedo: the depleted uranium tip penetrates the light hull, the torpedo rests on the strong one - after which the cumulative jet enters the case. Which, in fact, burns through the solid hull and creates excess pressure in the compartment, and since all the hatches in the compartment are battened down, the crew, accordingly, dies, there is no one to plug the hole in the side, the boat is gaining water and goes to the bottom.
    Well, the fact that in the photo there are no such openings in a sturdy case ... Have you ever seen a tank or armored personnel carrier damaged from the border? And here it’s similar: Maaakhinka is such a hole, which you can’t immediately see right behind the rest of the fittings, what can I say about photography.

    Such is, approximately, the alignment. As for me, it is quite logical, especially in comparison with the conclusions of other "experts" and other supporters of the conspiracy theory =))))
    1. rolik2
      rolik2 14 December 2013 17: 21
      +5
      Quote: Cat
      about the "depleted uranium warhead"


      Fuck a torpedo, the speed of which is 40-50 knots "depleted uranium warhead", and could you, in support of your idea, provide some data on the fact that such a warhead was ever developed.?

      Quote: Cat
      the cumulative jet comes into play

      What do you smoke dear? When did torpedoes cumulatively make ??

      Quote: Cat
      quite logical

      For client psycho dispensary laughing
      1. Lesnik
        Lesnik 14 December 2013 17: 29
        0
        For client psycho dispensary

        You are a little ham negative
        1. rolik2
          rolik2 14 December 2013 17: 44
          0
          I apologize if I insulted, but it really hurts fantastic versions.
          1. Delta
            Delta 14 December 2013 17: 45
            +2
            Quote: rolik2
            but it’s really fantastic versions.


            otherwise it will not be interesting. And how, then, without a great conspiracy and "bloody gebney"
          2. The comment was deleted.
          3. Cat
            Cat 14 December 2013 17: 56
            0
            Quote: rolik2
            I apologize if I insulted, but it really hurts fantastic versions.

            such a thing as irony Do you know If not - google kaknit at your leisure, you can learn something interesting =)))
      2. Cat
        Cat 14 December 2013 17: 36
        +3
        Quote: rolik2
        Fuck a torpedo, the speed of which is 40-50 knots "depleted uranium warhead", and could you, in support of your idea, provide some data on the fact that such a warhead was ever developed.?

        Will you provide data? Yeah, schazz. It is said that the torpedo is secret. So secret that not only submariners - even scientists do not know anything about it (as well as about a tank capable of operating at minus 350 Celsius).
        Quote: rolik2
        What do you smoke dear? When did torpedoes cumulatively make ??

        I smoke Camel, manufactured by JT International Ukraine. Cigarettes, it seems, are with tobacco, but judging by the emergence of cumulative torpedoes - about tobacco, these same PAT "JT kaktam next ..." are clearly not saying something =)
        Quote: rolik2
        For client psycho dispensary

        The dispensary is rumored to be warm and well fed, and they are not forced to go to work. It’s quite a cozy place, in short =)))
        1. Zeus
          Zeus 14 December 2013 17: 43
          -1
          Quote: Cat
          So secret that not only submariners - not even scientists know anything about it


          And who in this case developed this torpedo?
          1. Cat
            Cat 14 December 2013 17: 51
            +2
            Quote: Zeus
            Quote: Cat
            So secret that not only submariners - not even scientists know anything about it


            And who in this case developed this torpedo?


            Classes at the tank school. The ensign begins the lecture:
            - So, comrade cadets, now you will get acquainted with the latest secret tank that can operate even at a temperature of minus 350 degrees Celsius!
            One of the cadets holds out his hand:
            - But, comrade ensign ... what are minus 350 ??? Scientists have found that absolute zero is minus 273,15 ° C, it simply does not happen below temperature !!!
            - For stupid ones, I repeat: the tank is secret. So secret that your scientists know nothing about it!


            PS: secret cumulative torpedo - from the same series =)))
        2. Delta
          Delta 14 December 2013 17: 44
          -1
          Quote: Cat
          It is said that the torpedo is secret. So secret that not only submariners - not even scientists know anything about it


          No one knows. Only you.
        3. The comment was deleted.
        4. rolik2
          rolik2 14 December 2013 17: 46
          0
          Respect, Cheered laughing good
  • Rurikovich
    Rurikovich 14 December 2013 19: 25
    +1
    This is a STRONG case! Lightweight is the outer shell itself with a strange "hole". Because hypothetical topred came from the aft heading angles, then the inlet at the edge of the cut is still preserved, which cannot be said about the more durable hull (by the way, the thickness is from 45 to 70 mm of very high-strength steel) that remained in the sea. And the thickness between the light and strong hulls was not less than 3,5 meters, mto is quite impressive.
  • Zeus
    Zeus 14 December 2013 17: 14
    +3
    This hole was cut out after the death of the boat precisely in the place of the dent to make an examination of the boat material for the presence in it of material from the hull of a foreign submarine.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • saturn.mmm
    saturn.mmm 14 December 2013 21: 30
    +2
    Quote: Boris55
    Four torpedoes were fired at the Kursk. Look at the inlet. Dent inside!

    And that torpedo hull pierced but did not explode?
  • Boa kaa
    Boa kaa 15 December 2013 01: 46
    +4
    Quote: faraon
    And indeed, it turned out precisely because of a crew error.

    "Do not judge, but you will not be judged" (c)
    If the "fat woman" did not gas ... If the watch torpedo operator, as it should be according to the instructions, clearly counted the number of bubbles of released hydrogen from "Sadko", and timely made reports on the dynamics of the process, and the "mine" (KBCH-3) was good obscenely yelled at the HS about a gas torpedo, which must be fired in an emergency, and not allowed under the belly of "Peter", on which the naval and representatives of Oboronexport are trying to snatch it to a foreign customer, and the commander, knowing about this, nevertheless accidentally drops it, then ... Too many tragic coincidences for one crew.
    I think that the striped ones also put to this paw. This is from information from eyewitnesses on board the NK in the disaster area. So the truth is somewhere nearby.
  • IGS
    IGS 14 December 2013 10: 08
    15
    I am not an expert in this, but the fact that there is a lot of speculation on this topic is for sure. I watched some kind of film, commented experts and so convincingly, and suddenly they talk about depleted uranium, I was shocked like a current, why on a torpedo with its speed depleted uranium in the form of a core, tip, cap or something else ???? Depleted uranium is used because of its high density, and because of an interesting physical property: when the uranium core collides with the armor at high speed, it seems to "self-sharpen". After that, he began to be skeptical about everything. It is not necessary to lay it all out on purpose for everyone to see, this is the business of specialists to figure it out and take measures to prevent this from happening in the future. Public posting for laymen with those details is speculation on the misfortune and grief of others. I know one thing: the sailors died, both from our side and from "their" side, they died a terrible death, for me it is heroism that they simply go out to sea, they have Eternal Memory.
    1. And Us Rat
      And Us Rat 14 December 2013 13: 03
      10
      Quote: IGS
      ... im eternal memory.


      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 15 December 2013 02: 14
        +3
        Quote: And Us Rat
        And Us Rat (1)
        Quote: IGS
        ... im eternal memory.

        HOW LACQUEROUS, BUT CAPACITY! THANKS...
  • uestlend
    uestlend 14 December 2013 10: 30
    +3
    Ships crap crew gouging super version, the official version of the explosion of your own torpedo almost rotten can be worked out in any industry for decades, consider yourself a specialist by learning a few terms and location of nodes, but not understanding this and not the hell and the commission you were told what the reason, and you nodded together, but the government, which did not save our sailors, hopefully, after many years, they will answer in full.
    1. clidon
      clidon 14 December 2013 10: 47
      +3
      As if the explosions of their own torpedoes are something fantastic. Yes, periodically someone explodes on board. The British similar torpedo ditched the submarine Sidon, we, right at the pier in the Arctic, pulled the B-37 ...
    2. Yegorchik
      Yegorchik 14 December 2013 11: 27
      +2
      One of the first statements by Putin- "You know, we have no other information, we have no other versions. Either there really was a collision, or a mine, perhaps an explosion inside the boat, although experts do not think so - it is practically unrealistic, but theoretically possible. I repeat: In addition to the military, I also talked with technical specialists, which means that the hole is very large - one and a half to two meters. Apparently, from an explosion. The explosion was so powerful that, of course, in the first sections the tragedy occurred within one and a half to two minutes ... "
      So that round hole that they like to show on the forums has nothing to do with the death of the boat, as well as the version that this hole was made by a mythical tip made of depleted uranium. All much more prosaic compartments with traces of a real explosion of an American torpedo "hole one and a half by two meters" are cut off and Yes, there was information that after the death of Kursk, the automatic torpedo system on the Pi Ndos boats of the ball was turned off.
  • kair_kz
    kair_kz 14 December 2013 11: 19
    +3
    Eternal memory to the crew of Kursk! He was still a kid, watched on TV, worried
    1. Boris55
      Boris55 14 December 2013 11: 43
      0
      And to all who did not return to the pier ...



      About the Kursk’s secret campaign that prevented the dismemberment of Russia:
      http://www.kpe.ru/sobytiya-i-mneniya/ocenka-sostavlyayuschih-jizni-obschestva/vo
      orujennye-sily-armiya / 2929-o-tainpm-pohode-kurska


      "In memory of the dead Russian sailors of the nuclear submarine" Kursk "" and a letter of thanks from the King of Norway:

  • largus886
    largus886 14 December 2013 11: 38
    +7
    For the gifted, I’ll remind you of the state of combat readiness of the Russian army and navy in 2000, this state is called complete devastation! Therefore, a crew error of 90% took place and the readiness of the fleet's rescue forces did not occur. And the rest is speculation and not a clean PR on the bones of sailors! Respect article
  • sasska
    sasska 14 December 2013 11: 51
    -1
    Quote: Fox
    so, according to Kursk, I understood that the carelessness and stupidity of the crew led to a tragedy ?! no, "retired vice admiral" - rub this crap in the ears of the rams! minusanul ...

    “Stop creating and developing myths about the involvement of American submarines in the death of our K-129, K-219, K-141 Kursk submarines. These myths prevent us from objectively assessing our own capabilities and the combat qualities of our ships. The Americans have nothing to do with these disasters Dont Have."
    and men don’t even know ...
    bastard, fulfills the State Department pension or what?
    eternal memory of the dead
    1. largus886
      largus886 14 December 2013 12: 32
      +6
      What a sensible submarine commander would give an order for a torpedo attack in alien ter. waters and under the nose of anti-submarine forces? Probably agreed with Putin that they would not be touched. There are no suicides there. The easiest to blame on amers
      1. largus886
        largus886 14 December 2013 12: 50
        -3
        No, I’m probably wrong there are suicides! In the movie I saw called Case in a square 36-80.
        1. clidon
          clidon 14 December 2013 13: 07
          +7
          And I saw in a movie how a man on a fighter hit a plate of aliens.
  • vmf971
    vmf971 14 December 2013 12: 48
    +2
    yeah the best crew sunk this is a division of americos
  • poccinin
    poccinin 14 December 2013 13: 20
    -4
    read an article by captain 1st rank retired Alexander Peskov. interview with NEWSLAND.COM newspaper 14.08.13. so he says 1.that torpedoes have 4 levels of protection and they don’t just explode. 2.the boat was at the time of death on the surface, all the retractable devices were exposed. since the depth under the keel was only 115 meters and the length of the boat is 150 meters. this is as a "puddle for pike" to dive the boat must have at least 3 lengths of its hull under the keel. collisions with a US boat are also probable. There were collisions before, but all got along with scratches and dents. 4. "KURS" was sunk by ground-to-ground missiles during the exercise. If anyone is interested, write. I have an article in "classmates"
    1. largus886
      largus886 14 December 2013 13: 27
      0
      Whose rocket?
      1. clidon
        clidon 14 December 2013 13: 46
        +2
        This, apparently, is about the version that during the exercises "Peter the Great" shot down the "Kursk" with his PLUR "Waterfall". In my opinion, even more delusional than the option with the shooting at the boat by the Americans.
      2. Dimy4
        Dimy4 14 December 2013 14: 06
        0
        Our. There was such a version, but it was quickly removed.
    2. The comment was deleted.
    3. Zeus
      Zeus 14 December 2013 17: 35
      +2
      Quote: poccinin
      in order to sink the boat must have at least 3 lengths of its hull under the keel


      Brad!
    4. Delta
      Delta 14 December 2013 17: 43
      +1
      Quote: poccinin
      torpedoes have 4 levels of protection and just do not explode


      Well then read about the B-37 submarine and how her torpedoes exploded. All the same, with all degrees of protection.

      Quote: poccinin
      the boat was at the time of death on the surface all the retractable devices were exposed


      on the surface she was not, what nonsense sculpt? where is it from? it was at periscope depth, and therefore retractable devices were advanced. And I was on the periscope simply because I was preparing to shoot a practical (training) 400-mm electric torpedo, according to the plan of the exercises.

      Quote: poccinin
      KURS was sunk by surface-to-surface missiles


      well, there’s a curtain
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 15 December 2013 02: 47
        +1
        Quote: Delta
        preparing for firing a practical (training) 400-mm electric torpedo, according to the plan of the exercises.

        Vyacheslav, hello! Where does infa come from, maybe something new has appeared here, but I don’t know?
        "Torpedo armament submarine pr.949A is represented by six bow torpedo tubes: 2 × 650 mm and 4 × 533 mm. The ammunition stock includes 8-12 rocket-torpedoes and torpedoes of 650 mm caliber and 16 torpedoes of 533 mm caliber. "
        Well, if only in a thick TA to install a lattice and experience self-exit?
        1. Delta
          Delta 15 December 2013 12: 56
          +1
          Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
          Vyacheslav, hello! Where does infa come from?


          greetings. Yes, I thought about the 667 project, but wrote about "Antey". It was late, I wanted to sleep))) It happens. I apologize
        2. mpa945
          mpa945 3 January 2014 13: 15
          0
          torpedo launcher complex prRK pr 949a a little different
    5. Boa kaa
      Boa kaa 15 December 2013 02: 35
      +2
      Quote: poccinin
      read an article by captain 1 rank of retired Alexander Peskov.

      Professor Preobrazhensky did not advise reading Soviet newspapers and was somewhere right. Peskov is apparently far from the fleet, as he began to learn on a cycle. But we know: you can’t do, manage, you go to teach.
      Quote: poccinin
      4 torpedoes of protection level

      Actually 2. And the final cocking warhead for the passage of 200 m distance.
      Kursk hung under the periscope, as evidenced by a list of retractable
      Quote: poccinin
      in order to sink the boat must have at least 3 of the length of its hull under the keel.

      Bullshit! If the memory does not change the 100m, which are the sum of the bottom limit --50m, the depth of the safe from ramming NK -20m, the vertical projection of the boat, plus the yaw in depth. At least they trimmed on 100 meters without comment.
      There are no words about the "collision" and the defeat of the RO "surface-to-surface" (and not "ground-to-ground", maybe in the sea "land" at the depth of the place) - there are no words: delirium is not commented on.
  • vvp2412
    vvp2412 14 December 2013 14: 02
    -2
    Here is what I found about this so-called author Ryazantsev:

    "Notes on the words and actions of VD Ryazantsev, vice-admiral-reserve Material index
    Notes on the words and actions of V.D. Ryazantsev, vice admiral of the reserve
    Page 2
    Page 3
    All pages

    Page 1 from 3

    Fulfilling your obligation: to clarify and clarify the materials posted on the K-244 SITE, as well as to respond to comments and recommendations received both in connection with the Response of V.D. Ryazantsev to the REVIEW of V.I. Alikov, and in connection with the Article about the Prize Attack-87, and at the same time place everything constructive in these receipts on the K-244 SITE and realize it as much as possible; and also fulfilling the promise: to give explanations on the comments of V.D. Ryazantsev contained in his Response to the REVIEW, which are not manifestly unfit, i.e., absurd and (or) insulting,

    I REPORT visitors to the K-244 SITE as follows.




    The first one. Lack of awareness of the majority of visitors to K-244 SITE is a fact.

    V. Ryazantsev relies on the “supervisibility” of incompetent visitors, and I, Alikov, count on their conscientiousness and on the fact that these visitors will be attentive to the content of the materials.



    The second one. The MEANING of my NOTES is to discredit the arguments of V.D. Ryazantsev, who, abusing his high rank of vice admiral, is trying to discredit the Fleet and sailors



    The Response of V.D. Ryazantsev (hereinafter - V.R.) to my TESTIMONIAL to the article “In the wake of death” is nothing that would remove my accusations of that Article of its groundlessness and harmfulness.

    I found in this Answer only one thing that indicates a mistake, possibly made by me in OTIVA: there I indicated that V.D. Ryazantsev is a retired vice-admiral, i.e. that he is more than 65 years old, but he He signed his Response as Vice Admiral of the reserve, i.e., that he is less than 65 years old.

    But that only means that he was born before me no more than five years. Since everyone understands that by the age of four, pea jackets are “scribbled” only by those who are already born adults, that is, strongly born, or have other characteristics of origin, for example, like P.P. Sharikov, a patient of Professor F.F. Preobrazhensky. Since VD Ryazantsev turned our attention to this feature of his, I will take it into account. The word “POSSIBLE” was used by me because it is possible, counting himself “in stock”, that is, young, V.R. just did not pay attention to the age limits of stay in the reserve. Moreover, V.R. refers to "in reserve" and E. D. Chernova, 1930g.r. when he is already 15 years "retired."

    If V.R. I focused on his seniority at an age that I do not protest, I would like to know what V.R. while I was "growing up"?



    To polemicize with V.R. not possible, since it does not even count with the obvious, indisputable

    I decided to express my opinion on the arguments contained in his Article and in the Reply to my REVIEW in the form of separate NOTES regarding the interpretation of V.R. one or another circumstance snatched by V.R. from the mass of topics raised by VR, it is completely unsystematic.

    Due to the disordered arrangement of the “source material”, as I mentioned in the REVIEW to Article VR, these individual NOTES could not be combined into a single whole, into a semantic sequence.

    So these my NOTES appeared on separate episodes - on topics raised by V.R. in his opuses.



    He considered it necessary to start with what showed a real level of competence of V.R. and the ideology of V.R.
  • vvp2412
    vvp2412 14 December 2013 14: 02
    +1
    In the Response, completing the part entitled “I am responding to the charges under section 4,” V.R. writes:

    “Being in the cabin of the commander of an American warship, I (Ryazantsev) saw many different monitors and several computers, and when I asked the American commander why he needed this in the cabin, he replied that thanks to such equipment and equipment, the commander can control the ship and lead battle with any naval enemy directly from the cabin.

    In the cabins of our ship commanders, carpets, televisions, video recorders, but there is nothing for war

    Our ship commander must arrive at the command post (main command post), take one of the checklists, read it, and then begin to act. "



    Of the many commanders who knew me in person or who knew in absentia (as V.R. involuntarily became familiar), V.R. - the only one who was so impressed by the instruments and other equipment that is usual for modern ships and for the cabins of their commanders, both American, Soviet, and Russian.

    Such equipment was also in my cabin - the cabin of the commander of K-244, PLA, etc. 671-RTM.

    It is known that the Pacific Fleet included the 13 submarine of this project. Really, when serving in the Pacific Fleet, V.R. have not visited any of those boats? How could it happen that, in the performance of responsible positions, the officer did not know what he was obliged to know about the ship, but controlled that ship?

    However, while “investigating” the Kursk catastrophe and raining accusations of insufficient survivability of the 949 submarines, V.D. Ryazantsev managed not to know either the organization of the survivability struggle (this is in my REVIEW) or the design of the survivability system of the submarines, etc. 949, - which he admitted at the beginning of his Answer, - and, as if by chance, shifted his guilt of ignorance to the designers
  • vvp2412
    vvp2412 14 December 2013 14: 03
    +1
    Each sufficiently attentive, knowledgeable and responsible sailor will understand that the impressions of V. R in the cabin of the US ship are the impressions of the savage (with the admiral's rank, that is, the savage is not an ordinary, but a “leader”), upon discovering which, the commander of the American ship allowed himself a joke, telling the savage leader that he was controlling the ship and was fighting a naval enemy directly from the cabin.

    Every normal commander understands that from the cabin he has no right to either control the ship, or, moreover, to engage in battle with the naval enemy. For this there is a specially equipped GKP.

    VD Ryazantsev undertook to introduce the Russian Fleet, having the ambitions of the “leader” of savages and professionalism at the level of Ellochka-Cannibal. The joke of the American ship commander took seriously, and exposed the fleet commanders of Russia and our ships in a very unsightly, wretched state. This is a shame.

    As if specifically to refute the "discovery" by V. Ryazantsev of the "backwardness" of our ships, in 1989. at the request of the American side, it was K-244 that was shown to the US Navy Chief of Staff Admiral K. Trost (photo - on the K-244 SITE). Visiting the ship, this admiral noted the current level of equipment of the K-244 and good maintenance of the ship.

    The commander of K-244 V. Yuferova and the crew of K-244, who received Admiral Trost, told me that the distinguished guest was impressed by the high level of maritime culture, professionalism, responsibility for his country and its Fleet, and respect for the Russian Fleet, knowledge history of Russia. I had a similar impression after a personal meeting with Admiral Trost at the Naval Academy, where he made a presentation to the command and teachers.

    Since V.R. He showed that he only recognizes the “opinion of a foreign country,” I emphasize: the American admiral recognized the current level of equipment of K-244. He saw and noted exactly what VD Ryazantsev “did not notice” neither for our commanders, nor on our ships.

    Thus, in a dispute with me, the commander of K-244, V.D. Ryazantsev shouted at our Fleet, our ships and their commanders, "recognized" for our Fleet what was not and should not be on our Fleet.

    Such a “recognition” of the vice admiral of the reserve VD Ryazantsev is an impudent slander against the Russian Navy.

    To me, an officer of the Navy of the USSR, in the past, I was the commander of a nuclear submarine of the 671-RTM project (very modern, but still not the “most” modern), the revelations of VD Ryazantsev about how he behaved when visiting an American warship, and how he allegedly perceives our Fleet to read disgusting.
  • vvp2412
    vvp2412 14 December 2013 14: 04
    +1
    It is no less disgusting to read another, palmed off by VD Ryazantsev to an ignorant reader as “sincere revelations of a competent officer”, vice-admiral of the reserve, former “big rank”

    In the middle of the part entitled “Answer the charges under section 4,” V.R. writes: “I’ll note that for those posts that I held for a long time in the Pacific Fleet and in the system of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, my responsibilities included the right to evaluate ship commanders, commanders of formations and associations on matters of combat training of the Navy, accident prevention, etc. P. But this “right” still had to be earned with its knowledge and experience,

    How did many naval commanders evaluate their subordinates? Only with a "cheat sheet" in the hands where the correct answers to certain questions were written. In another way, such superiors could not appreciate the fact that they themselves did not know what their subordinates were asking about. ”

    The message about the incompetence of “many naval commanders” V.D. Ryazantsev, “who had the right to give an assessment to the commanders and commanders” is no less absurd than the above presentation of our ship commanders to him. Having served a lot and seen many, I did not meet such a state of our commanders and such chiefs of the Navy, as reported by V.D. Ryazantsev.
  • vvp2412
    vvp2412 14 December 2013 14: 05
    0
    Putting on the Internet your “revelations” about the shortcomings he had invented by our commanders and our ships, about our “naval commanders” V.R. seeks to please the enemies of Russia.

    Obviously, each of the former ship commanders, talking about the work of the commander (and the former commander of the compound, talking about the work of the commander of the formation), will mean first of all himself and his work, “revelations” V.R. it was his “mysterious past” that was revealed. In his “sincere” story about “our commander”, or in no less “sincere” slander against “many naval commanders,” V.D. Ryazantsev spoke about himself. Well, not about me!

    Indeed, many people know that I recognize the usefulness of a certain meaning of the Checklists, not at all the one in which they were used by the commander V.D. Ryazantsev. I did not work on evaluating subordinates according to the “cheat sheet”, but as openly as possible, with documentation of instructions and promises, and their implementation

    VD Ryazantsev was clearly used to doing everything thoughtlessly, “according to the cheat sheet”, according to the “Checklist”, moreover, without bothering to make them himself. And his current actions are also clearly dictated by someone. Own forces at V.R. just enough to demonstrate their ignorance.

    An unpleasant acquaintance with the increasingly revealing essence of V.D. Ryazantsev helps to understand how important it is to promote only those who are responsible and conscientious!

    "Revelations" V.R. testify that the elimination of officers like VD Ryazantsev from the K-244 crew (the episode is described in the Article on the formation and formation of the K-244 crew) was correct.

    The current "arguments" of Vice Admiral V. D. Ryazantsev (claiming that his competence is confirmed by the high posts entrusted to him) strikingly coincide with what the officer said, without coordination with me and clearly mistakenly appointed to a high position in the crew of K- 244. He told me in public: “You are pointing out errors to me, as if I were at all, but they will not appoint a fool to such a position in the rank of senior lieutenant!” (The text is absolutely accurate). It turned out, appointed ...

    They nevertheless corrected that mistake of appointment to the K-244 crew, the officers from the command post in the crew were removed, but during the time of his "activity in the post" this officer caused a lot of harm.
  • vvp2412
    vvp2412 14 December 2013 14: 05
    +2
    I have no doubt that the veterans, getting acquainted with the "revelations" of V.D. Ryazantsev, agree with me, and the military leaders, who once nominated V.D. Ryazantsev, now realized how wrong they were then.



    In connection with the “memory of V.R. about visiting an American ship ”, I note that this stupid lie about“ our commanders ”and“ naval commanders ”has three categories of“ consumers ”.

    The first is our likely adversary, the commander of an American ship. Let this “consumer” of disinformation think of us in the way VD Ryazantsev speaks of us — then, you see, it will relax, and it will be easier for our sailors to defeat such an enemy. But I know that Americans don’t think of us like that.


    The second category is “ordinary” citizens of Russia, including our parents, wives and children. Before them, I am ashamed of the appearance of our commanders in which VD Ryazantsev put us up. If we can still explain to our parents, wives, and children how we work and how we are placed on ships, then we cannot explain this to the rest of Russians, to the majority of citizens. Thus, the former deputy head of the Main Directorate of Combat Training of the Armed Forces for the Navy, vice admiral in the reserve V.D. Ryazantsev in his own words about the ship commander discredited the honor and dignity of the central figure of the Fleet, the ship commander.

    But there is a third category of consumers of this lie - officials who determine the conditions of ship service, including the remuneration of the ship's commander. Many of these people, due to various circumstances, did not serve in the Navy, and therefore are not familiar with the essence of the work of the ship's commander and crew members.

    These officials learn about the work of the ship’s commander and other crew members from their “close associates,” in particular, from employees of the central apparatus of the Ministry of Defense, and from media collections

    The “works” of V. Ryazantsev published on the Internet are read by D. Medvedev, B. Gryzlov, S. Mironov, S. Stepashin and other officials, on whom much depends on the state of the Navy and sailors. These persons include A. Serdyukov and V. Vysotsky. Managing a lot, these officials do not have the experience of real military (V. Vysotsky, - naval) service, they have nothing to compare with the “revelations” of the allegedly experienced Vice Admiral V. Ryazantsev. So these officials have an impression about the maritime service that is clearly not true.

    When posting "the works of V.D. Ryazantsev" on the Internet, due to the fabrications of V.D. Ryazantsev, which are slanderous of sailors, the work of sailors, the Navy, if this slander is not refuted by proper comments, the salary of the ship’s commander, and the wages of other sailors, which are extremely insufficient at present, can only be further reduced.

    Due to Ryazantsev’s presentation of the commander’s work, the confidence of D. Serdyukov D. Medvedev in the legitimacy of the destruction of the military education system is growing: education is useless for fulfilling wretched “duties”, and so on and so forth.
  • vvp2412
    vvp2412 14 December 2013 14: 05
    +1
    One of the reasons for this is that those former sailors who have experience in commanding a ship and now have received positions in the highest bodies of state power (in particular, reserve admiral Komoedov V.P., deputy of the State Duma of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation, retired admiral Popov V.A. - Member of the Council of the Federation of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation), do nothing to ensure that the Legislator and the President of Russia take due account of the conditions of service and not only declare, but also provide conditions for a decent life sailors

    Unfortunately, the list of former military leaders who, in words, advocate for the Navy and for sailors, but in fact focus only on personal well-being, is not exhausted by these two names.

    The current state of affairs shows that those former sailors who settled in the Federal Assembly do not at least provide reliable information about the Fleet and those who serve in the Fleet.

    I prefer not to quote the current leaders, because I believe that the value of their words will appear only after the end of their “century”. But I will cite the words of Vladimir Putin at a recent meeting with sports shifts, since the leadership of Russia needs reliable information in them.

    Vladimir Putin then said: "The truth must be protected from cynicism, barbarism and lies."

    Obviously, the words of V.D. Ryazantsev about our commanders and about our ships are a cynical lie. The truth about our ships and our commanders must be protected from the cynical lies of V.R. Ryazantsev

    Indulgence in "barbarism": - lack of professionalism and obvious dementia, in this case is unacceptable.

    The collapse of the Navy and the collapse of the state does not happen by itself. This is the handiwork of either malicious or incompetent people, who happened to be "under the authority" by accident. The collapse is facilitated by the passivity of the competent. Fleet veterans and active seamen are obliged to take into account this consequence of passivity, and at least in response to the activity of Vice Admiral in the reserve V.D. Ryazantsev must react accordingly. "
  • vvp2412
    vvp2412 14 December 2013 14: 06
    0
    I think that such "Authors" -provokers should be banned forever!
  • vvp2412
    vvp2412 14 December 2013 14: 06
    0
    All the “strength” of Ryazantsev’s arguments lies in the “breadth of his stripes”, in the authority of the posts that the Navy leadership trusted him (now reproachable to Ryazantsev). He insists that it is precisely this “trust of the Navy leadership” that confirms his professionalism. VD Ryazantsev replaced the very meaning of the concept of professionalism, which expresses precisely and only the real result of work in the profession.

    One example of the Minister of Defense of the Russian Federation A. Serdyukov completely refutes this pseudology, but there are many more such examples: the Navy Civil Code V. Vysotsky, the Chief of the Naval Forces A. Rimashevsky, etc.

    But A. Serdyukov, V. Vysotsky and A. Rimashevsky still have the opportunity to prove themselves positively in their posts. In contrast, V.R. already dismissed, everything that he could accomplish in those posts, he had already "accomplished." Now he has only the opportunity to comprehend the experience of his service, including in those senior positions that he had been entrusted to him at one time. But he does not do that either.

    Referring to the authority of their previous posts, V.R. He doesn’t want to understand that it is not the position itself, but the one who worked well in this position that determines the authority of the position. So, Admirals G.M. Egorov, G. A. Bondarenko and A. I. Gorbunov elevated the position of Chief of Combat Training of the Navy by the fact that in that position each of them organized and held large-scale instructive events
  • vvp2412
    vvp2412 14 December 2013 14: 06
    0
    In one of them, in the teachings of the Anti-Aircraft Division of the Navy PLA in the Norwegian Sea, I happened to participate, commanding the K-244 submarine, attached to this division, under the command of I.I. Naletov.

    In Admiral G.A. Bondarenko, I felt not only the chief, but precisely the highly qualified wise leader, who, together with the division commander and flagship specialists, really made the Fleet more organized and smart, i.e., more relevant to the tasks assigned.

    Admiral G.A. Bondarenko was extremely attentive not only to the opinion of the division commander, but also to the commanders of the ships, and to the flagship specialists. All useful and even just harmless was collected in the Report, which became the basis in the documents on the combat employment of the forces of the Northern Fleet in the Norwegian Sea (the knowledge gained then was useful to me when working on the Diploma Project).

    Anyone who has not had the chance to serve both under the guidance of an intelligent, conscientious boss, and under the leadership of an irresponsible layman, who did not feel the difference between these two "options" of service, is unlikely to understand me right away. It’s bad if such a person, instead of believing, says: “It glorified Glavpur,” or something like that. I’ll say this: take your time to object, understand with time!

    Question: WHAT DID VD Ryazantsev do while occupying positions in the leadership of the combat training?

    Answer: I traveled to the United States and ridiculed the commander of an American ship with his wretchedness. In the same state, he participated in the investigation of incidents, fooling the designers and existing submariners, i.e., definitely, NOTHING ANYTHING FOR THE NAVY to guide the combat training did.

    I know this because in the positions of the deputy commander of the division, then - the deputy chief of staff of the Northern Fleet for combat control - the operational duty fleet, while being the chief of the Far Sea Zone in the organization of the headquarters of the Northern Fleet, which was created by the Chief of Staff of the Northern Fleet I.I. Attacks - in these positions I received all the instructions of the combat training, but from the Directorate of combat training, which then consisted of VD Ryazantsev, any instructions (neither sensible, nor those that VD Ryazantsev “issues” to present) e reported. Thus, any participation of a major military commander V.R. in combat training of the Northern Fleet was not.

    The entire text of VD Ryazantsev’s Response to my REVIEW is messy and in many ways clearly inadequate.
  • vvp2412
    vvp2412 14 December 2013 14: 08
    0
    A little later I will lay out the third page of this text! Now you have to leave!
  • nnz226
    nnz226 14 December 2013 14: 39
    +1
    We will not talk about torpedoing the Kursk, let us take the author's thought on faith. Then the question is: the explosion of a torpedo in a TA (hydrogen peroxide, etc.) is described well.It is described that the blast wave, according to the laws of physics, spread in all directions of the TA, knocked out the back cover, just designed to withstand pressure from the inside of the TA (in preparation for a shot the pressure inside the TA is equalized with the outboard) - it means that the outer cover of the TA was guaranteed to fly into the sea, since it is just designed to resist external pressure, and not pressure from the inside of the TA. Conclusion: at the moment the torpedo exploded in 4 torpedo tubes, both torpedo tubes flew out, and, accordingly, a furious stream of water with a diameter of 1 mm (caliber TA) and a pressure of 650 atmospheres, which corresponds to a depth of 10 meters, rushed into the 100st compartment of the Kursk. Maybe the pressure was less, at a shallower depth of the submarine at the time of the explosion, but in any case, water poured into the 1st compartment very quickly and a lot. And the question: and then from what alley did the warheads of the remaining torpedoes and missiles lying on the racks detonate ??? From a shock wave, albeit a fiery one? So all torpedo warheads are on several fuses, which are removed only at the moment of a shot from a TA (trigger hook, for example) ... From the history of hostilities it is known that ammunition explodes when initiated by a close explosion (capsules, fuses themselves, explosives exploded nearby with shells or torpedoes), but in case of fires or the consequences of distant explosions, it is necessary that the same shells or torpedoes "fired up", and only then they begin to detonate (see reports about explosions in the warehouses of the Ministry of Defense in recent times) ... So when could they "raskochegaritsya" to the state of the explosion of the warhead of torpedoes in the 1st compartment of the "Kursk", if he was actively flooded with water ??? And the fiery wave that passed through 1 compartment from the TA hardly immediately caused the warhead to detonate? Somehow earlier it was not observed that even from close explosions torpedoes were detonated, both on surface ships and on submarines (the history of 2 world wars does not show such examples, I do not take cases of direct hits with torpedoes). Moreover, if memory serves, the 650 mm caliber TA on the pr. 949 (A) submarine are located at the top of 1 compartment and, accordingly, the water should not just come from below, but merrily fill the entire compartment ...
  • Aleksey_K
    Aleksey_K 14 December 2013 15: 22
    -9
    The fact that in peacetime, in the history of the submarine fleet of all states of the world, there was not a single case of attacks from submarines, both surface and submarine targets, our "newly-minted Jules Verne" do not know.


    Lies! I was told about one case by a senior officer, a sailor, with whom I was lying in a hospital. In the Mediterranean, an American frigate attacked a submarine when they surfaced. Tried to drown by cutting in half. An urgent dive saved the boat. Since the attack was committed, the commander attacked (torpedoed) the frigate. He did not even have time to send the SOS, as he was destroyed. The Americans did not know the true reason for the disappearance of their ship, because their captain launched an attack without coordinating it with senior management.
    1. rolik2
      rolik2 14 December 2013 15: 35
      +1
      And do not tell me what kind of frigate it was? When and where did he disappear?
      1. Aleksey_K
        Aleksey_K 14 December 2013 15: 47
        -2
        I can not, because that captain did not disclose the name and date. I know his surname, but I won’t say it. If he is alive, it will not be sweet for him, and if in the family who serve in the marine part, a career collapse is also possible, because in power are liberals who are friends with the Americans. Have to believe a word.
      2. largus886
        largus886 14 December 2013 16: 26
        +3
        And do not tell me which department they were in? And that the Amer frigate alone sailed in the middle-earth? Hero boat commander received or how?
        1. El13
          El13 14 December 2013 17: 57
          +3
          I think it’s not necessary to ask the department, but the room number.
    2. clidon
      clidon 14 December 2013 17: 02
      +3
      You take sea bikes too close to your heart.
    3. coserg 2012
      coserg 2012 14 December 2013 18: 42
      +1
      Gonish ?? Tell me more about it. A man from БЧ-10 (Flagship Svistunskaya).
    4. stjrm
      stjrm 19 December 2013 17: 10
      0
      As I understand it, the Americans do not know that the frigate has disappeared from them.
      Here hezh a. The Americans do not know about the ship, but they know that without coordination, he attacked the boat.
      No, well, nonsense ...
  • Chuykov
    Chuykov 14 December 2013 15: 24
    +1
    It is pointless to touch on the technical subtleties, but two questions arose that prevented the vice admiral from increasing the skill and professionalism of the personnel, and why did the technically lagging domestic apl, not having modern sonar, floated freely under the nose of the aircraft carrier, so they didn’t lag behind in noise isolation?
  • Aleksey_K
    Aleksey_K 14 December 2013 15: 32
    -4
    If our submarine commanders, when tracking an object, will focus on secrecy of navigation and covert tracking, and navigation safety will not be ensured, then such tracking in peacetime should be prohibited. This provision should also be proposed to our potential adversaries in negotiations on maritime issues.

    The author is an idealist. But what about fighting under water when fighting if you don’t know the noise of the enemy? What, the enemy will provide them in peace negotiations? The author of the article is completely crazy!
  • Aleksey_K
    Aleksey_K 14 December 2013 15: 38
    +1
    So you need, first of all, to create such an effective observation in these seas, which will allow our forces to immediately respond to "uninvited guests", to constantly know their position and intentions

    But why did the Americans not create such a surveillance system and record our noises, and climb into a collision? They are ahead of us in development, their own fleet was not destroyed by the Gorbachevs, Gaidars, Chubais, Yeltsins and Serdyukovs.
  • saag
    saag 14 December 2013 17: 10
    +3
    If we go by the opposite method and accept as a hypothesis the torpedoing of Kursk by an American submarine, then questions arise about how the fleet allowed the presence of a foreign submarine in its "under the keel", gave it the opportunity to make a torpedo attack and leave, this is what it should be in this case combat training ???
    1. Aleksey_K
      Aleksey_K 14 December 2013 19: 38
      -3
      It's very simple. You go under the bottom of a large vehicle. And since it reproduces noise at all frequencies very much and very loudly, no one can detect the PL. In the right place, she stops the propellers and becomes on alert. And no one, not even the Americans themselves, know exactly where it is. Theoretically, the nuclear submarine may not reveal itself for years. And imagine, the Kursk is sailing, not suspecting anything about the Americans. The exercises begin. "Kursk" starts a torpedo attack towards the Americans, unaware of their existence, and the Americans are in a panic, they are found and are attacking! Here whoever is the first is alive!
      1. clidon
        clidon 14 December 2013 20: 37
        +2
        And the submarine with the screws stopped is not detected? ) Almost the submarines are on duty for no more than three months. And they certainly do not stick out in a drifting place. But this is so prose.
        And if the Americans had discovered an attacking torpedo, it was too late to twitch, and certainly destroyed another submarine, which for some reason was going to destroy you. In general, the late Clancy would have appreciated, but no more.
      2. Cat
        Cat 14 December 2013 20: 53
        0
        Quote: Алексей_К
        Yes, very simple. You go under the bottom of a large transport. And since it reproduces noise at all frequencies very much and very loudly, no one can detect the submarine. In the right place, she stops the screws and becomes on alert. And no one, not even the Americans themselves, knows exactly where she is

        In addition to the propellers, the submarine has such a nasty thing as a turbine - which always makes noise, even if the boat lies on the ground. And even if the turbine is cut down (if this is possible at all, except in emergency mode), there will still be cooling pumps for the reactor, and they will not be cut at all. But on the DPS there isn’t all this nonsense, so they have much more secrecy than nuclear-powered ships.
        1. pl675
          pl675 14 December 2013 23: 00
          +1
          Quote: Cat
          Quote: Алексей_К
          Yes, very simple. You go under the bottom of a large transport. And since it reproduces noise at all frequencies very much and very loudly, no one can detect the submarine. In the right place, she stops the screws and becomes on alert. And no one, not even the Americans themselves, knows exactly where she is

          In addition to the propellers, the submarine has such a nasty thing as a turbine - which always makes noise, even if the boat lies on the ground. And even if the turbine is cut down (if this is possible at all, except in emergency mode), there will still be cooling pumps for the reactor, and they will not be cut at all. But on the DPS there isn’t all this nonsense, so they have much more secrecy than nuclear-powered ships.


          you rave.
          Please indicate apl projects that lay on the ground.
          1. Zeus
            Zeus 14 December 2013 23: 12
            +2
            Quote: pl675
            Quote: Cat
            Quote: Алексей_К
            Yes, very simple. You go under the bottom of a large transport. And since it reproduces noise at all frequencies very much and very loudly, no one can detect the submarine. In the right place, she stops the screws and becomes on alert. And no one, not even the Americans themselves, knows exactly where she is

            In addition to the propellers, the submarine has such a nasty thing as a turbine - which always makes noise, even if the boat lies on the ground. And even if the turbine is cut down (if this is possible at all, except in emergency mode), there will still be cooling pumps for the reactor, and they will not be cut at all. But on the DPS there isn’t all this nonsense, so they have much more secrecy than nuclear-powered ships.


            you rave.
            Please indicate apl projects that lay on the ground.


            The nuclear submarines do not lie down on the ground, but everything is correctly written about the turbine and reactor circulation pumps.
            1. pl675
              pl675 14 December 2013 23: 26
              -1
              The nuclear submarines do not lie down on the ground, but everything is correctly written about the turbine and reactor circulation pumps.

              and what is true?
              on points please.
              1. Zeus
                Zeus 14 December 2013 23: 31
                0
                During the run, the turbine is constantly running. And circulation pumps work even when the submarine is stopped.
                1. pl675
                  pl675 14 December 2013 23: 43
                  -1
                  Quote: Zeus
                  During the run, the turbine is constantly running. And circulation pumps work even when the submarine is stopped.


                  you will laugh, the turbine / one of the / can operate in the tg-mode without a boat move, which happens in 95% of cases.
                  this is the first.
                  second - circulation pumps of what? -
                  they are full, both in the turbine compartment and in the reactor compartment - in any case, they always work, whether with or without a move.

                  we do not consider geom with zhmt.
                  1. Zeus
                    Zeus 14 December 2013 23: 51
                    0
                    Quote: Zeus
                    reactor circulation pumps - everything is written correctly.


                    I wrote what.
          2. Cat
            Cat 14 December 2013 23: 58
            +2
            Quote: pl675
            you rave.
            Please indicate apl projects that lay on the ground.

            alas, I don’t know those submarines, even if they suddenly exist.
            I wrote about this, by and large, for clarity - and how else to most effectively emphasize the immobility of a nuclear submarine =)))

            If you adhere to strict realities, you should write that the screws, in fact, the nuclear submarine stops extremely rarely, especially in the underwater position. Since it is ideal for optimists to balance the boat perfectly, the given diving depth is supported by horizontal rudders, which are useless in a stationary position. And so the boat is constantly, albeit at 3 knots, but still moving.
            Yes, you can still put the boat on a thermocline (the boundary between the layers of water with different temperatures), for which you also need to play with ballast and differentiation).
            Etc.
            But the conversation is not about that? =)
            1. pl675
              pl675 15 December 2013 00: 08
              -1
              Quote: Cat
              Quote: pl675
              you rave.
              Please indicate apl projects that lay on the ground.

              alas, I don’t know those submarines, even if they suddenly exist.
              I wrote about this, by and large, for clarity - and how else to most effectively emphasize the immobility of a nuclear submarine =)))

              If you adhere to strict realities, you should write that the screws, in fact, the nuclear submarine stops extremely rarely, especially in the underwater position. Since it is ideal for optimists to balance the boat perfectly, the given diving depth is supported by horizontal rudders, which are useless in a stationary position. And so the boat is constantly, albeit at 3 knots, but still moving.
              Yes, you can still put the boat on a thermocline (the boundary between the layers of water with different temperatures), for which you also need to play with ballast and differentiation).
              Etc.
              But the conversation is not about that? =)


              Apparently, you are not aware of the existence of a ship system that keeps the submarine stationary regardless of the "thermocline" - just take it and hover where the automation will play with the ballast, and the engineer will control the process.
              key phrase - no move apl.
              the conversation went on a different plane, or rather you gently left the specifics.
              I have everything, I propose to end the dialogue due to the insolvency of one of the parties.
              1. Cat
                Cat 15 December 2013 02: 21
                0
                Quote: pl675
                apparently, you are not aware of the existence of a ship system ....

                To be honest, I don’t know not only about this, but also about many other ship systems. Nevertheless, I repeat:
                Quote: Cat
                But the conversation is not about that? =)



                Threat in essence: even with mine insolvent From the point of view, it seems obvious that any manipulations with ballast of a submarine are fraught with certain acoustic effects - extremely undesirable from the point of view of secrecy. So, in some cases, a thermocline is probably preferable, what do you say?
            2. Delta
              Delta 15 December 2013 00: 09
              0
              Quote: Cat
              the set immersion depth is supported by horizontal rudders, which in a stationary position are useless. And so the boat is constantly, albeit at 3 knots, but still moving.


              there is such a thing as a depth stabilizer without a stroke. EMNIP back in 74 with the help of it even "azuha" was fired off with a rocket
        2. Boa kaa
          Boa kaa 15 December 2013 03: 26
          +3
          Quote: Cat
          turbine - which always makes noise, even if the boat is on the ground.

          The rovers do not lie down on the ground, but stand on the depth stabilizer. Although we had craftsmen who hung out the boat in such a way that it was possible to lay down on the "liquid" soil - a layer with different densities. But this is fraught, because they always try to have a slight positive buoyancy in order to slowly float up and not sink.
      3. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 15 December 2013 03: 15
        +3
        Quote: Алексей_К
        You go under the bottom of a large transport.
        This is you, dear, "Raise the periscope" Hollywood seen enough? Or "We swam - we know!" But, judging by further reasoning, something doesn't look like ...
        Quote: Алексей_К
        In the right place, she stops the screws and becomes on alert.

        AHA! HOW A TANK - BURNS INTO THE EARTH! (sorry, "soaked in water"!)
        Quote: Алексей_К
        And no one, not even the Americans themselves, knows exactly where it is located. Theoretically, nuclear submarines may not find themselves for years.

        ... not to get in touch (although the connection is not feedback) and let the Navy CKP’s operators pull out all the hair on their head and ... do not pull it out, and the Navy GK reports to the management that the connection has been lost and the boat is considered to be damaged ...
        ... for years not to reveal oneself, to eat the holy spirit, to take fools for a walk through the compartments, air regeneration (due to the use of hopkolite cartridges) - not to do, change the swelling between the compartments and so on ...
        Quote: Алексей_К
        Americans in a panic, they were discovered and attacked! Then the first one is alive!

        Oh how! But I didn’t know! You probably wanted to tell us about the automated PTZ system for staff on the BS? So it’s only on the attacking torpedo that VO makes a decision.
        And the one who is luckier, smarter, more cunning, etc. will remain alive. The torpedo can pass by, but you shouldn't forget about the "omega and post-salvo maneuvering"!
        1. stjrm
          stjrm 19 December 2013 17: 17
          0
          Well, for example, a strategist in military service (this is certainly not years), but does not work for the transfer. Only at the reception.
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Lelek
    Lelek 14 December 2013 18: 13
    +2
    What are you talking about, folk orbits? Why are you threatening Russia with anathema? Discussion is good, but only within the framework of those far from the madhouse. fool
  • mark7
    mark7 14 December 2013 18: 31
    +4
    Quote: faraon
    due to crew error

    I don’t want to be rude, but don’t touch the crew, they are all heroes to one, and the article minus noodles about technological holes and knowledge about torpedoes
    1. Delta
      Delta 14 December 2013 20: 53
      +4
      Quote: mark7
      do not touch the crew, they are all heroes to one,


      you know, there is such a good phrase - not the dead need it, the living need it. So that in the future this does not happen to those who are now living, we must talk about insufficient training, about design flaws, and so on, because of which our ships perished. Otherwise, everything will remain in place. The Komsomolets crew are also heroes, but the fact that they did not know how to use life rafts is a fact. It is not the crew members who are to blame; the chiefs of all ranks are to blame. The fault is the system that we create or maintain. The same Ryazantsev is somehow trying to break it
      1. Boa kaa
        Boa kaa 15 December 2013 03: 59
        +3
        Quote: Delta
        The Komsomolets crew are also heroes, but the fact that they did not know how to use life rafts is a fact.

        Half of the rafts dropped from the Il-Xnumx did not open, a wave turned upside down. The storm was. Those who climbed the rafts held the hands of those who remained in the water. When the fingers went numb, they held with their teeth ... as much as they could.
        When this was told, the tears rolled down into a glass with an awl ... Then they drank chistogan without washing down. 7 DIP Eternal memory to comrades.
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. Delta
          Delta 15 December 2013 12: 54
          0
          Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
          Half of the rafts dropped from the IL-38 did not open, a wave turned upside down


          I talked about rafts that were aboard the K-278
        3. mpa945
          mpa945 3 January 2014 13: 32
          0
          and where is "7 diPL"?
  • coserg 2012
    coserg 2012 14 December 2013 19: 09
    -1
    When the information about Kursk was passed, my Moscow companion who urgently served with me asked: Well, what would you do in this situation? I answered: First of all, people. To lift, you need pontoons, from 5 to 8 pieces on any floating dock. Take a floating dock from Chalpushka or Rostov and Tow to the place and through it pull up the stern of the boat, the depth allows you to freely. And a third friend sitting next (the Marine Corps) says: Yes, you won’t drown them anyway, you won’t leave them alive. So damn it happened!
    1. stjrm
      stjrm 19 December 2013 16: 01
      0
      Where did you serve?
  • Garysit
    Garysit 14 December 2013 19: 33
    +3
    Read Ryazantsev's book "In the wake of death" then you will understand why "Kursk" died. There was no torpedoing, a bluff to divert from the true reasons.
    1. pl675
      pl675 14 December 2013 22: 54
      -1
      Quote: GarySit
      Read Ryazantsev's book "In the wake of death" then you will understand why "Kursk" died. There was no torpedoing, a bluff to divert from the true reasons.


      rather controversial version.
      we don’t know the truth in our lifetime.
      1. stjrm
        stjrm 19 December 2013 17: 26
        0
        One of the closest to the truth, the judicious version of the disaster.
        The truth may be even more offensive ...... it happens.
    2. Not hearing
      Not hearing 15 December 2013 10: 59
      +4
      Quote: GarySit
      Read Ryazantsev's book "In the wake of death"

      Oh well, why read this book. It is tedious, with a bunch of technical terms, there are no pictures, everything is chewed in detail, which is called to the level of a bolt. While reading, you’ll fall asleep. Whether the case was watched by a French film - 40 minutes of business and you are an academician. Yes, and it's interesting to watch - like a detective. And the book is also seditious. Moreover, uncomfortable questions are being asked there, why the rescue service fell apart on the fleet, why did the Sev leadership allow it. fleet, who was responsible for this in the Ministry of Defense? And why no one answered for this?
      In short, the Amerikans are to blame for everything, one hundred pounds.
  • Silent
    Silent 14 December 2013 21: 20
    0
    Yes, no matter what happens in Russia, the Americans are to blame. Face it - accidents (at work, in transport, in the army) are a more common thing than facts of foreign aggression.
    1. Lesnik
      Lesnik 14 December 2013 22: 14
      +4
      And the collapse of the USSR is also a personal sloppiness of the crew?
      1. Lesnik
        Lesnik 14 December 2013 22: 26
        -1
        Well, there’s nothing to say minus laughing
      2. Delta
        Delta 14 December 2013 22: 37
        +1
        Quote: Forestman
        And the collapse of the USSR is also a personal sloppiness of the crew?


        and who ruined it for us? uncles came running from behind a hill and let's chop with axes?
        1. Lesnik
          Lesnik 14 December 2013 22: 42
          -1
          Manifested laughing
          Why don’t you love the fleet so much? not rated? laughing
          1. Delta
            Delta 14 December 2013 23: 30
            +1
            Quote: Forestman
            Showed up laughing
            Why don’t you love the fleet so much? not rated?


            why should I "manifest"? I didn't even hide. And in the last post, I did not minus .. But I love the fleet. (if it ever happened to me)
        2. Lesnik
          Lesnik 14 December 2013 22: 53
          0
          Quote: Delta
          Quote: Forestman
          And the collapse of the USSR is also a personal sloppiness of the crew?


          and who ruined it for us? uncles came running from behind a hill and let's chop with axes?

          And why did you change the flag to Soviet from Ukrainian if you hate the "scoop" so much?
          1. Lesnik
            Lesnik 14 December 2013 23: 10
            -3
            Quote: Forestman
            And the collapse of the USSR is also a personal sloppiness of the crew?


            Quote: Delta
            and who ruined it for us? uncles came running from behind a hill and let's chop with axes?


            And why did you change the flag to Soviet from Ukrainian if you so hate the "scoop" disguise yourself? I read your thread here laughing So here you are what EUROPEETS laughing
            1. Delta
              Delta 14 December 2013 23: 31
              -1
              Quote: Forestman
              So here you are


              have we been drinking for a long time on brudershaft? I’m not just a European, I’m a civilized person, which can’t be said for you.
              1. Lesnik
                Lesnik 14 December 2013 23: 36
                0
                In any case, I do not speculate on the death of guys and do not minus the quiet and I do not change the flag !!! like a corrupt b ..
                1. Delta
                  Delta 14 December 2013 23: 40
                  -1
                  Quote: Forestman
                  In any case, I do not speculate on the death of guys


                  I ask the studio for my speculations on the death of guys. If they are not there, then you are automatically identified in the empty talker. By the way, speculation on someone’s death happens if a person earns something from this. Authority, money ... where is it?

                  Quote: Forestman
                  and not minus the quiet

                  minus not quiet. If minus, then I write accordingly right there. If you are so impressed with the number of minuses on your posts, then you would at least think that I won’t do so many of them alone)))

                  Quote: Forestman
                  and the flag does not change

                  how not to change? and where did the Soviet come from?
                  1. Lesnik
                    Lesnik 14 December 2013 23: 57
                    0
                    Quote: Delta

                    I ask the studio for my speculations on the death of guys.


                    no problem

                    Quote: Delta

                    accusations of insufficient patriotism and work for US intelligence agencies begin)))


                    Well, I’m not the devil’s lawyer.

                    Quote: Delta

                    If you are so impressed with the number of minuses on your posts, then you would at least think that I won’t do so many of them alone)))


                    I will cease to respect myself if I allow all EUROPEANS to discredit the memory of the deceased, and therefore I write what I know and think, regardless of the minus


                    Quote: Delta
                    and the flag does not change
                    how not to change? and where did the Soviet come from?


                    I was born under him and God forbid and die
                    1. Delta
                      Delta 15 December 2013 00: 19
                      -1
                      Quote: Forestman
                      accusations of insufficient patriotism and work for US intelligence agencies begin)))


                      Well, I’m not the devil’s lawyer.

                      specifics, please. This chatter is still. What kind of lawyer and what kind of "devil" am I?

                      Quote: Forestman
                      I will cease to respect myself if I allow all EUROPEANS to discredit the memory of the deceased, and therefore I write what I know and think, regardless of the minus

                      Well, we’ve already talked about minus signs, and now, if your complexes have already been discussed, take the trouble to explain why I discredit the memory of the deceased?

                      Quote: Forestman
                      I was born under him and God forbid and die

                      same as me. Any other questions regarding the flag?
      3. The comment was deleted.
      4. Silent
        Silent 14 December 2013 23: 05
        +2
        "The Soviet Union was destroyed". In the sense of "they" are bastards. You can hear it again, and again, and again ..... Once there was a state, flourished, was preparing to win the Cold War, and then it was destroyed. The trouble is that as far as I remember my history course at the history department, everything was "a little" wrong. First, the economic crisis began, and then the USSR collapsed, and not vice versa.
        1. Lesnik
          Lesnik 14 December 2013 23: 25
          0
          I don’t know at the rate of the history department how the Union collapsed. I don’t need to tell about the economy and the reasons for the collapse of the Union are clearly not in the economy but the desire of a small handful of the city to become masters of life and live beautifully - like behind a hill
  • llalex
    llalex 14 December 2013 22: 34
    +2
    Bravo, Vice Admiral !!! Our divers are really suckers !!! And how can we blame the glorious ovsk navy? They do not enter the waters of our territorial waters, do not violate any other boundaries !!! These beacons of human rights and democracy !!! How many were thrown at you, so that you would mix your guys with the bottom silt ??? Yes, everything is not going smoothly with Us, but talk about the non-involvement of amers, their holy behavior is lower, damn it !!!, all moral norms for a Russian officer !!!!!!! You stigmatize those who remained faithful to duty forever and those who tried to achieve the truth! Debunking the "theories" of others, at least they could offer a little from themselves! The hole inside was made not by our sailors, but by someone from outside. Gentlemen, opponents, there is nothing to drive empty !!! Read the performance characteristics of the MK-48 torpedo, at least the open part of them, there is no question of any 10 * 10 meters of hole !!! About depleted uranium is also crap ,,,,, explosives are detonated inside the object according to an algorithm, by the way, not so complicated! By the time of the attack, the Russian Federation had been “friends” with NATO for 10 years, cutting missiles, taking out tank armies into an open field, leaving our bases behind the cordon to fend for themselves. What the USA did ::: moved to the east, spat on the UN, carried democracy on a sharp blade with blood. Their appearance off the coast of the northern part of the Russian Federation during the exercises of the Northern Fleet is rather natural, their behavior during our exercises is contrary to all norms of law, at least in peacetime !!! How many more guys will die before you admit the truth? Or maybe you will never talk about her ???
    1. stjrm
      stjrm 19 December 2013 16: 27
      +1
      To defeat the enemy, it is not enough just to hate him.
  • FREGATENKAPITAN
    FREGATENKAPITAN 14 December 2013 22: 42
    +2
    Stop dancing on the bones of the boys, many of whom I knew personally! Eternal memory to them! And an article with strange and unproven statements is unambiguously minus!
  • llalex
    llalex 14 December 2013 23: 15
    -2
    About the boys you are right! But put the understatement and strangeness to yourself "" "" Y +++ !!!
  • saag
    saag 14 December 2013 23: 45
    0
    Quote: GarySit
    Read Ryazantsev's book "In the wake of death" then you will understand why "Kursk" died

    Thank you, read, from the point of view of human psychology there is pretty close to the truth
  • b-130
    b-130 15 December 2013 00: 09
    0
    There was recently a good article by a full member of the Kursk commission - they drove the crew - I remember this time along Vidyaevo - two boats in service, pay - only to those who go to sea - the entire garrison - on organized fishing - really wanted to eat, damn it! Everything is as usual, park, do not give a damn about faulty materiel, everyone is silent! It was a good crew, very sorry for the guys.
  • navy33
    navy33 15 December 2013 00: 13
    +3
    I welcome everyone. There are no words, only emotions. One million suggestions can be made, but only the dead Guys know the Truth. Eternal memory.
    1. Lesnik
      Lesnik 15 December 2013 00: 45
      0
      Here is what m..ak minus?
      Quote: Navy33
      I welcome everyone. There are no words, only emotions. One million suggestions can be made, but only the dead Guys know the Truth. Eternal memory.
  • poccinin
    poccinin 15 December 2013 00: 41
    -2
    I read the comments and I think there are only sailors "EXPERTS" that sank the US "KURSK" and tochka. a torpedo exploded in the compartment and tochka. I wrote an interview with a captain of the 1st rank in retirement who spent his whole life on boats. neee here all rear admirals good God be with you gentlemen. think what you want.
    1. Delta
      Delta 15 December 2013 00: 48
      0
      Quote: poccinin
      here the USA sunk "KURSK" and period


      Well, they’re building some versions, investigators are breaking their heads. Here a person knows everything for sure
      1. Black
        Black 15 December 2013 14: 53
        0
        Quote: Delta
        Here a person knows everything for sure


        This disease is incurable !!!!
  • sasska
    sasska 15 December 2013 00: 44
    0
    Quote: clidon
    And I saw in a movie how a man on a fighter hit a plate of aliens.

    New Swabia had a "plate". honestly (I saw it myself: two saucers, two aircraft carriers, ... three ... three aircraft carriers !! repeat )
  • pvv113
    pvv113 15 December 2013 01: 27
    +7
    How can such substances be used on a ship full of people, there is a disregard for people's lives.
    FREON 114B2 (OR REFRIGERANT) IS ALREADY USED IN PRIVACY IN THE FIRE FIGHTING SYSTEM OF DOMESTIC AIRCRAFT VEHICLES.
  • Delta
    Delta 15 December 2013 01: 30
    +1
    the funny thing is that no one thought about one point. Namely - WHAT "smart person" WILL INTENTIONALLY FLOOR IN PEACE TIME Submarine in the Barents Sea (let me remind you - next to Norway, Sweden, Finland) with two nuclear reactors on board ??? Yes, the same Americans, Preminin, erected a monument for saving them from the explosion of the K-219 reactor, and then suddenly they simulated a nuclear disaster with their own hands?
    1. barbiturate
      barbiturate 15 December 2013 08: 20
      0
      and you are not too serious about nuclear reactors? there was a cloud of nuclear tests underwater, a bunch of radioactive junk was buried underwater (including nuclear reactors), well, and there would have been another underwater nuclear explosion, what's so unusual or so terrible?
      Opposing powers often shoot at each other and planes shoot down and soldiers shoot, but this does not lead to large-scale wars, so there is nothing supernatural in the sinking of the boat
  • saag
    saag 15 December 2013 10: 48
    0
    Quote: barbiturate
    Well, another submarine nuclear explosion would happen, what is unusual or so terrible?

    Well, Fukushima happened and in Germany nuclear power plants are banned, it would seem where Japan and where Germany
  • alex-cn
    alex-cn 15 December 2013 11: 26
    0
    In many ways I agree with the author, but I will allow myself to question his knowledge of explosives "What does RDX explosive consist of? Of the components of ammonium nitrate and aluminum powder. If you explode separately ammonium nitrate and aluminum powder, there will be no explosion. But if these substances put together and detonate, we get an explosion of great power. " A mixture of ammonium nitrate and powder refers to ammonium explosives, while hexogen is a product of nitration of a cyclic hydrocarbon. After that, some of his other statements should be approached with caution. In general, it is clear that such disasters are both in our country and they are so secret that We will not get any real information for many years ...
  • Black
    Black 15 December 2013 14: 47
    +1
    Quote: ruton
    And why is the author worried that we will think that the United States is to blame? Is he their lawyer?


    This is how to read, so as to distort the meaning and conclusions of the article !!!