Author Topic: K-19, the movie... (Read 1341 times)

Boroda · « **Reply #15 on:** July 24, 2002, 08:23:11 AM »

Thank you for kind answers!

Miko, here are some links in Russian for you:

http://www.sukhoi.ru/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?board=aviaart;action=display;num=1027104701

About the 658 series:

http://www.submarina.ru/sub.php?658

K-19 didn't have a personal name, and the whole 658 project didn't have a project name too.

I'll see this movie even if it will not me in theaters here. My friend has sattelite TV, and I bet it will be on the market in DivX on CDs.

Russian submariners who consulted the movie crew said they refused to work with them after reading the final scenario... I expected something like that, even if Americans tried to follow all their requests they should refuse anyway.

http://www.estart.ru/kino/news/issue_17750.html

They said that the scenario is written in "worst traditions of cold war, and Soviet submariners are pictured as imbeciles and alcoholics"...

They even started a lawsuit (!!!) against the Intermedia company that made the film, and their lawer, Arthur Barence (sp?) applied to the supreme court of LA. I don't know if it's true, and will now look for American sources about this story. Looks like they finaly reworked the scenario. The interview with K-19 crew was on "Vremya" evening news in January, 2001.

I am not surprised if it is true (I mean the submariners opinion), when we had "Enemy at the Gates" in theatres - many Stalingrad veterans signed a petition to prohibit that movie, for "showing Soviet soldiers as stupid speechless herd, and officers - as coward scumbags"... That is partially true, EatG is full of roadkill, and I hope in K-19 they really listened to Soviet vets. At least i've heard that Harrison Ford went deeply into details with them, and they even called him "comrade captain".

The movie was made on a real Soviet sub, project 651 (Juliet), that is now belongs to a Saratoga CV museum.

Sikboy · « **Reply #16 on:** July 24, 2002, 08:39:29 AM »

Boroda,

I had heard something abut the Sailors being up in arms about the alcoholism portrayed in the movie, but I'm guessing that a lot of it was edited out, because there are very few scenes in the movie which show anyone drinking alcohol, and most of it is atributed to the anti-radiation effects of red wine (not vouching for any scientific validity here lol). As I mentioned in my first post, the Alcohol use in the Movie was mild, especially compared to sea stories from US Sailors (and I'm sure of Sailors from every nation that has ever put to sea.)

If I had to guess I would say that the Sailor's complaints were listened to by the producers of the movie, and that a lot of the booze footage was edited out. Personally I like that. While I believe there is a time and a place to point out the deficiencies of the Navy Lifestyle, I don't think that a movie honoring the efforts of these men is such a time or place.

-Sikboy

Boroda · « **Reply #17 on:** July 24, 2002, 08:51:18 AM »

An update:

From this page (in Russian only):

http://www.referent.ru:2008/nvs/forum/archive/5/5514

There indeed were two different scenarios, the one that was later used for film, and another, rejected by K-19 vets. It had a standard (sorry

) line of "stupid Russians" and focused on imaginary conflict between K-19 commander and his senior officer. K-19 officers were extremely offended by that crap, with scenes when sailors steal oranges and officer beats their hands, crew members playing cards during combat alert... The super-modern sub of that time was shown as a rusty heap of metal. The main idea was that Russians are so stupid and lazy that the accidents will happen all the time, and there was a direct connection with Kursk tradegy... I am glad they have chosen the better scenario. AFAIU - mr. Ford was one of the persons who insisted on abandoning that stupid crap. The legal case I mentioned above was between two film companies who wanted to make a film about K-19. I am glad that it turned out the way it did.

Skuzzy · « **Reply #18 on:** July 24, 2002, 09:05:46 AM »

Saw a special on the making of the movie. Harrison Ford and Liam Neeson both went out with the veterans of K-19 and, from the sound of it, they enjoyed the company.
Liam said, "We drank many toasts, but it was all in Russian, and it was very enjoyable."

They also said, the vets were allowed to come to the set and input from them was taken on various situations and the vets complained about some things they said did not happen the way it was portrayed. I can believe that. The challenge of making this movie AND getting people to the box office required walking a fine line between the reality of what happened and what would be good to draw an audience.

Again, Hollywood will always put a "spin" on things, but even if half the story is accurate, it is certainly a tribute to the submarine crew of K-19.

Borada, I walked out of the movie with a newfound respect for these people. I do not know what is being ssaid over in Russia, but I thought the movie paid a very good tribute to the crew.
The only thing that was negative, was how it was all portrayed to be sloppy workmenship which caused the problems.

But, if you look at the movie a bit deeper, it appears K-19 was rushed out to sea and not allowed any sea worthiness tests. If this was true, then I could only speculate that this was unique about K-19 due to the pressure being exerted on Russia as the U.S. was knocking at the door with our own nuclear arsenal.

Overall, a series of events took place that lead to the deaths of some fine military personnel, if the story, as it is protrayed in the movie is true.

I would be very interested to see what people from Russia think about the movie.

Boroda · « **Reply #19 on:** July 24, 2002, 09:06:45 AM »

Sikboy, Soviet submariners indeed had daily "wine ration", mostly dry red Moldavian Cabernet, that really helps to withdraw radionuclids from body.

Food rations on early nuclear subs were extremely rich too, and included black caviar, fresh fruits any time of the year and consisted mostly of delicatessen that were unavailible even in finest Soviet restaurants. It was a compensation for the lack of comfort. That subs were not much different from old diesels. But, OTOH, boats like K-19 had a personal bed for every crew member.

Drinking traditions in Russian navy are the same as in any Western country

Before the Revolution every sailor recieved a daily "charka" (~150ml IIRC) of vodka or rum. Now only submariners get alcohol every day.

Russians really drink more then average Westerner, and Leonid saw how we drink when he was in Moscow

But no ship commander will ever allow sailors to get drunk, and every officer who will get caught drinking too much has a very dig chance to be signed off to the shore.

lazs2 · « **Reply #20 on:** July 24, 2002, 11:14:12 AM »

The men who died on K19 were heroes because they saved their fellow crewmen and brought the sub back.. There was no danger of a nuclear war being caused by the incident. Nor, was there much danger to the environment. certainlyu not on the scale of a chernoble (or however ya spell it).

K19 was superior to first generation U.S. subs but inferior to latter versions.
lazs

Boroda · « **Reply #21 on:** July 24, 2002, 11:45:07 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2

K19 was superior to first generation U.S. subs but inferior to latter versions.
lazs

US already had George Washington subs carrying Polaris missiles that were lauched from underwater. Project 658 had only 3 missiles lauched from the surface, that should have been fueled before launch... Basically 658 were November boats with 3 missiles in an enlarged "sail".

Skuzzy, I didn't find any sources about the tests before K-19 was sent out on duty. The tests must have been performed before it was taken to navy service, and the accident happened on July, 4th, 1961, while the boat was assigned for duty in late 1960.

Sikboy · « **Reply #22 on:** July 24, 2002, 12:02:24 PM »

I agree with Boroda, the George Washington Subs were superior to K-19, in two of the most important ways, ability to carry more missiles, and ability to fire while concealed.

Where the Soviets Generally were ahead in the Sub Race was in the Attack submarine. In many cases the Soviet Subs were able to move faster and dive deeper than their American Counterparts. I don't know about the 1960s and early 1970s, but by the time I was on the scene, they were noisy as hell. If you believe Jane's, the Lira class (nato codename Alpha) was able to make 45 knots submerged

The Komsomlets (Nato Codename:Mike) could dive to 1,000 yards

And if you really want to drive US Squids crazy, look at some of those Soviet anti ship Missiles, especially the new "Yakhont" missiles. Those keep me up at night lol. Of course, I'll take a Tico any day, but hey, I'm Biased

-Sikboy

Hangtime · « **Reply #23 on:** July 24, 2002, 12:35:03 PM »

Any design team that installs a nuclear power reactor without a backup cooling system should be the ones to operate it...

..and repair and service it.

The boat had no prototype.. worse, the boat used several untried and original design precepts in it's execution... an accident just waiting to happen.

I still shake my head in wonder over the 'no backup' to the cooling system. Such arrogance and disregard for the saftey of the men assigned to such a coffin speaks volumes about the government and fuctionaries that approved the design, over the strident dissent of the people assigned to run it.

None of my comments detracts from the superb original design innovations used throughout the rest of the boat... in later production versions they proved themselves to be what they were.. brilliant. But that 'No-backup' for the reactors cooling system was criminal in my opinion.

Further.. the apperance of a wrecked soviet submarine carrying nuke missiles and having a reactor dispensing radiation in our coastal fisheries waters 150 miles off NYC and NOT having far reaching enviornmental impact and political fallout is ludicrious.. and yes, if it happened and the public was aware of it, it probably would have lead to if not a war, then certainly a political hair trigger tenseness that the later cuban missile crisis would have no doubt lead to a shooting war.

Hangtime · « **Reply #24 on:** July 24, 2002, 12:48:08 PM »

Rooski sonar, recognition and tracking system deficiencies more than negated any edge in speed and dive capabilites exibited by the early russian nuclear attack boats.

We could hear 'em, track 'em and attack 'em without their even being aware we were in the neighboorhood. Sub vs Sub, they really were disadvantaged thru the entire cold war.

Sub vs allied Surface units.. another story. They could and did penetrate our CVBG screens, particularly when they operated in shallow confined waters, and could have at any time nailed any of our CV's with tactical nukes, and there would have been damn little we could have done to stop 'em.

Where the Russians excelled was in DIESEL attack boats.. very very good, quiet and exceptionally lethal. Kilo's were the best in the world at what they did.. sneak in and SURPRISE! Yer dead. Our surface forces would have suffered horribly at the onset of a war with Soviet Russia... as usual, our adversarys were better than they let us think they were.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #25 on:** July 24, 2002, 02:31:46 PM »

Boroda, whats your opinion on this guys opinion (from another BBS)?

Quote

The Soviet Navy submarine program has been affected by tragedy time and again. Besides the K-19, I can quickly think of or find:

Soviet K-129 Western Pacific (this was a Golf class we tried to raise) - Loss of all hands
Soviet K-8 NE Atlantic - Loss of all hands
Soviet K-219 NW Atlantic - Loss of all hands
Soviet Komsomolets (Mike class) Norwegian Sea - can't remember death toll - I think about 40. Sub sank.
Soviet Echo I/II that lost a game of chicken against the US 6th fleet in the Med in the 70s. 10 - 12 killed by rocket fuel oxidizer fumes after collision
Soviet ballistic missile submarine that surfaced, burning, SE of Florida in the early 1990s I think - unknown dead
Russian Kursk Barents Sea - loss of all hands
Soviet K-19 - two incidents - more than 40 killed

As many specialist of the trade point out, many of the problems can be attributed to poor quality control (poor welds in the case of the K-19's first incident) and a rush to put submarines into service before they have been adequately tested in various trials.

Anecdotal information also suggests that the Soviet reliance on training only a small percentage of the crew to be maintainers as well as operators contribute to the problem. In the US Navy, most of the crew are operator/maintainers.

Boroda · « **Reply #26 on:** July 25, 2002, 10:31:17 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Ripsnort
Boroda, whats your opinion on this guys opinion (from another BBS)?

Rip, I am in no way a submarine enthusiast/expert. I can only make some comments based on the info from Russian Underwater Fleet website.

Here is a page about accidents and catastrophes in Underwater Fleet since the War ended. It includes many diesel sub accidents too.

http://submarine.id.ru/memory.shtml

Ok, let's start.

Soviet K-129 Western Pacific (this was a Golf class we tried to raise) - Loss of all hands

K-129 was a diesel missile sub. Sank on March 8th 1968, reason unknown. Versions: probable snorkel valve malfunction was an official Soviet one, American version was an explosion, reported by an acoustic station near Hawaii. Though, most reasonable version is a collision with SSN-579 Swordfish, that returned to base in Okinawa with very recognizable damabe to the "sail" (or better to say "conning tower"?). Anyway, Americans knew the position quite well.

Soviet K-8 NE Atlantic - Loss of all hands

K-8 was lost because of a fire on April, 12, 1970. Of 125 crew members 52 were lost. K-8 was the third Soviet nuclear sub, in service since 31.12.59. An accident happened on the 52nd day of autonomous mission, practically the limit for project 627.

Soviet Komsomolets (Mike class) Norwegian Sea - can't remember death toll - I think about 40. Sub sank.

K-278 story is well known

Of the 69 crew members 39 perished... One sailor survived in an evacuation camera from the depth of 1500m...

Soviet Echo I/II that lost a game of chicken against the US 6th fleet in the Med in the 70s. 10 - 12 killed by rocket fuel oxidizer fumes after collision

Couldn't find anything about this accident. Probably a legend.

Soviet ballistic missile submarine that surfaced, burning, SE of Florida in the early 1990s I think - unknown dead

Must be K-219, project 667AU (Nalim), lost on October, 6th, 1986, 4890 miles NE from Bermuda islands. Fire in the missile silos, probably a result of a collision with an American sub. 6 crew members lost. I think we can say that last two episodes are actually one.

Russian Kursk Barents Sea - loss of all hands
Soviet K-19 - two incidents - more than 40 killed

Enough said about this two...

Now - some stats.

In 1986 USSR had 364 subs, of whom:

76 had ballistic missiles (62 nuclear)
64 had antiship cruise missiles (50 nuclear)
218 had torpedo-only armament (73 nuclear)

Other Warsaw Pact countries had only 6 subs - 3 Poland and 3 Bulgaria

It gives us 370 boats total.

USA had 139 subs, including 38 missile subs, 97 attack subs, few special boats and 4 diesel, out of combat duty.

Other NATO countries had 153 subs, including 18 British and 11 French nuclear boats.

Japan has 14 diesel subs and Australia has 6.

This gives us 312 boats total.

Production numbers for USSR and US since early 50s:

USSR: 235 nuclear and 300 diesel.
USA: 150 nuclear and 18 diesel.

Accident ratio:

USSR: 6 subs lost out of 535, gives us 1 boat lost per 89 built.
USA: 5 boats lost out of 168 built, gives us 1 boat per 33 built.

The worst accident ratio belongs to France: 5 subs lost out of 35 after the War.

Source: http://www.submarina.ru/api/w62.shtml

Sikboy · « **Reply #27 on:** July 25, 2002, 11:38:14 AM »

Wow, those are very cool sites Boroda!

But the numbers don't seem to match up.

http://submarine.id.ru/memory.shtml

Lists 11 Submarines Sunk in peacetime.
(the are:
Nuclear- K-56, k-8, k-219, k-278, and k-141
Diesal-M-256, S-117 C-80 K-219, B-37 and S-178)
I totally admit that my Russian is pretty bad, so it could easily be a translation error on my part.

But the other sources, say only claims 5 losses up to 1998 (Given the time frame, we must subtract one from the first source, since that happened in 1999).

It is important though, to consider the difference in numbers of the Soviet and Russian submarine fleets though. Just as it is important to remember that the US has not lost a Submarine since 1968 (USS Scorpion) In fact, I can only find details about three US Submarine losses since WWII.
USS Cochino (Diesal, 1 dead)
USS Thresher (Nuke, 129 dead)
USS Scorpion (Nuke 99 dead)

Very interesting stuff.

-Sikboy

Boroda · « **Reply #28 on:** July 25, 2002, 12:23:54 PM »

Thanks, Sikboy!

Hehe, I said "some stats"

and statistics usually never has matching numbers....

The trick with the stats on http://www.submarina.ru/api/w62.shtml is that the data is taken from 1986 Janes

so some accidents like K-429 were not known in the West.

Another thing is that 3 diesel sub lost by the US were built during the War, while only one Soviet boat lost (S-117) was built even before the War, in 1934.

Gunthr · « **Reply #29 on:** July 28, 2002, 02:33:15 AM »

I enjoyed the movie, especially after the insights I got from reading this post and from seeing a documentary on the K-1-9 on the History Channel last night. The movie reveals the difficulties inherent in getting things done under communism, reflected in rushed, shoddy technology and shortages of trained specialists and supply problems and a lack of safety equitment on the sub. In the end, though, this movie is about dedication to duty and bravery.

I thought the movie could have been better if it had a little more character development, especially of the heroes, and if it showed a little more of the details of life aboard a Russian sub (like the passing out of cotton or cloth pads soaked in astringent after sleep periods in lieu of washing at a sink) - but I liked it even so. Some of it reminded me of accounts I've read about the Chernobyl incident. I give K-19 a (7.5) out of (10).