Author Topic: Russian Navy - Secrets of the Kursk  (Read 3008 times)

Offline FrodeMk3

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2481
Russian Navy - Secrets of the Kursk
« Reply #30 on: July 05, 2007, 12:45:04 AM »
This link gives a little info on the rocket torp, for those of you wondering about it:http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=a20_1174275765

Interesting read, that.

Offline MORAY37

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
Russian Navy - Secrets of the Kursk
« Reply #31 on: July 05, 2007, 01:12:14 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Wotan
As some one who served on an America fast attack submarine (Swager did as well) as a sonar tech I can tell you it was routine for us to set off Soviet waters and then track Soviet submarines as they left for patrol. sometimes for months. That's here-nor-there...

The Kursk sank due to a malfunction in a torpedo that used a hydrogen peroxide based propellant. This type of propellant is highly volatile and a serious fire hazzard.

This is what probably caused the Kursk to sink - the propellant caught fire then detonated  the torpedo warhead. Once the Kursk flooded and went to the bottom there was no hope in saving any of the surviving crew.

Torpedo fuel leak sank Kursk

All other nonsensical 'conspiracy theory' nutbagness aside some of you seem to want to believe in the most ridiculous garbage.

Oswald killed Kennedy alone, the earth is round, the US actually landed men on the moon and Bush actually believe WMDs were in Iraq.

Wotan mit uns!!!


And yet the U.S.S. Memphis shows up in a Norweigan port, on an unscheduled port call, 6 days after the "incident", (almost the exact time it would take to get there if you were limping along with major stability issues) with damage to her starboard bow?  Do I think there was an incident?  YES.  Do i think we fired any torpedoes?  Probably not, although, in such shallow water with so much traffic in a wargame, it would be possible to slip one into the Kursk, and get out of there.  Both subs would easily have been able to negotiate their way out in the confusion of what happened.  Would be interested to see the sonar tapes from a good russian boat.... or better yet the sonar log from the other attack boat we had.... but it's unlikely that would ever happen.
"Ocean: A body of water occupying 2/3 of a world made for man...who has no gills."
-Ambrose Bierce

Offline MORAY37

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
Russian Navy - Secrets of the Kursk
« Reply #32 on: July 05, 2007, 01:18:58 AM »
The new torp the russians developed, (and which the Iranians apparently developed on their own with help from China, as well) basically, sheathes itself in vapor.  It is said it is unguided or capable of only the bare minimum of course corrections.  Moving at 225 to 300 miles per hour though, it really doesn't have to have any form of guidance.  It's designed to attack surface ships, specifically, our aircraft carriers.  Using it on subs would be difficult, and only achieved with active sonar.... which would give away the attacking sub.
"Ocean: A body of water occupying 2/3 of a world made for man...who has no gills."
-Ambrose Bierce

Offline McFarland

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 606
Russian Navy - Secrets of the Kursk
« Reply #33 on: July 05, 2007, 01:24:11 AM »
Yes, but all the sub would have to do would be flip on the sonar for a second, find out if they were lined up, and shoot. A torpedo moving that fast, the aircraft carrier could do nothing more than take the sub down with it. They aren't exactly capable of dodging.

Offline MrRiplEy[H]

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 11633
Russian Navy - Secrets of the Kursk
« Reply #34 on: July 05, 2007, 02:05:33 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by McFarland
Yes, but all the sub would have to do would be flip on the sonar for a second, find out if they were lined up, and shoot. A torpedo moving that fast, the aircraft carrier could do nothing more than take the sub down with it. They aren't exactly capable of dodging.


He meant when attacking another sub. The carrier can be passively monitored or even actively using the good old periscope view.

With an another sub there's a problem of depth and quiet operation.
Definiteness of purpose is the starting point of all achievement. –W. Clement Stone

Offline McFarland

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 606
Russian Navy - Secrets of the Kursk
« Reply #35 on: July 05, 2007, 03:25:02 AM »
Ah, I thought he meant in the attack of a carrier. :o

Offline Hortlund

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 4690
Russian Navy - Secrets of the Kursk
« Reply #36 on: July 05, 2007, 04:19:27 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by MORAY37
(almost the exact time it would take to get there if you were limping along with major stability issues)  


What kind of rubbish is this? How do you calculate the exact time it would take for a submarine to "limp home". Is it capable of 4 knots? 9 knots? On what do you base this assumption?

Offline Nilsen

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18108
Russian Navy - Secrets of the Kursk
« Reply #37 on: July 05, 2007, 04:20:27 AM »
Something tells me that there are plenty of people both in norway, usa and russia that knows in detail what happened. Some things are best kept in the dark and settled behind closed doors.

Offline Suave

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2950
Russian Navy - Secrets of the Kursk
« Reply #38 on: July 05, 2007, 08:17:38 AM »
The over dramatic descriptions of the shkval makes me think that the story is likely bs.

The shkval has very limited usefullness, it's unguided and uses a magnetic fuse. But most importantly it's extremely LOUD, and because it travels in a straight line, if you shoot one off everybody in the ocean is going to know where you're at.

It's really more of a defensive counter measure.

Offline Suave

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2950
Russian Navy - Secrets of the Kursk
« Reply #39 on: July 05, 2007, 08:18:43 AM »
What do the guys over on the subsim.com forums think of the clip ?

Offline Elfie

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6142
Russian Navy - Secrets of the Kursk
« Reply #40 on: July 05, 2007, 02:56:39 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Vad
May be you are right... I don't know.
Hope we will be never on the position to make such decisions.


I have never envied commanders when it comes to making life/death descions.

Quote
Do i think we fired any torpedoes? Probably not, although, in such shallow water with so much traffic in a wargame, it would be possible to slip one into the Kursk, and get out of there. Both subs would easily have been able to negotiate their way out in the confusion of what happened.


I'm pretty sure the USS Memphis couldn't have fired a torpedo w/o some sonar operator noticing. As far as escaping afterwards.....it's said that from the air the wreck of the Kursk was clearly visible in those shallow waters. It would be pretty hard to escape if they can see you from the air.
Corkyjr on country jumping:
In the end you should be thankful for those players like us who switch to try and help keep things even because our willingness to do so, helps a more selfish, I want it my way player, get to fly his latewar uber ride.

Offline MORAY37

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
Russian Navy - Secrets of the Kursk
« Reply #41 on: July 05, 2007, 04:01:22 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by MrRiplEy[H]
He meant when attacking another sub. The carrier can be passively monitored or even actively using the good old periscope view.

With an another sub there's a problem of depth and quiet operation.


Exactly what I meant.  Surface contacts are monitored and prosecuted with passive measures.  Sub-surface usually, at least in this age, must be approached with active pinging.
"Ocean: A body of water occupying 2/3 of a world made for man...who has no gills."
-Ambrose Bierce

Offline MORAY37

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
Russian Navy - Secrets of the Kursk
« Reply #42 on: July 05, 2007, 04:38:03 PM »
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/KURSK/kazouille_1105145210_torpille3.jpg



Interesting picture.  The source, ostensibly, was a european news agency...and it is posted on an admittedly slanted website.. though I cannot verify it with a palatable source, I will not make a decided opinion on it.  That being said, I showed it to a colleague that designs submersibles where I am employed, and he could not come up with logic that would explain a hole on the outer hull dented inward, resulting from an internal explosive event.  He stated, that it appeared as though, from that picture, something pierced the outer hull, coming from starboard and aft, at an angle of around 15-30 degrees, and the resulting effective explosion would radiate forward as dictated by the bulkhead structure on the Kursk, if it were an explosive that pierced the hull.

I am well aware the photo could be doctored...I work in the business of definable truths.. but if it is not... that is a serious question, at least in my eyes.
"Ocean: A body of water occupying 2/3 of a world made for man...who has no gills."
-Ambrose Bierce

Offline MORAY37

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2318
Russian Navy - Secrets of the Kursk
« Reply #43 on: July 05, 2007, 04:49:14 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Hortlund
What kind of rubbish is this? How do you calculate the exact time it would take for a submarine to "limp home". Is it capable of 4 knots? 9 knots? On what do you base this assumption?


From a Russian magazine report.
.......The American nuclear submarine SSN 691 Memphis, Los-Angeles class, is currently located at the Norwegian port in Bergen. A representative of the Norwegian embassy in Moscow told the Russian RIA "Novosti" news agency that the 'Memphis' entered the Norwegian port "for repairs." Initially the Norwegian embassy refused to say when the American submarine requested entry to and entered the Norwegian base. Shortly after publishing this information, RIA "Novosti" was contacted by another representative of the Norwegian embassy, Ule Hopestad, who said that his colleague, who gave the initial interview to the news agency, provided "incorrect information" due to his "problems with the Russian language. According to Ule Hopestad, the 'Memphis' entered the Norwegian port in Bergen on August 18 not for repairs but to replenish its supplies of food and to allow its crew to rest. Norwegian officials say that 'Memphis' was scheduled to arrive to Bergen almost two months in advance.

According to the Russian Defense Minister, Igor Sergeyev, Russian experts are studying satellite photos of the area where "Kursk" sank. 'Memphis' was detected by satellites when it surfaced and was traveling at a very low speed away from the general area of the "Kursk" accident toward Norway. Later the American submarine accelerated to around 8-9 knots (16-17 km/h) and proceeded along the Norwegian coast toward Bergen (roughly 1,900 km from the site of the "Kursk" accident along the Norwegian coastline). The submarine was generally identified as a Los-Angeles class and later was determined to be the SSN 691 'Memphis'. The unidentified foreign submarine was initially detected by the Russian nuclear cruiser "Peter the Great" after it intercepted a NATO radio distress signal originated by the submarine, requesting emergency entry to one of Norwegian naval bases.

Representatives of the Norwegian embassy in Moscow told RIA "Novosti" that the American submarine was seen by Norwegian journalists. However, attempts on the part of the Russian news agency to locate these journalists have failed.....

 

This snapshot was made by the Russian intelligence satellite on August 19, 2000 from the altitude of 40 thousand meters. This is the Norwegian naval base Haakonsvern, arranged on the coast of a Grimstad-fiord in a province Hordalan, in nine kilometers to the southwest from Bergen. Geographical coordinates of base are 60-20-20 N, 5-13-53 E, ? = +20?. Naval base Haakonsvern is used by the small and medium ships - up to frigate class, but not for for submarines.

On the August, 19 the nuclear submarine of the Los Angeles class has come into Haakonsvern and moored in the piers close to the frigate of Oslo class. A submarine moored in the piers, instead of dock, because the docks in Haakonsvern, we have to repeat, are not assigned for submarines, especially nuclear. We presume that the name of this boat is Memphis or Toledo. Both of them are of Los Angeles class submarines. The submarines of this class are of 109,7 meters length, 10,1 meters high and 9,9 meters width. Displacement is of 6000 tons.



The boat coming for the repair had considerable damages in the bow, and that was captured by the means of optical-electronic reconnaissance. The thick rubber-ceramic skin of the submarine was torn off, as a peel from a banana. Obviously the steel inner hall was also damaged.

The boat has been repaired for 8 days. On the August, 27 in second half of day she left the base and has departed to the coast of Britain. The boat doubled the British islands in the east, entered Southampton on the southern coast of England and became on repair in closed dock.
"Ocean: A body of water occupying 2/3 of a world made for man...who has no gills."
-Ambrose Bierce

Offline Jackal1

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9092
Russian Navy - Secrets of the Kursk
« Reply #44 on: July 05, 2007, 04:57:43 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Elfie
Very likely that if an American sub had fired a torpedo that the rest of the Russian fleet would have immediately attacked the American sub  




Well........they were going to do just that. The only problem was they couldn`t get the 25hp Evinrude started on the attack vessel.
An order for a new set of sparkplugs from Sears has been made to correct the problem.
Democracy is two wolves deciding on what to eat. Freedom is a well armed sheep protesting the vote.
------------------------------------------------------------------