Russian admirals paranoid: “Kursk” sunk by NATO

The RIA Nowosti agency published a material in which the narrative was completely changed as to the causes of the sinking of the nuclear submarine “Kursk” on August 12, 2000. The interview published on November 22, 2021 shows that the Russian ship was to sink as a result of a collision with an identified NATO submarine. This theory was taken seriously enough that it was announced by the then commander of the Russian Northern Fleet, Admiral Vyacheslav Popov, i.e. the man who theoretically best knew the results of the subsequent investigation.

Popov informed that “athe volume submarine “Kursk” went missing in 2000 as a result of a collision with a NATO submarine, the name of which is known “with a 90% probability”. However, it turned out that he cannot disclose it as there is no evidence of it.

The submarine that collided with Kursk followed Kursk, apparently was not able to ensure safety in these sea conditions and in all other conditions getting too close, or the Kursk maneuver led to a loss of contact … I with a probability of 90% I know its name, but to name it publicly, you need to have evidence and put it out. I cannot lay them out. NATO submarine. And he was there, in the area where he collided with “Kursk”.

According to Popov, the cause of the accident may be proved by the fact that the SOS signal was not sent from Kursk, but from the NATO submarine that was supposed to be damaged. This unit, moreover, was later to be tracked by anti-submarine aircraft of the Russian naval aviation off the coast of Norway.

As you can see, the Russian Navy only acknowledged that its submarine “Kursk” sank on August 12, 2000 in the Barents Sea at a depth of 108 m, 175 km from Severomorsk. However, there is no agreement as to the official version of the cause of the crash, which was the detonation of the torpedo on board and the detonation of the remaining ammunition in the torpedo compartment.

It turns out that some admiralty still adheres to the theory officially announced by Popov in 2000 that the tragedy was caused by a collision with another submarine, which “was to hit the most vulnerable point of the submarine of this project”. The only difference with today’s declarations is that Popov has now admitted knowing which specific individual had hit “Kursk” and sunk it.

The problem of information provided by the agency The RIA Nowosti is that it does not make any reference to what is already known about the 2000 crash. Of course, it was recalled that a total of 118 people died on board the Kursk, but it was forgotten to add that 23 submarines died in the stern compartment because of not providing them with timely help. And it was the incompetence of Admiral Popov who did not want to admit the lack of skills of his rescue services and did not call for help in time for the death of these people. He also personally controlled the rescue operation, landing a helicopter on the cruiser “Piotr Wielikij”, staying near the crash site.

His theory also completely omits what “Kursk” was. The Russians themselves called this ship “submarine cruiser”, and for good reason. It was a unit of the project 949A, type Antiej (according to NATO, type Oscar II), 154 m long, 18.2 m wide and with an underwater displacement of 23,900 tons. On the other hand, actually in the Arctic at that time: two American Los Angeles USS submarines “Memphis “(SSN-691) and USS Toledo (SSN-769) and the British submarine Swifture HMS Splendid (S106) were much smaller (submarine displacement: 6,900 tons and 4,900 tons respectively) and collided with the Russian “Colossus” they would have problems. Meanwhile, all three units later served actively in the line.

Additionally, each submerged submarine in its own water area, after hitting an obstacle, would make an emergency ascent to check the extent of damage. The crew of “Kursk” was ranked among the best and one should not even suppose that anything else had been done.

Therefore, Popov’s attempts to explain himself are only evidence that remorse will sooner or later catch up with everyone.

image
advertisement


About Banner Leon

Videogames entered his life in the late '80s, at the time of the first meeting with Super Mario Bros, and even today they make it a permanent part, after almost 30 years. Pros and defects: he manages to finish Super Mario Bros in less than 5 minutes but he has never finished Final Fight with a credit ... he's still trying.

Check Also

“It’s like charging a huge battery.” It was raining hard on the prehistoric Earth!

In times when the climate on Earth was much warmer than today, with average temperatures …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *