US 'torpedoed Kursk nuclear sub'

[Kilgor]

Daniel Stacey, London
May 09, 2005
A FORMER British military official has backed a sensational claim that the Russian nuclear submarine, the Kursk, was torpedoed by US forces in August 2000.

An official inquest concluded that the disaster – in which all 118 crew drowned in the Barents Sea, 135km off the Russian coast – was caused by an accidental explosion of an onboard torpedo.

But Maurice Stradling, a former torpedo engineer and a key figure in the original investigation, believes a new French documentary, The Kursk: A Submarine in Troubled Waters, should change world opinion on the sinking.

"On the balance of probabilities, the Kursk was sunk by an American MK-48 torpedo," said Mr Stradling, formerly a senior member of the British Defence Ministry.

BBC editor Nick Fraser called the claim a "pack of lies" and has refused to air the documentary, which attracted a record audience of more than 4 million when it screened on French TV.

The BBC used Mr Stradling as its main authority for a documentary it made in 2001 – What Sank the Kursk?, in which Mr Stradling theorised that the sinking was caused by the malfunctioning of an old-fashioned HTP torpedo.


Mr Stradling, who also appears in the new French documentary, said: "At the time (2001), that was a perfectly reasonable film, given the facts as we knew them then, when there seemed to be no third-party involvement,"

The new explanation for the Kursk's downing is based on film footage of a hole in the side of the vessel, and evidence placing US submarines in the area at the time it was sunk.

The French film shows stills of the Kursk raised above the water after being salvaged, with a precise circular hole in its right side. The hole clearly bends inwards, consistent with an attack from outside the submarine.

A US military source in the documentary declares the hole to be the trademark evidence of an American MK-48 torpedo, which is made to melt cleanly through steel sheet due to a mechanism at its tip that combusts copper.

The film suggests the attack happened while two US submarines, the Toledo and Memphis, were shadowing the Kursk in a routine military exercise.

The documentary says the Toledo accidentally collided with the Kursk, at which point the Russian submarine opened its torpedo tubes, leading to an attack from the Memphis, which was protecting the damaged Toledo while it retreated.

The cause of the sinking was covered up at the time in an act of diplomacy between then US presidents Bill Clinton and Russian President Vladimir Putin – a deal that included the cancellation of $US10 billion ($12.5 billion) of Russian debt, the film states.

After the documentary received its only public broadcast in Britain, some claimed the Russian navy had drilled the hole and fed doctored footage to the film-makers to create a false impression.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,15220443%255E2703,00.html

[Moledet]

And the Frenchise at it again.

[Evildave]

I dont believe that artical but it would not surprise me if it was true. And for the record my cat says that is the way it went down.

[Thom]

hahahahahahahaha

[HoboWithAK]

Very possible, but I think rather unlikely. The Kursk was what, a Oscar II? The Mk48 ADCAP has a what, 700lb warhead? I'm pretty sure that a hole bending inwards wouldn't have been the only damage. The shockwave would have snapped it in half. Besides, the normal shoot-shoot-listen/look would have involved two Mk48 ADCAPs, which would have turned the Kursk into a fine dust. However, I wouldn't be suprised, seeing as the situation was tense, that a CO on a boat wouldn't be following a normal form of operations.

[Evildave]

Very possible, but I think rather unlikely. The Kursk was what, a Oscar II? The Mk48 ADCAP has a what, 700lb warhead? I'm pretty sure that a hole bending inwards wouldn't have been the only damage. The shockwave would have snapped it in half. Besides, the normal shoot-shoot-listen/look would have involved two Mk48 ADCAPs, which would have turned the Kursk into a fine dust. However, I wouldn't be suprised, seeing as the situation was tense, that a CO on a boat wouldn't be following a normal form of operations.I believe you are right about the hole. That would be very hard to prove, With the massive damage that was done to the boat.

[CG51]

Very possible, but I think rather unlikely. The Kursk was what, a Oscar II? The Mk48 ADCAP has a what, 700lb warhead? I'm pretty sure that a hole bending inwards wouldn't have been the only damage. The shockwave would have snapped it in half. Besides, the normal shoot-shoot-listen/look would have involved two Mk48 ADCAPs, which would have turned the Kursk into a fine dust. However, I wouldn't be suprised, seeing as the situation was tense, that a CO on a boat wouldn't be following a normal form of operations.

yeah, its a 650lbs warhead...heh, there would be more than an small hole in the sub...torps can be programed to run under a ship, thus the explosion is intensified...

[Baltic]

I heard another story, that it colided with USS submarine Toledo. But that is still a bull**** IMHO.

[bluffcove]

surely the pressure on the Hull means that any fracture in the Exterior will end up having edges curving inwards. regardless of which side of the skin the explosion happened on?

NOT A SUBMARINE ENGINEER, just spent time round boats, any views?

[EvanL]

Thats a lie! russian subs cant be torpedoed, there too great!

[PeterRJG]

It was Darth Vader from the planet Vulcan.

[obd]

Are you kidding me?!?! An entire theory based on grainy murky deep underwater footage............I wonder if he ever stopped to ask "what purpose would the Americans have sinking the Kurk"? This is just another stupid "blame America for everything that ever goes wrong in the world" conspiracy theory.........

What purpose would sinking the Kursk serve the US?

The documentary gives us nothing but a hole in the side of a sub........and from that they somehow determine it must be the Americans and a MK-48 torpedo.......what a load of ****.

[Kilgor]

Its just another example of Tin foil french conpiracy theories at work.

Not cotent with 9/11 being the work of the american government, now its the kursk that was a victim to american aggression.

:roll:

[Oddbod]

BS
Eveyone knows that the Kursk was infested with tinworms & they ate a hole in the hull :cantbeli:

[Drunkensquid]

must've been an export version of the MK-48, thus the small hole.

[gc]

I am sorry, but i have to confess that it was me. I was trying to burglar it to get my hands on the vodkas stored in the subby. Forgot at the moment of excitement that it was submerged. :oops:

[NicNZ]

heh this topic is gonna be locked soon for dangerously high levels of sarcasm

[jmatucd]

yea, I saw a cat fall out of a tree today. US GOVERNMENT WAR CRIMES CONSPIRACY!!!! 'George Bush war criminal' wanted the cat's tree for oil exploitation and the exploitation of minorities.

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

Russians probably fired a Torpedeo during a test. The guidance system on the torpedo probaly failed resulting in the torpedeo locking on to the Russian sub.

Like what happened to the USS Thresher(?) in the late 50's

And when a breach occures like that of a torpedeo, becuase of the pressure of the hull and the pressure of the water the sub pretty much floods instantly. 1-2 secs tops. Well unsealed areas anyway which results in very little damage because the near instantanious flooding prevents it occuring before the steel is weekened due to two different pressures on the hull.

When a submarine or any pressurized vessal sinks below it's crush deapth it's very different. Look at the two halves of the Titanic. 1 half is in suprising good condition despite the force of the impact on the ocean floor due to it already being flooded. The stern was still full of trapped air when it sunk. Resulting in major structeral failure.

Has anyone got the depth of the Kursk when the accident happened?

I've got a good book on maritime archeology and might be able to cross reference same reading.

[Rakki]

.... I thought the Kursk was big enough that one little torpedo wasn't going to sink it. Russians built the things with double hulls to eat torpedoes for dinner...

[stuntman]

.... I thought the Kursk was big enough that one little torpedo wasn't going to sink it. Russians built the things with double hulls to eat torpedoes for dinner...
I was thinking the same thing. Not only that but didn't the few sailors leave written logs about how the ship was tilted in a certain direction, explosion of the front hull and how fires broke out but no mention of US or any other involvement. I mean we (US) might dis the Russians in regards of being a little backwards militarily but one thing for sure is that they are in no way incompetent when it comes to sub warfare. That I know!!!

[CG51]

actually, the official report was:


An official report into the Kursk tragedy concluded that it was caused by hydrogen peroxide seeping out of cracks in a torpedo and exploding when it came into contact with kerosene and metal.

Source (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2247421.stm)

if someone would like to refute the official report, too bad, the russians have already destroyed most of the Kursk...

[Bluezoo]

Are you kidding me?!?! An entire theory based on grainy murky deep underwater footage............I wonder if he ever stopped to ask "what purpose would the Americans have sinking the Kurk"? This is just another stupid "blame America for everything that ever goes wrong in the world" conspiracy theory.........

What purpose would sinking the Kursk serve the US?

The documentary gives us nothing but a hole in the side of a sub........and from that they somehow determine it must be the Americans and a MK-48 torpedo.......what a load of ****.

I agree with you on this, dude. Good insight!

[OldRecon]

Have any of you seen that documentary yet?
I have, and it's freaking scary :|.
The documentary is French, yes, but the questions asked and conclusions drawn still appear to be well funded.
The documentary isn't particularly kind to president Putin either, though if this documentary portray the truth of what actually happened, I'm actually quite glad he acted the way he did in the afthermath of the Kursk incident.
Otherwise I guess we would have an atomic winter by now, rather than spring :|.
Easiest way to pic this documentary apart would be to document that USS Toledo did not enter a covered dock immediately after the Kursk incident for an unscheduled refit.
Don't remember if the Frenchies behind the documentary showed of a photo of USS Toledo in dock with damaged bow (a somewhat similar pic to that of the US sub who collided with a rock of Hawai.) though :|.

[He219]

Are you saying a 'Head-on' collision, OldRecon?

[OldRecon]

Russians probably fired a Torpedeo during a test. The guidance system on the torpedo probaly failed resulting in the torpedeo locking on to the Russian sub.

Like what happened to the USS Thresher(?) in the late 50's

And when a breach occures like that of a torpedeo, becuase of the pressure of the hull and the pressure of the water the sub pretty much floods instantly. 1-2 secs tops. Well unsealed areas anyway which results in very little damage because the near instantanious flooding prevents it occuring before the steel is weekened due to two different pressures on the hull.

When a submarine or any pressurized vessal sinks below it's crush deapth it's very different. Look at the two halves of the Titanic. 1 half is in suprising good condition despite the force of the impact on the ocean floor due to it already being flooded. The stern was still full of trapped air when it sunk. Resulting in major structeral failure.

Has anyone got the depth of the Kursk when the accident happened?

I've got a good book on maritime archeology and might be able to cross reference same reading.

The barents sea is pretty shallow. Think the depth at scene of incident, was less than 100 m.
Think there were shown some pics in the documentary of the bow section of the Kursk. It wasn't just a neat round houle. More like a trace of a hole with more or less one side of the forward section completely smashed in.
Soviet/russian submarines are of double hull construction, vs. the circular single hull of US subs.
As hulls of modern subs are more or less circular, without keels in the normal sense of the word, I guess the effect of torpedoes with proximity fuzes designed to go off "under the keel" of the target is different with a sub hull than with a surface ship.
I.e. because of the higher density of water than air a torpedo designed to go off underneath the keel of a surface ship, will tend to lift that ship "out of the water in a way that "breaks the back" of that ship upwards.
On an underwater target I guess the effect will be more like a ww-1/ww-2 depth charge, give or take som kg's of explosives and/or explosives force.
Nowdays I guess a shaped charge would be even more effective against a fully submerged target. Though I'm no submariner :|.

[joe mama]

I'd like to see this documentary, I bet it'd be fun. Sounds like science on the same caliber as that used in the "proof" that it wasn't a plane that hit the Pentagon on 9/11 because you didn't see a plane resting in the wreckage. After all, anyone who thinks that a bunch of aluminum and steel built to be as light as possible (so it can fly) moving at hundreds of miles an hour would be unrecognizably torn to bits upon hitting a structure made of steel, concrete, granite, and steel reinforced concrete clearly is a Bush brainwashed fool! lol...

[BlackRain]

new French documentary, The Kursk: A Submarine in Troubled Waters, should change world opinion on the sinking.

Just like the French books about the United States bombing it's own Pentagon and destroying the World Trade Center.

Here is the real (non-French) story directly from the Russian's.


"Massive Blast" In Kursk Torpedo Room


New details about the massive detonation that ripped apart Kursk's torpedo compartment in the vessel's bow have been revealed by Russian Navy commander-in-chief Admiral Vladimir Kuroyedov. He told Interfax news agency: The power of the explosion in the first compartment was so great that mechanisms and equipment that were in it or in the second compartment were found by divers in the fourth compartment. Those who know the design of a submarine, where all compartments are separated by partitions, understand how great the blast really was."

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/produit/6958_us.html

[OldRecon]

Are you saying a 'Head-on' collision, OldRecon?
If I remember correcty the animation sequence in the documentary showed the US submarine to miscalculate distance to Russian sub and hitting the forward part of the Russian sub with its own bow and conning tower at a somewhat glancing angle to the Russian sub.
Don't remember if the hit angle was "head on" or "aft quarter" though.
The plot of the documentary is something like this:

1) The Russians attempt to sell Shkval "torpedoes" (the Shkval looks more like an underwater gun shell able to overcome water-resistance to me though) to the Chinese navy.

2) US administration/political/military leadership are not too happy about that.

3) On the day Kursk sank it apparently had a Chinese military delegation onboard, to whom the Russians were to demonstrate the weapon.

4) US intelligence had information about this, and mission of USS Toledo was to demonstrate US displeasure with Russian attempts to sell Shkval to China, by circling closely around Kursk during weapons demonstration.

5) Then USS Toledo inadverently came too close and collided wiht Kursk.

6) And the rest is history...

[BlackRain]

Torpedo, not mystery vessel, sank Kursk says Russia
June 19, 2002


MOSCOW (*******) - A senior minister cleared NATO and other foreign vessels Wednesday of sinking Russia's Kursk nuclear submarine two years ago, saying a faulty torpedo was to blame.

The softer line came as senior Russian navy officers and a top NATO admiral discussed joint work on submarine rescue, the first tangible fruits of Russia's closer relationship with the Atlantic alliance after the Sept. 11 terror attacks on the United States.

"There remains only one version -- a torpedo blast," Ilya Klebanov, who chairs an official investigation into the disaster in which all 118 crew died, said in comments on Russian television.

"The commission has discounted a collision and a mine," said the trade, science and technology minister, drawing a line under a disaster that traumatized Russia and shook the nascent presidency of Vladimir Putin.

Klebanov's commission is expected to report later this year into Russia's worst peacetime naval catastrophe. The nuclear submarine sank in the Barents Sea in August 2000 after an explosion triggered a raging inferno aboard the vessel.

In the wake of the calamity, many senior navy officers suggested that one of Russia's most modern vessels could have sunk after a collision with a NATO submarine -- always denied by the Western alliance -- or a World War II-era mine.

But navy chief Admiral Vladimir Kuroyedov pointed the finger at a torpedo fault in February, saying the model used by the Kursk was being withdrawn. Suspicions have focused on the weapon's unstable propeller.

Klebanov said the commission had told navy chiefs to stop trying to raise more of the Kursk's front section, which was left on the seabed last year when the bulk of the shattered vessel was raised.

He said there was no need to raise anything else from the seabed for the investigation. Most of the 500-foot, 18,000 ton nuclear-powered boat was raised in an unprecedented recovery operation last year.

MASSIVE BILL

Dismantling the vessel, which was armed with nuclear-capable cruise missiles, will take the final bill of the operation to some $130 million, a significant sum for Russia's tiny budget.

The loss of the Kursk stunned Russia, leading to national soul-searching and an outpouring of grief.

Stung by accusations he had failed to grasp the seriousness of the tragedy, Putin made it a point of honor to raise the Kursk and give the ill-fated crew a decent burial.

In total, 115 bodies have been identified and buried in two recovery operations. The remaining three are believed to be mutilated beyond recognition.

The Russian navy was heavily criticized for failing to promptly take up foreign offers of help during efforts to rescue sailors who survived the initial blast aboard the Kursk.

But after a two-day seminar in St Petersburg, Russian and NATO admirals Wednesday signed a protocol to set up an international sea-rescue service. Experts will work out a program of cooperation on submarine rescue by the year's end.

"The tragedy of the Kursk nuclear submarine was at the center of our discussions," said Russian Admiral Anatoly Komaritsyn, head of the ministry of defense department for navigation and oceanography.

"We have to make sure this never happens again," he told a press conference.

U.S. Vice-Admiral Malcolm Fages, deputy chairman of NATO's military committee, said the accord followed the May summit at which a new NATO-Russia Council was formed to advance military cooperation between the former Cold War foes.

"At the Rome summit last month, the heads of state and government from NATO and from Russia mentioned specifically a desire to see closer cooperation in the field of...search and rescue, and the seminar today is a manifestation of that."

(Additional reporting by Kostya Trifonov in St Petersburg)


http://www.cdi.org/russia/johnson/6317-2.cfm

[panzerjager]

Are you kidding me?!?! An entire theory based on grainy murky deep underwater footage............I wonder if he ever stopped to ask "what purpose would the Americans have sinking the Kurk"? This is just another stupid "blame America for everything that ever goes wrong in the world" conspiracy theory.........

What purpose would sinking the Kursk serve the US?

The documentary gives us nothing but a hole in the side of a sub........and from that they somehow determine it must be the Americans and a MK-48 torpedo.......what a load of ****.

Wow, I never thought I would ever agree with you. Well, the day has arrived.

[Para]

Trust the French to stir the pot, Britain had a similar type of torpedo as the Russians had on board, the dam fuel was not only corrosives but highly volatile and a British Submarine almost sank when they had trouble with one while the Submarine in tied along side a Naval Dock at it's home port. Had the British Submarine been at sea it would have probably have sunk, what is it with every and conspiracy theories

[joe mama]

4) US intelligence had information about this, and mission of USS Toledo was to demonstrate US displeasure with Russian attempts to sell Shkval to China, by circling closely around Kursk during weapons demonstration.

And the Chinese on board will be able to see the Toledo circling closely by looking out the windows. When the Chinamen are watching, the crew of the Toledo will moon them, thus showing the US's anger over the potential arms deal.

[DPGLAW]

Figures that it would be the moronic, waste of human life french that would come up with a retarded claim like that....Anything to damage world opinion of the US and help their terrorist allies they are willing to do....It is impossible to believe this claim, firstly, if this did happen I am sure as **** that the "payoff" would be a hell of alot more than 10 billion.....This is just illogical

[bloddyaxe]

The official explaination is fairly good and believeable.
This conspiracy theory is however strange.
If an american submarine had fired a torpedo against a russian sub without provocation, we'd have a single executed american sub commander to wonder about, not to mention the rest of the Russian navy in the area would have detected the sound of the torpedo, which is different from their own and have sent their weapons in the general direction of the launch area...

On the other hand a collision setting off the weaponry in Kursk sounds plausible...

[OldRecon]

I just say: "Watch the documentary first".
If you think the US are in for a blaming in this documentary, so indeed is the Russian president. The documentary in a sense is allmost more damaging to Putin.
But though my regards are with the crew of the Kursk and their families left behind, in a sense I'm most relieved that the Russian president kept a lid on things (when you realize what the stakes could have been) :|.
If the history, as depicted in this documentary, in any way is close to the true one :|.
This Kursk-documentary I guess is made by the same French guys that have also made a several parts documentary seires about the CIA (which though critical in its approach, don't blame the CIA for everything evil, far from it), and a documentary comedy / conspiracist joke about the role of Stanley Kubrick in making a fake moonlanding video/movie for NASA (in case the moon progamme should go awry) :lol:.

[RomanS]

I love how members of countries that DON'T HAVE NUCLEAR SUBMARINES have to pitch in their 02 cents.

Get a navy first...

[(_SPETSNAZ_)]

lmfao nice one roman umm yeah its sad that what had happened to those crew members but theres proof that us did launch a torpedo and theres proof defending them but then again the USA is good at hiding many of things :) lol

[wholagun]

I don't know alot about naval tactics or equipment but permit me to add my 2 cents. I thought that US torpedeos detnated below ships and near subs, in other words they detnote next to the ship/sub and don't actually physically touch skin of the enemy ship(s).

From pics I've seen of the destroyed kurst the metal is blow outwards, the only way this could happen is if there was an explosion on board. Had the explostion come from another sub the metal would be bent inwards and that is not the case.

[(_SPETSNAZ_)]

no they have many torpedos and the blowing outward thing they have missles that go in then blow out.Basically small hole going in it explodes and make the "Explosion hole" and goes outward i seen it on the net a while back on us missles.

[ronin2172]

lmfao nice one roman umm yeah its sad that what had happened to those crew members but theres proof that us did launch a torpedo and theres proof defending them but then again the USA is good at hiding many of things :) lol
where is the proof all i see is speculation...and crappy speculation at that.

The liklehood of a single US sub getting into a position to launch a torpedo and get away without a scratch with a good sized chunk of the russian fleet about is HIGHLY improbable.

I also dont think the Kursk would have just sat there and let themselves get smoked.

Unless you have a chunk of a Mk 48 that is embedded somewhere in the Kursk wreckage that says property of the US Navy you have no proof of anything.


Yes there was a US sub in the area monitoring the excersise...but there is nothing strange about that. The previous mention of the Toledo circling around the Kursk is bull too. Oh yea lets pull an insane stunt with two nuclear powerd vessels weighing thousands of tons and putting who knows how many lives at risk....

[Shiftyfive]

I love how members of countries that DON'T HAVE NUCLEAR SUBMARINES have to pitch in their 02 cents.

Get a navy first...


foot your navys own bills first :roll: http://www.bellona.no/en/international/russia/navy



maybe they just forgot to secure the screen door?

[Violet Fashion by Mindy]

I love how members of countries that DON'T HAVE NUCLEAR SUBMARINES have to pitch in their 02 cents.

Get a navy first...

Well Australia does have a pretty big navy for our size and has perhaps the the most lethal conventianal submarines in the world that in some cases are more lethal then same spec nuke subs. ;)

Just ask the yanks. Their buying one.

[rhino]

^ :P that is the funniest comment yet (not that one, the one above),

now with all due respect to the dedicated submariners that died in the Kursk, as someone mentioned some of them survived long enough to write good bye letters to the loved ones, if there was something fishy going on I m pretty sure they would mention it so the "higherups" knew who was responsible, beside that it was a northern fleet ex, no????? so there was more then enough ships in the area to ( again someone mentioned it) to respond rapidly to any sign of hostility from whaterver US ship was unfortunate to be in the area.
geesh, some people love dreaming up the ways the "big brother" is trying to f**** us over.

this $0.02 was brought to you by someone with small navy p-)

[(_SPETSNAZ_)]

Why would they sink it also they had a very strong hull to hold blasts from torpedos and held on for coupple hours then filled totally up with water...

[RomanS]

I love how members of countries that DON'T HAVE NUCLEAR SUBMARINES have to pitch in their 02 cents.

Get a navy first...


foot your navys own bills first :roll: http://www.bellona.no/en/international/russia/navy



maybe they just forgot to secure the screen door?

Too bad we don't think its a good idea to sell our newest weapons to "innocent terrorists in Iraq" We could get lots of money, and send democracy back to USA, and in lots of body bags. I mean US tried it in Afganistan, so the game should go on? /SARCASM OFF

No but really, why is it your concern about Russian navy? How is it affecting your life today?

[rhino]

roman I think the sarcasm was directed at the french,
as to selling weapons to Iraqi insurgents, what are the chances of them ending up in your own back yard??? think about it, bouth US and Russia are fighting the same people, dont think so?????

[(_SPETSNAZ_)]

Rhino people like you think they know everything by trying to prove something to some one wrong or what ever like roman talk some more **** and **** will be flying back in your face fagott....

[rhino]

oh jeebas, I better put on the kevlar, BOHICA

[Shiftyfive]

I love how members of countries that DON'T HAVE NUCLEAR SUBMARINES have to pitch in their 02 cents.

Get a navy first...


foot your navys own bills first :roll: http://www.bellona.no/en/international/russia/navy



maybe they just forgot to secure the screen door?

Too bad we don't think its a good idea to sell our newest weapons to "innocent terrorists in Iraq" We could get lots of money, and send democracy back to USA, and in lots of body bags. I mean US tried it in Afganistan, so the game should go on? /SARCASM OFF

No but really, why is it your concern about Russian navy? How is it affecting your life today?

funny how the russian forget their weapon deals to vietnam and korea every time afganistan come up rofl

my concern is - the US tax payer (remember since you live here that means you too) and other tax payers in the west has to foot the bill for taking care of the rusting pieces of **** russia calls a navy because their too incompetent to take care of it with out the wests help. And then the wannabes come on here and talk about all the new uber super weapons the russians develop when they cant even manage the responsibility to take care of the old crap. and hopefully thanks to western tax dollars the russians wont suffer a naval chernobyl :roll:

[(_SPETSNAZ_)]

and your strap on...

[Brozozo]

I love how members of countries that DON'T HAVE NUCLEAR SUBMARINES have to pitch in their 02 cents.

Get a navy first...


foot your navys own bills first :roll: http://www.bellona.no/en/international/russia/navy



maybe they just forgot to secure the screen door?

Too bad we don't think its a good idea to sell our newest weapons to "innocent terrorists in Iraq" We could get lots of money, and send democracy back to USA, and in lots of body bags. I mean US tried it in Afganistan, so the game should go on? /SARCASM OFF

No but really, why is it your concern about Russian navy? How is it affecting your life today?

funny how the russian forget their weapon deals to vietnam and korea every time afganistan come up rofl

my concern is - the US tax payer (remember since you live here that means you too) and other tax payers in the west has to foot the bill for taking care of the rusting pieces of **** russia calls a navy because their too incompetent to take care of it with out the wests help. And then the wannabes come on here and talk about all the new uber super weapons the russians develop when they cant even manage the responsibility to take care of the old crap. and hopefully thanks to western tax dollars the russians wont suffer a naval chernobyl :roll:Good points.

[RomanS]

roman I think the sarcasm was directed at the french,
as to selling weapons to Iraqi insurgents, what are the chances of them ending up in your own back yard??? think about it, bouth US and Russia are fighting the same people, dont think so?????

My friend, you can't be anymore right. I keep telling everyone that US and Russia has the same enemy. If Russia and US would of solved their problems before the war in Afganistan, we would probably live in a lot better place now. 9/11 would probably never happen, the war in Chechnya and todays Iraq.

Both coutnries wasted a **** load of money on what? To see who's **** would have more bling on it? It was clear that when the Cold War started someone out of the 2 would discover the new type of enemy. This enemy is what we are fighting today. So far its just a tiny infant, and us two are its parents. So what happens when both parents constantly arguying, and fighting eachother. The infant will grow into a disaster, a bigger threat for both.

So the sooner our two countries understand that, the sooner we will take control of the terrorism.

[Shiftyfive]

roman I think the sarcasm was directed at the french,
as to selling weapons to Iraqi insurgents, what are the chances of them ending up in your own back yard??? think about it, bouth US and Russia are fighting the same people, dont think so?????

My friend, you can't be anymore right. I keep telling everyone that US and Russia has the same enemy. If Russia and US would of solved their problems before the war in Afganistan, we would probably live in a lot better place now. 9/11 would probably never happen, the war in Chechnya and todays Iraq.

Both coutnries wasted a **** load of money on what? To see who's **** would have more bling on it? It was clear that when the Cold War started someone out of the 2 would discover the new type of enemy. This enemy is what we are fighting today. So far its just a tiny infant, and us two are its parents. So what happens when both parents constantly arguying, and fighting eachother. The infant will grow into a disaster, a bigger threat for both.

So the sooner our two countries understand that, the sooner we will take control of the terrorism.

The US didnt waste all that money - it helped protect us and others from a people who lived under a system no better than the terrorist we fight today. We fought the germans together even though the russians were no better than the nazis and now we fight the muslims terrorist together.

[rhino]

and your strap on...

:cantbeli: kid, do you even know what you are talking about????

[RomanS]

roman I think the sarcasm was directed at the french,
as to selling weapons to Iraqi insurgents, what are the chances of them ending up in your own back yard??? think about it, bouth US and Russia are fighting the same people, dont think so?????

My friend, you can't be anymore right. I keep telling everyone that US and Russia has the same enemy. If Russia and US would of solved their problems before the war in Afganistan, we would probably live in a lot better place now. 9/11 would probably never happen, the war in Chechnya and todays Iraq.

Both coutnries wasted a **** load of money on what? To see who's **** would have more bling on it? It was clear that when the Cold War started someone out of the 2 would discover the new type of enemy. This enemy is what we are fighting today. So far its just a tiny infant, and us two are its parents. So what happens when both parents constantly arguying, and fighting eachother. The infant will grow into a disaster, a bigger threat for both.

So the sooner our two countries understand that, the sooner we will take control of the terrorism.

The US didnt waste all that money - it helped protect us and others from a people who lived under a system no better than the terrorist we fight today. We fought the germans together even though the russians were no better than the nazis and now we fight the muslims terrorist together.

notice we always fight those who atacked us together

we just need to figure out each others problems and avoid them

[Brozozo]

roman I think the sarcasm was directed at the french,
as to selling weapons to Iraqi insurgents, what are the chances of them ending up in your own back yard??? think about it, bouth US and Russia are fighting the same people, dont think so?????

My friend, you can't be anymore right. I keep telling everyone that US and Russia has the same enemy. If Russia and US would of solved their problems before the war in Afganistan, we would probably live in a lot better place now. 9/11 would probably never happen, the war in Chechnya and todays Iraq.

Both coutnries wasted a **** load of money on what? To see who's **** would have more bling on it? It was clear that when the Cold War started someone out of the 2 would discover the new type of enemy. This enemy is what we are fighting today. So far its just a tiny infant, and us two are its parents. So what happens when both parents constantly arguying, and fighting eachother. The infant will grow into a disaster, a bigger threat for both.

So the sooner our two countries understand that, the sooner we will take control of the terrorism.

The US didnt waste all that money - it helped protect us and others from a people who lived under a system no better than the terrorist we fight today. We fought the germans together even though the russians were no better than the nazis and now we fight the muslims terrorist together.

notice we always fight those who atacked us together

we just need to figure out each others problems and avoid them woot Yes, a breakthrough!

[Shiftyfive]

roman I think the sarcasm was directed at the french,
as to selling weapons to Iraqi insurgents, what are the chances of them ending up in your own back yard??? think about it, bouth US and Russia are fighting the same people, dont think so?????

My friend, you can't be anymore right. I keep telling everyone that US and Russia has the same enemy. If Russia and US would of solved their problems before the war in Afganistan, we would probably live in a lot better place now. 9/11 would probably never happen, the war in Chechnya and todays Iraq.

Both coutnries wasted a **** load of money on what? To see who's **** would have more bling on it? It was clear that when the Cold War started someone out of the 2 would discover the new type of enemy. This enemy is what we are fighting today. So far its just a tiny infant, and us two are its parents. So what happens when both parents constantly arguying, and fighting eachother. The infant will grow into a disaster, a bigger threat for both.

So the sooner our two countries understand that, the sooner we will take control of the terrorism.

The US didnt waste all that money - it helped protect us and others from a people who lived under a system no better than the terrorist we fight today. We fought the germans together even though the russians were no better than the nazis and now we fight the muslims terrorist together.

notice we always fight those who atacked us together

we just need to figure out each others problems and avoid them

no we fight them together cause it is convient. today russia is our ally against terrorist cause we share the same enemy - which means for russia- it has the worlds only super power on its side not to mention its helps keep the flow of western aid going. were as for us it helps stem the flow of russian arms to the terrorist - but with the russian mafia its hard to put a total cork in it and its one more threat the terrorist have to worry about. plus we help avoid the total collapse of russia while we hopefully keep helping to keep them pointed in the direction of democracy.

[NicNZ]

I am suddenly reminded of a book that I saw, picked up, and leafed through in a shop a few months ago. I dont remember what the book was called but it was about the Kursk incident. According to that book, the Russian navy was (unsurprisingly and perhaps sensibly) trying to "use up" old and otherwise redundant ammunition and missiles in tests, rather than using new ammunition and missiles. The book reports that an initial missile launch from one of the surface vessels had failed on the morning that the Kursk went down because the missile was old. As such, we shouldnt be entirely surprised if the Kursk was using older, less reliable torpedos to conduct tests and it may well be that the use of such equipment led to the catastrophic tragedy that we know occurred.

[ronin2172]

was it called Kursk Down?

I think that is the name of the book I read. It said a similar thing. (I dont recall if it said the weapons were old though). But it did say that the Peter the Great launched an ASW missle not long before the explosion (which was of such magnitude that if it had collided with a 688, that sub would not have made it too far).

Anyway it had a lot of detail, concerning the exercise, the explosion, the participants and the response.

It also portayed in grim detail what it might have been like for the men trapped in the sub. Very sobering, I wouldn't wish that on anybody

[NicNZ]

Could well be it but I can neither confirm nor deny ;)

[Sloppy Joe2]

roman I think the sarcasm was directed at the french,
as to selling weapons to Iraqi insurgents, what are the chances of them ending up in your own back yard??? think about it, bouth US and Russia are fighting the same people, dont think so?????

My friend, you can't be anymore right. I keep telling everyone that US and Russia has the same enemy. If Russia and US would of solved their problems before the war in Afganistan, we would probably live in a lot better place now. 9/11 would probably never happen, the war in Chechnya and todays Iraq.

Both coutnries wasted a **** load of money on what? To see who's **** would have more bling on it? It was clear that when the Cold War started someone out of the 2 would discover the new type of enemy. This enemy is what we are fighting today. So far its just a tiny infant, and us two are its parents. So what happens when both parents constantly arguying, and fighting eachother. The infant will grow into a disaster, a bigger threat for both.

So the sooner our two countries understand that, the sooner we will take control of the terrorism.

The US didnt waste all that money - it helped protect us and others from a people who lived under a system no better than the terrorist we fight today. We fought the germans together even though the russians were no better than the nazis and now we fight the muslims terrorist together.

notice we always fight those who atacked us together

we just need to figure out each others problems and avoid themi like your thinking roman :D :hug: woot
shifty the time at which russia and the us are enemies is over, and now we are fighting a common enemy together not only becuase its convient but because its the right thing to do. thank god our two nations brought our feud to an end, i seriously cant see how some people still want russia and the us to go to war :roll:

[saigonsmuggler]

My friend, you can't be anymore right. I keep telling everyone that US and Russia has the same enemy. If Russia and US would of solved their problems before the war in Afganistan, we would probably live in a lot better place now. 9/11 would probably never happen, the war in Chechnya and todays Iraq.

Both coutnries wasted a **** load of money on what? To see who's **** would have more bling on it? It was clear that when the Cold War started someone out of the 2 would discover the new type of enemy. This enemy is what we are fighting today. So far its just a tiny infant, and us two are its parents. So what happens when both parents constantly arguying, and fighting eachother. The infant will grow into a disaster, a bigger threat for both.

So the sooner our two countries understand that, the sooner we will take control of the terrorism.
woot woot and we have a winner!!!

Roman hit the nail right on the head!

[Shiftyfive]

roman I think the sarcasm was directed at the french,
as to selling weapons to Iraqi insurgents, what are the chances of them ending up in your own back yard??? think about it, bouth US and Russia are fighting the same people, dont think so?????

My friend, you can't be anymore right. I keep telling everyone that US and Russia has the same enemy. If Russia and US would of solved their problems before the war in Afganistan, we would probably live in a lot better place now. 9/11 would probably never happen, the war in Chechnya and todays Iraq.

Both coutnries wasted a **** load of money on what? To see who's **** would have more bling on it? It was clear that when the Cold War started someone out of the 2 would discover the new type of enemy. This enemy is what we are fighting today. So far its just a tiny infant, and us two are its parents. So what happens when both parents constantly arguying, and fighting eachother. The infant will grow into a disaster, a bigger threat for both.

So the sooner our two countries understand that, the sooner we will take control of the terrorism.

The US didnt waste all that money - it helped protect us and others from a people who lived under a system no better than the terrorist we fight today. We fought the germans together even though the russians were no better than the nazis and now we fight the muslims terrorist together.

notice we always fight those who atacked us together

we just need to figure out each others problems and avoid themi like your thinking roman :D :hug: woot
shifty the time at which russia and the us are enemies is over, and now we are fighting a common enemy together not only becuase its convient but because its the right thing to do. thank god our two nations brought our feud to an end, i seriously cant see how some people still want russia and the us to go to war :roll:

it was no simple feud - and it was broght to the end by the victors - the west. When russia starts doing things because its the right thing to do I will be shocked out of my skin. Who wants to see us go to war? However that does not remove the threat russia still poses with its crumbling grip on its NBC forces or its conventional arms or the internal rot that has set in. Russia now does not pose so much a direct threat i.e invasion of germany and exportation of the garbage they call communism, but more a indirect threat. Their dealing with Iran and Syria ring any bells or their involvement in the Food for Oil scandle?

[RGRBOX]

Are you kidding me?!?! An entire theory based on grainy murky deep underwater footage............I wonder if he ever stopped to ask "what purpose would the Americans have sinking the Kurk"? This is just another stupid "blame America for everything that ever goes wrong in the world" conspiracy theory.........

What purpose would sinking the Kursk serve the US?

The documentary gives us nothing but a hole in the side of a sub........and from that they somehow determine it must be the Americans and a MK-48 torpedo.......what a load of ****.

Although I've yet to see this doc.. I was told that it talks about the two US Subs were following, and watching the Rus prepare to test a new torpedo system, that they were going to start selling on the market.. If this would have happened then this would have ment some serious problems for the the US, because this new Torpedo was suspose to be (Very Powerful) at what it did. And the possible buyers weren't the people the US wanted to have it. Anyway, so they in the end killed the Rus sub... I don't know any facts about this.. but just trying to pass on what I was told by someone else who has looked into this...

[RGRBOX]

I love how members of countries that DON'T HAVE NUCLEAR SUBMARINES have to pitch in their 02 cents.

Get a navy first...

rofl rofl rofl

[Sloppy Joe2]

roman I think the sarcasm was directed at the french,
as to selling weapons to Iraqi insurgents, what are the chances of them ending up in your own back yard??? think about it, bouth US and Russia are fighting the same people, dont think so?????

My friend, you can't be anymore right. I keep telling everyone that US and Russia has the same enemy. If Russia and US would of solved their problems before the war in Afganistan, we would probably live in a lot better place now. 9/11 would probably never happen, the war in Chechnya and todays Iraq.

Both coutnries wasted a **** load of money on what? To see who's **** would have more bling on it? It was clear that when the Cold War started someone out of the 2 would discover the new type of enemy. This enemy is what we are fighting today. So far its just a tiny infant, and us two are its parents. So what happens when both parents constantly arguying, and fighting eachother. The infant will grow into a disaster, a bigger threat for both.

So the sooner our two countries understand that, the sooner we will take control of the terrorism.

The US didnt waste all that money - it helped protect us and others from a people who lived under a system no better than the terrorist we fight today. We fought the germans together even though the russians were no better than the nazis and now we fight the muslims terrorist together.

notice we always fight those who atacked us together

we just need to figure out each others problems and avoid themi like your thinking roman :D :hug: woot
shifty the time at which russia and the us are enemies is over, and now we are fighting a common enemy together not only becuase its convient but because its the right thing to do. thank god our two nations brought our feud to an end, i seriously cant see how some people still want russia and the us to go to war :roll:

it was no simple feud - and it was broght to the end by the victors - the west. When russia starts doing things because its the right thing to do I will be shocked out of my skin. Who wants to see us go to war? However that does not remove the threat russia still poses with its crumbling grip on its NBC forces or its conventional arms or the internal rot that has set in. Russia now does not pose so much a direct threat i.e invasion of germany and exportation of the garbage they call communism, but more a indirect threat. Their dealing with Iran and Syria ring any bells or their involvement in the Food for Oil scandle? from the way i see it was a feud, we both scared each other into a hate relationship. it is not for you to judge what is the intentions of russia for you are not a member in the russian government. the dealings with iran will be dealt with carefully by the russians because if dealt without care they will face consequences as well, as mentioned we face the same enemies and our common enemy would strike a common foe.
shifty from your past posts i know you are a very passionate american which i highly respect, but i think this is a case where you need to let go of the past and embrace our new alliance :D

[ronin2172]

Are you kidding me?!?! An entire theory based on grainy murky deep underwater footage............I wonder if he ever stopped to ask "what purpose would the Americans have sinking the Kurk"? This is just another stupid "blame America for everything that ever goes wrong in the world" conspiracy theory.........

What purpose would sinking the Kursk serve the US?

The documentary gives us nothing but a hole in the side of a sub........and from that they somehow determine it must be the Americans and a MK-48 torpedo.......what a load of ****.

Although I've yet to see this doc.. I was told that it talks about the two US Subs were following, and watching the Rus prepare to test a new torpedo system, that they were going to start selling on the market.. If this would have happened then this would have ment some serious problems for the the US, because this new Torpedo was suspose to be (Very Powerful) at what it did. And the possible buyers weren't the people the US wanted to have it. Anyway, so they in the end killed the Rus sub... I don't know any facts about this.. but just trying to pass on what I was told by someone else who has looked into this...
yea it was supposed to be testing the Shikval (sp) ..even if this were true the US still wolud gain nothing and lose everything if they did sink her. Plus how did the whole russian fleet just miss them. i guess the fimakers never bothered with that fact.

Again from what I have read it was accidental and possiably a result of fratricide. There was a single US sub in the area doing a routine eavesdropping on the exercise. But she was far removed from the area (which would be prudent as they were conducting live fire exercises) and I believe the russians knew she was there.

[RomanS]

Shifty,

I agree with AUDIEM,

He has the same thinking as me.

We tried very hard to destroy ourselves without actually going at it full scale. Both countries did good, and did bad things during the Cold War. Both donated its share of mistakes to the problems we have today. But we hate to admit it out loud, because both nations are proud of themselves way too much. However both were doing all of the above to protect themselves from loosing. Towards the end of it, Soviet Union was the one that droped the race. Some say lost, some say saved the world from pressing the button as a last resort. But to this day neither nation wants to back out from the cockswinging contest.

While we still barking at eachother, terrorist fanatics (no religion mentioned) are having their best time. They are using everyone and everything they can, to atract us to their ambushes and at the same time hurtnign us both. How do you defeat 2 strong nations? You make them fight eachother, and than you take both from inside.

Yeah, so what happens if we fight? We both will fuk eachother up pretty hard. The conditions will be bad in both countries after a huge fight. Guess who will take over? Someone hiding behind a religion that gets picked on the most at the moment. Yeah they will show both sides that their way, is the only way to live.

So lets continue smacking eachother on who was wrong in the game of Risk. While the real threat kicks us between our balls, because we are too busy blaming eachother.

From what I heard, American Subs usually follow Russian, Chinese Subs, or Fleets because they want to know what they are usually test firing or doing. Maybe the americans had been detected in the area, see it's not very hard to get detected specially when you need 70-80 feet for a periscope depth.

MK 48, I love it when they control it with wires attached from the Sub that launch it, it becomes a controlled Torpedo.

[RGRBOX]

Are you kidding me?!?! An entire theory based on grainy murky deep underwater footage............I wonder if he ever stopped to ask "what purpose would the Americans have sinking the Kurk"? This is just another stupid "blame America for everything that ever goes wrong in the world" conspiracy theory.........

What purpose would sinking the Kursk serve the US?

The documentary gives us nothing but a hole in the side of a sub........and from that they somehow determine it must be the Americans and a MK-48 torpedo.......what a load of ****.

Although I've yet to see this doc.. I was told that it talks about the two US Subs were following, and watching the Rus prepare to test a new torpedo system, that they were going to start selling on the market.. If this would have happened then this would have ment some serious problems for the the US, because this new Torpedo was suspose to be (Very Powerful) at what it did. And the possible buyers weren't the people the US wanted to have it. Anyway, so they in the end killed the Rus sub... I don't know any facts about this.. but just trying to pass on what I was told by someone else who has looked into this...
yea it was supposed to be testing the Shikval (sp) ..even if this were true the US still wolud gain nothing and lose everything if they did sink her. Plus how did the whole russian fleet just miss them. i guess the fimakers never bothered with that fact.

Again from what I have read it was accidental and possiably a result of fratricide. There was a single US sub in the area doing a routine eavesdropping on the exercise. But she was far removed from the area (which would be prudent as they were conducting live fire exercises) and I believe the russians knew she was there.

Yea.. It doesn't make any since that the entire Russian Navy would allow two US Attack Subs to sneek up and ram one of theirs plus shoot a torpedo and then get away... sounds a little strange... somethings missing in the story.. and it's not just the truth..

[ronin2172]

^^Exactly...it seems this 'documentary' (or should I say mockumentary) is so enthralled with unearthing some fantasticaly contorversial theory that it seems to have left logic behind.

[Werewolf01]

Shifty,

I agree with AUDIEM,

He has the same thinking as me.

We tried very hard to destroy ourselves without actually going at it full scale. Both countries did good, and did bad things during the Cold War. Both donated its share of mistakes to the problems we have today. But we hate to admit it out loud, because both nations are proud of themselves way too much. However both were doing all of the above to protect themselves from loosing. Towards the end of it, Soviet Union was the one that droped the race. Some say lost, some say saved the world from pressing the button as a last resort. But to this day neither nation wants to back out from the cockswinging contest.

While we still barking at eachother, terrorist fanatics (no religion mentioned) are having their best time. They are using everyone and everything they can, to atract us to their ambushes and at the same time hurtnign us both. How do you defeat 2 strong nations? You make them fight eachother, and than you take both from inside.

Yeah, so what happens if we fight? We both will fuk eachother up pretty hard. The conditions will be bad in both countries after a huge fight. Guess who will take over? Someone hiding behind a religion that gets picked on the most at the moment. Yeah they will show both sides that their way, is the only way to live.

So lets continue smacking eachother on who was wrong in the game of Risk. While the real threat kicks us between our balls, because we are too busy blaming eachother.


One of the few bits of prose on this board of late that I find myself in agreement with. woot I think working against each other on any level is foolish. An alliance between the US and Russia would not only help bring terroism to its knees so much the faster, it would seriously discourge anybody from getting too uppity with the US or Russia. Let's face it, nobody on the planet could face either fleet or army in a conventional fight and come out on the winning end, much less nuclear. Talk about security. Now if we could only get the leadership to agree.. ;) (BTW it would be potentially wonderful for both economies as well)

[Laworkerbee]

Russia and America have too much in common to be enemies, we are much better off as comrades :hug:

[Belrick]

Correct me if im wrong in regarding that neat circular hole filmed in the side of the kursk...

But no torpedo uses a jet a plasma to drill a hole in the side of a sub do they?

A torpedo that hit a sub and failed to detonate would just bounce off? It wouldnt penetrate would it?

Is it possible that the sinking was caused by an act of terrorism? Plastic explosive with a time delay strapped to the side while the kursk was still in port would of made such a hole would it not?

[Sloppy Joe2]

Russia and America have too much in common to be enemies, we are much better off as comrades :hug: x2 glad we are all on the same track, may it now take our two great nations to a better place :D p-)

[Belrick]

Whats that? A military alliance versus China in the near future?

[PeterRJG]

Whats that? A military alliance versus China in the near future?

Mightn't be a bad idea.

[Pooga]

Since we're already pointing fingers, is it too much more to ask if a small hole was created in the sub's skin for whatever reason and was indented and made larger by the intense pressure of the ocean?

[Kilgor]

Whats that? A military alliance versus China in the near future?

I think russia has as much to fear from china as the US does.

[Belrick]

Tell you one thing i'd rather be in washington than Vladivostok if war broke about between those three nations!
(could taiwan pick a better time to annouce independance? I think not!)

[NicNZ]

I think russia has as much to fear from china as the US does.

In terms of real threats, Russia has much more to fear; China can much more readily expand its borders into the Russian borders than it can the borders of the United States.

[Shiftyfive]

I think russia has as much to fear from china as the US does.

In terms of real threats, Russia has much more to fear; China can much more readily expand its borders into the Russian borders than it can the borders of the United States.

yet russia keeps selling all those arms to the red chinese? I think both our dealings with china are going to come back and bite us both right in the ass.

[soma]

My egoisel cockmarine rammed it.

It will be quite fearful to see the Chinese being the new America, why? It just is, I'm in Hong Kong, the Hong Kong people are very different from people from the Mainland, people from the MAINLAND CHINA, Like Beijing, Shanghai are more Nationalistic and very conservative, Imagine INTERNATIONAL BANKS like Lloyds TSB, JP Morgan etc... are actually having a hard time in China because Chinese banking customers would prefer talking to a TELLER in the bank rather than using a UPDATE MACHINE in their passbooks!

now that's interesting.