Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Krusher on October 29, 2003, 07:39:05 AM
-
Great news from Russia where they have found 11 of the 13 miners Alive. Theses guys were underground for 6 days!
It was a pretty heroic rescue effort to say the least.
-
Great news~! They did better in this rescue operation than they did with the Kursk.:rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Yeah, like the crew of the Kursk could have been saved.
Absolutely they could have been saved, the 23 trapped in the rear bulkhead died as a result of the Russian Navy's refusal to accept outside help until day 9 Read up on it, its a sad story about how the "Cold war" mentality still exists when it comes to people asking for help.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Absolutely they could have been saved, the 23 trapped in the rear bulkhead died as a result of the Russian Navy's refusal to accept outside help until day 9 Read up on it, its a sad story about how the "Cold war" mentality still exists when it comes to people asking for help.
Last night the History channel had a very good show on the Kursk tradgedy. The crew that survived the initial blast were some very brave men. They made a decision not to try the escape hatch and to wait for rescue. They might be alive if it wasnt for the stubborness of the Fleet commanders and the politicians at home. Both the UK and the USA had rescue rigs that were ready to go. The UK even had some specialized divers (trained for deep water) that could have been used to check for survivors.
-
**** off rip
-
I can't believe they got them out alive after 6 days. That's even longer than the PA miners were trapped, and I didn't think they would make it either.
-
Originally posted by Krusher
Last night the History channel had a very good show on the Kursk tradgedy. The crew that survived the initial blast were some very brave men. They made a decision not to try the escape hatch and to wait for rescue. They might be alive if it wasnt for the stubborness of the Fleet commanders and the politicians at home. Both the UK and the USA had rescue rigs that were ready to go. The UK even had some specialized divers (trained for deep water) that could have been used to check for survivors.
Exactly.
-
Originally posted by Maniac
**** off rip
DO you have some information to share other than the facts that are out there? Or just riding on emotions alone?
-
I saw that History channel show. They said a fire in the crew compartment killed the trapped men. The best hypothesis is that one of the crew dropped his oxygen-maker into the oily water which incinerated most of the men and suffocated the rest.
Interesting fact: The sub was actually longer than the depth of water it was in. Probably not very feasible, but Russian command could have just raised up one end of the sub to the surface.
-
Originally posted by davidpt40
I saw that History channel show. They said a fire in the crew compartment killed the trapped men. The best hypothesis is that one of the crew dropped his oxygen-maker into the oily water which incinerated most of the men and suffocated the rest.
Interesting fact: The sub was actually longer than the depth of water it was in. Probably not very feasible, but Russian command could have just raised up one end of the sub to the surface.
They had letters written to loved ones that were up to 3 days old from the surviving 23. I missed the part you mentioned, I thought they assumed all perished due to flooding from the prop shaft leakage and /or affixiation, lack of oxygen? (the kurst leaked quite a bit at the shaft inlet unless the shaft was turning)
Either way, I'm sure Boroda will be along soon and claim that US subs sunk her just like the Deputy Prime Minister claimed during his press conference.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Either way, I'm sure Boroda will be along soon and claim that US subs sunk her just like the Deputy Prime Minister claimed during his press conference.
No, actually it was Karl Stromberg trying to steal their nukes.
(http://homepages.nildram.co.uk/~prospero/images/screenshot/tswlm5.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
They had letters written to loved ones that were up to 3 days old from the surviving 23. I missed the part you mentioned, I thought they assumed all perished due to flooding from the prop shaft leakage and /or affixiation, lack of oxygen? (the kurst leaked quite a bit at the shaft inlet unless the shaft was turning)
Thats what I watched also. I think davidpt40 was in the bathroom when this part was on hehe
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Either way, I'm sure Boroda will be along soon and claim that US subs sunk her just like the Deputy Prime Minister claimed during his press conference.
Rip, AFAIK no sub crews were ever rescued from deeper then 60m. :( I mean rescued from outside.
The "record" is held by one guy who survived from Komsomolets in a rescue capsule, from 1.5 km IIRC. The capsule detached from sub when it hit the sea floor.
As for US sub sinking Kursk - I don't know, but it looked possible at that time. I hope you saw pictures of Memphis "spec ops" sub on repair in Norway. They were damaged so badly they couldn't make it home. And I have heard that it was signed off duty after that accident. I wonder if someone explained why.
Knowing that US subs are such frequent guests in our domestic waters that our sub commanders have to ram them to make them leave (shooting at them is impolite), and Americans usually are deaf and blind and can't turn away - Kursk could just collide with that recon sub.
Again - it looked possible right after the catastrophe. Now it's clear that it was a torpedo explosion. Or they simply don't tell us...
It's interesting that we don't have such films as you have on "history channel". As usual, journalists are informed better then our Navy. I think next time Navy has to hire them for investigation instead of lifting the sunk vessel. It's all so easy in the movies.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
We had our own rescue ship nearby and the Russians can be criticised for not accepting help, but somehow I suspect the USN would also choose not to accept foreign help if one of their nukesubs were to sink. With a full-blown arctic storm in the area even our guys say they most likely could not have helped, and with all due respect to the USN underwater operations and rescue is a Norwegian speciality.
As far as I remember it took your rescue ship several days to sail to the chash site...
Your divers made an exellent job, WTG! I wonder how long did it take to decopress after working for hours at 100m...
I really liked that the times have changed since 1988 when Navy refused from Norwegian assistance that could save many people from Komsomolets.
There was a Soviet film called "An accident in sector 36-80", about the same situation - an American sub has a reactor malfunction, and a commander refuses to accept help from a Soviet rescue team. The tanker that fueled a rescue plane gives up all it's fuel and the tanker crew merely escapes death by landing on an old nazi field in the mountains... The film was made in 1982, and 7 years later same thing happened to a Komsomolets :(
-
Originally posted by Boroda
It's interesting that we don't have such films as you have on "history channel". As usual, journalists are informed better then our Navy. I think next time Navy has to hire them for investigation instead of lifting the sunk vessel. It's all so easy in the movies.
Bear in mind that the interviews were with Russian commanders, and rescue personal that were at the scene but were not allowed to dive on the sub until day 9. As far as journalists are concerned, there were none inviewed...only those that were involved in the rescue operation were interviewed, but I'm sure they were lying too. :rolleyes:
-
Originally posted by Boroda
It's interesting that we don't have such films as you have on "history channel".
OMG! It's worse than I thought over there Boroda :)
Is the History Channel shown in other countries? Does anyone know?
-
Originally posted by GScholz
We had our own rescue ship nearby and the Russians can be criticised for not accepting help, but somehow I suspect the USN would also choose not to accept foreign help if one of their nukesubs were to sink. With a full-blown arctic storm in the area even our guys say they most likely could not have helped, and with all due respect to the USN underwater operations and rescue is a Norwegian speciality.
An non-military,independant British team specializing in deep sea dives complete with pressurization bells and suits offered help within 24 hours and were refused, they set sail to the area regardless because, as in the words of their captain "the worse that could happen is we'd just have to turn around".
I might add that the Brits were the first country to offer help, and second was the U.S., both within 24 hours of hearing about the catastrophe. During the first 24 hours of the event, the Russian Navy is even quoted (they had footage) of claiming that no emergency existed and it was simply a routine operational error. :eek:
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Weeks. To sad they could do nothing for the crew but knock on the hull, those hatches were hopelessly jammed shut no matter what they tried. To get to them the hull needed to be cut open which was completely unfeasible in the time they had and under those conditions.
Negative. The rear escape hatch was in perfect condition. When they did access the hull, this is the route they took (watch the footage if you get a chance) Unfortunately, by this time, day 9, the sub was flooded in that compartment and the air that did escape during depressuration was tested, and turned out to be not breathable (of course, they men had died 6 days earlier the estimated)
Bottom line by those that were involved in the rescue, then salvage operation: "The men could have been saved had it not been for the historically typical arrogance of the Russian Navy that we thought only exited in Cold war conditions."
I might add the letters written to loved and the timeline of those letters proved that these men could have indeed survived. The rescue bells, subs today can equalize the pressures at that depth and prevent the bends so Borodas theory of "unrescueable" is not true.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Bear in mind that the interviews were with Russian commanders, and rescue personal that were at the scene but were not allowed to dive on the sub until day 9. As far as journalists are concerned, there were none inviewed...only those that were involved in the rescue operation were interviewed, but I'm sure they were lying too. :rolleyes:
They were not allowed to dive until day 9? So what were all the rescue subs doing since first day?
What could divers do to the sub? Knock at the hatch?
There is no way to save sub crew from 100m without using rescue capsules or rescue subs. :(
I always wonder is all this totaly distorted view on what happens here a result of cultural/lingual misunderstanding or is it intentional? :confused:
Rip, about "During the first 24 hours of the event, the Russian Navy is even quoted (they had footage) of claiming that no emergency existed and it was simply a routine operational error" - it's funny to hear it. I was here in Moscow and was watching news on TV, so don't tell me "they have footage". I am not an idiot and I usually know what day of week and month it is.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
They were not allowed to dive until day 9? So what were all the rescue subs doing since first day?
What could divers do to the sub? Knock at the hatch?
There is no way to save sub crew from 100m without using rescue capsules or rescue subs. :(
I always wonder is all this totaly distorted view on what happens here a result of cultural/lingual misunderstanding or is it intentional? :confused:
Rip, about "During the first 24 hours of the event, the Russian Navy is even quoted (they had footage) of claiming that no emergency existed and it was simply a routine operational error" - it's funny to hear it. I was here in Moscow and was watching news on TV, so don't tell me "they have footage". I am not an idiot and I usually know what day of week and month it is.
The Russian navy, because of lack of maintenance that has befallen it since the Cold war ended, had their rescue sub in the water approx. 26 hours after the Kursk did not check in on time. However, it was in the water for 10 min. before they had to yank it and repair it, it was in such poor shape. When they did finally get the Russian Navy rescue sub to the Kurst, they didn't have the proper equipment to extract the men due to the depth, and the sub itself was limited to 12 persons I believe.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Oh? I've not seen any documentary on the operation yet, but from what I remember from the news at the time the divers had great difficulty with the hatches due to the hull was warped from the explosion and crash.
Thats the difficulty I mentioned in this above post, they did have difficulties, but it was because of the russian rescue subs lack of ability to do the job correctly. The Brits, Nors, and US had the right equipment for that type of rescue...and their equipment is constantly maintained. They have a unique flexible access tube that covers the emergency hatch, creates a vacuum, and clings to the hull surround the emergency hatch. Then pressured before opening. The Russian rescue sub was limited to mating direct to the hatch, so you may be right, there could have been some difficulties, but the whole point is...there *was* proper equipment there to do the job, arrogance and politics stood in their way.
The same reason the Russian rescue sub couldn't do the job is the same reason the Torps blew up, lack of maintenance. Those torps are not a can of soup you can store on a shelf for years and expect them to behave (Ask anyone about Hydrogen peroxide fuels)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
I might add the letters written to loved and the timeline of those letters proved that these men could have indeed survived. The rescue bells, subs today can equalize the pressures at that depth and prevent the bends so Borodas theory of "unrescueable" is not true.
I don't remember how many attempts were made to attach a specially-designed rescue sub to the rear hatch, I was posting about it on AGW in real time.
Did they tell about this attempts in that "documentary", or they just hired some emigrants who can speak Russian to act as "divers"?
Rip, we have free press here, and such things couldn't have escaped from public. If that "officers" could be interviewd by what you call "history channel" - our right-wing "democratic liberal press" should bark about it at every corner.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
I don't remember how many attempts were made to attach a specially-designed rescue sub to the rear hatch, I was posting about it on AGW in real time.
Did they tell about this attempts in that "documentary", or they just hired some emigrants who can speak Russian to act as "divers"?
.
Yes, they did Boroda, but it was lack of proper equipment and the egos that couldn't bear the fact to see themselves ask for help. See my above post.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Rip, we have free press here, and such things couldn't have escaped from public. If that "officers" could be interviewd by what you call "history channel" - our right-wing "democratic liberal press" should bark about it at every corner.
Did you see the footage of the wife of one of the victims at the Deputy Prime Ministers press conference? She was outraged because of the lack of information, the delay of the rescue...well, in typical Soviet fashion, military men walked up to this distraught woman that was ranting the D.P.M. and injected her with a sedative right thru her coat!. The sedative took effect in about 15 seconds and she was helped to her seat. :rolleyes:
-
So much for a thread about miners being found alive LOL
-
Originally posted by GScholz
From what I've read the 65-76 torpedo was fairly new, but was damaged accidentally during loading at port and later started to leak.
Well, in this documentary they said it could have possibly been damaged during loading, but was most likely due to lack of maintenance because of military budget cuts. (shrugs)
-
Anyway, we can agree on one thing, militaries, politics and the egos that go along with them certainly had a fatal outcome of the events.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Well if that's the case we should see lots of Russian subs blowing up. The 65-76 torpedo is used on all Russian nukesubs.
Unless these events lead to better maintenance.....The US took the hydrogen peroxide propellent type torps out of their inventory due to the hazards of such torps in the 70's I believe, you can check on this with Swager, he was a submariner.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Well if that's the case we should see lots of Russian subs blowing up. The 65-76 torpedo is used on all Russian nukesubs.
After the disaster, the Russian Navy ordered torpedoes of that type that exploded to be removed from service.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
Well the Russian Prosecutor General agrees with you, but he also states that the survivors all died after 6 to 8 hours.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2153484.stm
Like I said, the letters don't lie.
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I have not read them, do you have any information on their content?
Only what was shown in the documentary. If they air it again, I'll record it and send you the tape. Or, you might check the Historychannel.com and see if you can purchase the tape.
-
The name of the book is "inviting disaster" by James Chile and here is some info about the segment:
Inviting Disaster: #2
The amazing machines of human invention most often do our bidding with uncomplaining proficiency. But when they go wrong, they exact a terrible wage. In August 2000, the Russian submarine Kursk glided through the depths of the Arctic Sea. But the demands of the Cold War had planted the seeds of disaster in this great ship--118 men would pay with their lives. Their deaths would bring about an enormous step forward in Russia's evolving democracy. Based on James Chiles's book "Inviting Disaster". TV PG
-
Originally posted by NUKE
OMG! It's worse than I thought over there Boroda :)
Is the History Channel shown in other countries? Does anyone know?
It show on sat. but their French is terrible :)
so terrible that it look like the bastardized french also called english ;)
-
Originally posted by GScholz
I have not read them, do you have any information on their content?
It was a great documentary. I was looking for information on the "letter", and found a bunch of partial links. I haven't been able to find it in it's entirety. If you do a google search for Dmitry Kolesnikov (the person who wrote it), you'll find a bunch of snippets. If you dig through them, you may be able to find the whole note.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Yes, they did Boroda, but it was lack of proper equipment and the egos that couldn't bear the fact to see themselves ask for help. See my above post.
Well, if we didn't have proper equipment - then who else has it? Are British rescue subs designed to fit Soviet submarine hatches? Norwegians could not even open the hatch in compartment 9 util they were provided with special keys and wrenches....
Equipment indeed lacked maintenance. But the real problem was that it was designed to fit only when the hatches were directed straight up, and K-141 laid on it's side :(
There was a report on TV that days from British recsue training centre. They said British rescue subs suffered from the same problem. Disclaimer: I saw it on TV, so I can't say it's "true".
Inviting Norwegians was probably the bravest decision made in after that accident. GScholz is right: noone will be happy inviting foreigners to the top-secret submarine rescue. It's not national, it's military way of thinking.
-
Originally posted by Martlet
It was a great documentary. I was looking for information on the "letter", and found a bunch of partial links. I haven't been able to find it in it's entirety. If you do a google search for Dmitry Kolesnikov (the person who wrote it), you'll find a bunch of snippets. If you dig through them, you may be able to find the whole note.
Did they "show" the letter? Did they show other letters then Kolesnikov's?
Kolesnikov's letter was written less then 4 hours after the explosion.
IIRC all other letters found were immediately classified. Anyone pretending he shows them on TV or quoting them is a liar.
I get more and more surprised how such lies are easily fed to the public. WTG.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Did they "show" the letter? Did they show other letters then Kolesnikov's?
Kolesnikov's letter was written less then 4 hours after the explosion.
IIRC all other letters found were immediately classified. Anyone pretending he shows them on TV or quoting them is a liar.
I get more and more surprised how such lies are easily fed to the public. WTG.
Your so funny Boroda. How do you know for sure that the letter was written less than 4 hours after the explosion? Were you on board with him or did you get your information from some form of lying media?
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Well, if we didn't have proper equipment - then who else has it? Are British rescue subs designed to fit Soviet submarine hatches?
Yes, they are. Its a flexible rubber sleeve, fits ANY hatch (see my posts above) The Soviets knew the Brits had this technology aboard their Rescue sub.
-
Originally posted by Boroda
Did they "show" the letter? Did they show other letters then Kolesnikov's?
Kolesnikov's letter was written less then 4 hours after the explosion.
IIRC all other letters found were immediately classified. Anyone pretending he shows them on TV or quoting them is a liar.
I get more and more surprised how such lies are easily fed to the public. WTG.
GEE I WONDER WHY THEY WERE IMMEDIATELY CLASSIFIED?!?
(Pssst, because they timeline would have been exposed, listening sensors reported by the US Navy vessels in the area said the men were alive 3 days after the initial "Minor problem" ;))
Don't ya just hate democracy, Boroda? Shows how screwed up your country was, and still is. (Not that ours is much better, but hey, someones got to be on the bottom of the food chain.)
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
But the demands of the Cold War had planted the seeds of disaster in this great ship--118 men would pay with their lives. Their deaths would bring about an enormous step forward in Russia's evolving democracy.
@#$%@^^ bastards.
@#$% them. @#$% their "democracy".
Only a @#$%^@ bastard could say such a thing
:mad:
-
Your so funny Boroda. How do you know for sure that the letter was written less than 4 hours after the explosion? Were you on board with him or did you get your information from some form of lying media?
Lying media here is definetly not Russian.
The letter was a report to senior command, contained names and personal numbers of the survived crew members and had a time in the end.
I hope that you are smart enough that the report contained strictly classified information. It was given to the family only after serious investigation and hard work on restoring it, because the paper was damaged by water and fire.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Yes, they are. Its a flexible rubber sleeve, fits ANY hatch (see my posts above) The Soviets knew the Brits had this technology aboard their Rescue sub.
Using the same method our radioactive friend tried: did you try to fit a British "flexible rubber sleeve" to a hatch of Krasnodar class submerged missile 1st rank cruiser?
What I have heard on TV (same level of argument as yourth, sorry) was quite different.
-
Lying media here is definetly not Russian.
The letter was a report to senior command, contained names and personal numbers of the survived crew members and had a time in the end.
I hope that you are smart enough that the report contained strictly classified information. It was given to the family only after serious investigation and hard work on restoring it, because the paper was damaged by water and fire.
In other words you do not know for sure that the letter was written within 4 hours of the blast.
-
Originally posted by Ripsnort
GEE I WONDER WHY THEY WERE IMMEDIATELY CLASSIFIED?!?
(Pssst, because they timeline would have been exposed, listening sensors reported by the US Navy vessels in the area said the men were alive 3 days after the initial "Minor problem" ;))
Pretty damn stupid emoticon here.
So - there were US navy vesels there?
Listening sensors could hear people inside Kursk from outside of segured aquatory? Go tell me they heard them from sattelites.
Originally posted by Ripsnort
Don't ya just hate democracy, Boroda? Shows how screwed up your country was, and still is. (Not that ours is much better, but hey, someones got to be on the bottom of the food chain.)
Very nice. "Democracy" for us means being at the bottom of food chain. And as we have seen - an american way of delivering "democracy" is on the cruise missiles and B-52s.
I don't think that Democracy is good. It doesn't have an absolute value. In most of the cases it is dangerous. In most of the cases "democracy" is only a curtain for the masses who don't have any declared access to understanding what goes on. Mostly because they are stupid enough to be fed with propaganda. That "documentary" you like so much is a good example.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
In other words you do not know for sure that the letter was written within 4 hours of the blast.
In other words Kolesnikov's father didn't say anything against it. Navy officials said it was signed 15:15, less then four hours after the explosion.
Noone can be sure when it was written. Kolesnikov could have his watch stopped, could be mistaken, etc., but when he wrote it he signed it 15:15.
Are we talking in different languages?...
:(
-
Originally posted by Boroda
In other words Kolesnikov's father didn't say anything against it. Navy officials said it was signed 15:15, less then four hours after the explosion.
Noone can be sure when it was written. Kolesnikov could have his watch stopped, could be mistaken, etc., but when he wrote it he signed it 15:15.
Are we talking in different languages?...
:(
I'm pointing out to you that you used the media to get your information. The information you receive from your military has also been questionable in the past.
You come on this BB and state that the media is lying in one case, yet believable when you chose to beleive it.
-
Originally posted by NUKE
I'm pointing out to you that you used the media to get your information. The information you receive from your military has also been questionable in the past.
You come on this BB and state that the media is lying in one case, yet believable when you chose to beleive it.
I never believe media, I always try to find several sources for any information. But in this case I quote Kolesnikov's Father, who proved what Navy officials said. It's not media. Also, JFYI, Kolesnikovs didn't join the last lawsuit started by some attorney hungry for media attention, who said the "real cause of Kursk accident still isn't disclosed".
Believe me, we live in a free country, and media will catch every word Kolesnikov's family will say. If even your "history-channel" mock-up navy officers were allowed to speak - then noone can stop a pensioneer from stating his opinion. From an old kiddy "poem" about an old man throwing a hand-grenade into a window of a Party office: "Grand-dad is old, and he doesn't give a damn" (Dedushka stariy, yemu vsyo ravno).
I have to say again: our countries are different culturaly and traditionaly. But we are not bug-eyed monsters. There are always other reasons for our behaviour then "Russians are blood-hungry savages who usually want to kill everyone in sight".