|
16 Aug 00 - 12:31 AM (#278591) Subject: Karsk fiasco From: GUEST, Banjo Johnny I think it's really great, the way the Glorious Russian People's Navy is handling the "rescue effort". They wouldn't tell anyone what happened. They keep changing the story. They are blitheringly incompetent to help the sub, and they won't let anyone help. I think they would rather let the whole crew croak, than admit there might be a problem. So glad to see the Old Guard is still running the Kremlin. Johnny in Oklahoma City Related threads: |
|
16 Aug 00 - 01:32 AM (#278621) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GUEST,Barry Finn There is little more than a couple times in the history of the Silent Service that an entire sub & crew were lost during peace time, two of those times were American subs, the Thresher & the Scorpion on which my brother served as a seal on a sub, thank God he was on the sick list when she went down(he never got survivor's leave & he never got over survivor's guilt either). We did for them no better then than what the Russians are doing now. They'll be no survivor's leave if they are to be added to that number, send along your prayers for mariners all. Barry |
|
16 Aug 00 - 02:07 AM (#278629) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Lonesome EJ Eternal Father, strong to save Whose arm hath bound the restless wave. Who bidd'st the mighty ocean deep Its own appointed limits keep Oh hear us when we cry to thee For those in peril on the sea. Whiting said it best... |
|
16 Aug 00 - 03:04 AM (#278641) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: KT Barry wrote...."send along your prayers for mariners all." Indeed. And their families....especially those of the ones on that sub.....
|
|
16 Aug 00 - 06:53 AM (#278691) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GeorgeH Thanks, Barry, for your intellegent and fair-minded "take" on this. I'm not sure ANY nation puts its citizens' lives above matters of "military secrecy" and similar bullshit! G. |
|
16 Aug 00 - 07:14 AM (#278694) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: InOBU Johnny: Oklahoma is well inland, so I suppose that you do not make your living on the sea. Those of us who do, or in my case, once did, do not see national flags when our brothers and sisters are in jeopardy. All who slip their cables and move over and under the sea, do so at some risk and go with the prayers of all others who share the oceans with them. Very few days pass by that I do not remember one of the most beautiful days when my crews and I rowed two currachs I built, out of Baltimore harbor, escorting the Pride of Baltimore out of the harbor. I still see her skipper at the helm, waving as she sped out to sea, and to her fate -- to run her bow into a wave and sink with many of her crew and her skipper in moments. This is a time for prayers and solidarity, not the old cold war mistrust which led us into so many bad times and bad decisions. Let us all extend to our Russian shipmates our prayers and hopes and help if they ask. Larry |
|
16 Aug 00 - 07:51 AM (#278703) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: katlaughing Beautiful quote, LeeJ, thanks. Thanks, too, to Barry and InOBU. This whole thing has been bothering me a lot; it is a horrifying thing to imagine. I hope that today's news brings some good. In the meantime, all involved, even the incompetent-seeming government, are in my thoughts and prayers. kat |
|
16 Aug 00 - 08:10 AM (#278712) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: P05139 The Russians have actually got a word which sums all this up. I know cos I speak Russian. I'm gonna have to type it phonically cos I can't type in the Russian alphabet. The word is "oozhasno!" which means "terrible" FC |
|
16 Aug 00 - 08:38 AM (#278730) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GUEST,Roger the skiffler I've only ever travelled above the waves but can try to imagine what horrors the crew are going through,a submariner's nightmare. I am pessimistic that the belated rescue attempts will be in time, I fear that someone will be composing a ballad to a lost brave crew on the lines of the "Springhill Mine Disaster" soon. On the Huntley thread Clive Cussler was mentioned. It may need a real-life Dirk Pitt to pull this off. We can only hope for calm seas and international cooperation. Whatever the fate of the crew, the state of the vessel's reactor will raise serous environmental concerns. We are told the Russian naval bases are already badly contaminated by poorly maintained nuclear powered vessels. RtS |
|
16 Aug 00 - 08:39 AM (#278732) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: AllisonA(Animaterra) I have been holding the mariners and their families in my heart and aching for them and for mariners all. Thank you, Barry, Leej, InOBU and all. Keep praying... |
|
16 Aug 00 - 09:26 AM (#278767) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: catspaw49 Excellent postings from all and I can only echo the sentiment. Sending in additional aid is not going to make any difference, and will perhaps make things worse. As even Nikita himself once said, "A committee is an animal with four hind legs." The Russian technology below the surface is as developed as any on earth, but no one can control the conditions in the Barents Sea. The old habits of the cold war do die hard on both sides and the original multiple explanations of what happened did little to alleviate the "fears of Russian duplicity." However, the real fiasco here is the need on both sides to conduct dangerous simulations of war. May the coming days provide a rescue of the sailors and the occasional thought as to why we put young men in harms way. Spaw |
|
16 Aug 00 - 10:00 AM (#278792) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Kim C I cannot tell you how torn up I am about this. I am earnestly hoping for a miracle. My first thought is always, what if someone I loved were in this terrible peril? I'm sorry, I just can't make the words come out the way I want......... |
|
16 Aug 00 - 10:14 AM (#278803) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: catspaw49 I just heard that England is sending a DSRV but it hasn't been formally requested and is still two days. If you haven't seen the pictures of the conditions in the Barents Sea, it doesn't look real good. Also, no communication has come from the sub lately. Hold onto good thoughts. Spaw |
|
16 Aug 00 - 10:19 AM (#278805) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Rana who SHOULD be working Spaw, On the CBC radio news at 8 am they just announced that Russia had accepted UK offer of help. Just hope it is not too late. Rana |
|
16 Aug 00 - 10:23 AM (#278810) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: catspaw49 Thanks Rana......CNN is still saying that it hasn't been "formally" requested.....whatever that means. The unit they are sending "mates" with the escape hatches on NATO subs, but no one seems to know if it will work on the Russian sub. Spaw |
|
16 Aug 00 - 11:34 AM (#278851) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: katlaughing According to the latest online article I read, the correct name is "Kursk" and they have officially accepted the aid of GB. They are also talking about raising it with air-filled pontoons to a level where scuba divers could work. |
|
16 Aug 00 - 11:45 AM (#278860) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: catspaw49 Yhat pontoon system is really iffy at best. This is one of the largest subs going, something about in the 20,000 Ton displacement size and about 475 feet long. The pontoon method as do most others, require a stable platform to work from and that's not likely with the current sea conditions. Spaw |
|
16 Aug 00 - 12:29 PM (#278893) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Dave (the ancient mariner) Just keep your fingers crossed, and hope we get some back alive. Some comments on this thread are a little off key in my opinion. The Russians care about their people, and have been doing what they can to save the crew. This task is a formidable one and there are many factors that make it almost impossible; weather and the fact that the sub is listed on the bottom being the main problems. Far from being incompetent they have some good blokes out there, but they lack the equipment and the logistical ability that we in the west enjoy. They are constantly in my thoughts and prayers, they are sailors and not "the enemy" (even if they were the enemy, my duty would be out there trying to save them) Yours, Aye. Dave |
|
16 Aug 00 - 12:39 PM (#278896) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Peter K (Fionn) Banjo, assuming you want these guys out alive, how you must be wishing it could be the US Cavalry that saves them. Total humiliation.*BG* Not sure I'd want the Yanks coming to my rescue. Remember that mission to rescue the Iran hostages? Ha-ha-ha-ha-h - whoops - sorry. |
|
16 Aug 00 - 12:52 PM (#278910) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: P05139 I've just been watching the news and unfortunately, it appears that the people on board are dead. May their souls have safe passage to the afterlife. |
|
16 Aug 00 - 01:01 PM (#278918) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Kim C This whole situation seems very ironic to me when I consider that we just raised the Hunley. |
|
16 Aug 00 - 01:17 PM (#278935) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: KT Like you, kat, and Kim, and all of us I guess, I have been deeply disturbed by this, on all of the levels mentioned in the above posts... Imagine the numbers of people in the world who are, at this moment, aware of this disaster. Imagine, too, the power of combined good wishes, positive energy, prayer for all those involved....for resue, for comfort.....
|
|
16 Aug 00 - 01:56 PM (#278967) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: KT that last part should read rescue, intelligent decision making......
|
|
16 Aug 00 - 02:10 PM (#278973) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GUEST, Banjo Johnny Thanks for the correct spelling of Kursk. I re-read my post and I still don't see anything there suggesting that I was critical of the crew. Whatever their mission was, it is over now and they are helpless. Of course they deserve to be rescued! I do object to the obstinacy of the Russian Navy "High Command", in refusing outside help. They should be rescued by any means possible, even it it comes from the USA, UK, or anywhere. And I don't think there is any humiliation involved. Regarding the Thresher and the Scorpion, the situation was different. They sank below crush depth immediately, so there was no chance of a rescue. I am glad to hear that Barry's brother was on leave from the Scorpion, but I have never been able to imagine "survivor's guilt". They say it happens to lots of people, so it must be real. I remember the first time I heard Eternal Father Strong to Save. Didn't like the tune at all, but I was astonished to hear a hymn that was actually about something real -- about people right here on earth in a situation that was worth praying for. AMEN! == Johnny in OKC |
|
16 Aug 00 - 05:15 PM (#279092) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Penny S. I was awake in the middle night when I first heard of this, and the men have been in my thoughts much of the time since. The Royal Navy craft got to Trondheim before the request. Sounds have been heard again. I keep thinking of an old SF story about a craft sunk in the dust on the Moon. That must have been based on submariners' experience. Unbearable Penny |
|
16 Aug 00 - 05:20 PM (#279097) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Penny S. Oh, and Banjo Johnny, was the tune you heard Melita? That's the one we sing it to here, and it seems very powerful to me. Penny |
|
16 Aug 00 - 06:14 PM (#279136) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Peter K (Fionn) Banjo Johnny, I've re-read the whole thread and still can't find any suggestion from anyone that you were critical of the crew. Not sure where you got that from. I'm beginning to get the picture now. If a US sub sinks below crush depth, failure to mount a rescue operation is par for the course. If a Russian sub sinks in heavy seas, with strong, deep-running currents, any such failure must be "blithering incompetence." A member of the British support mission described ongoing contact with the Russian naval counterparts as "experts talking to experts." But what would he know? All in all, I thought there was more than a trace of nationalistic gloating in that first thread. If I've read it wrong, I'd be pleased to be corrected. |
|
16 Aug 00 - 06:30 PM (#279145) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Linda Kelly I doubt the situation would have been handled differently in either the UK or the US -neither military systems would rely on outside help until all possibilities have been explored -it is certainly nothing to do with incompetence on behalf of the Russians. My husband who has sailed in the Baring sea many times just shrugged his shoulders when he heard and said 'no chance'. On tonights news the situation remains grave with the British rescue team on its way from Norway, but unlikely to reach there until Saturday- I like the rest of you hope for a miracle |
|
16 Aug 00 - 06:39 PM (#279151) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: catspaw49 Well whatever nationalistic gloating there was or is aside............. I said in my first post that Russian technology in subs has been on or above par with that of any other country. Their sub technology went off in a different direction than that of the US as bulldozed by Hyman Rickover and General Dynamics dba Electric Boat. They have not put as much emphasis on the DSRV concept as western nations and still rely on the same bell design that pulled men from the Squalus. In the case of Russian subs, that idea is not all bad and the DSRV still must have a stable platform to launch from. The sea conditions will make any attempt to launch and control a DSRV almost as difficult as using the bell. I'm sure that experts from all nations are and have thought through the options, but unless the weather cooperates, a good method doesn't really exist. Like others, Clinton has offered support and a US DSRV could be on scene in less than 24 hours, but I'm willing to bet that most experts in the field consider it to be still a problem of weather and sea conditions. Spaw |
|
16 Aug 00 - 07:08 PM (#279174) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Lepus Rex My opinion: I doubt the Russian government gives a damn about what happens to the 118 sailors. Any govt. that would blow up civilian apartments (filled with precious ethnic Russians) to justify invading Ichkeria is inhuman. And that's only ONE Russian atrocity... ---Lepus Rex |
|
16 Aug 00 - 07:56 PM (#279193) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GUEST, Banjo Johnny I didn't say it would be easy. And sorry, but I just can't "trust" Vladimir Putin. == Johnny |
|
16 Aug 00 - 07:57 PM (#279195) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GUEST,Barry Finn Hi Banjo, my reply was not from any insensitivity on your part only that the focus remain on the sailors who are in need rather than what or who got them into their position in the first place & that when our subs sank that we were not much different from the Russians. From the small bit my brother would ever say about subs were that the Albacore was pretty decent & that the Scorpion was in very tough shape, again, not that much difference. His job was not sub related, it was the sub's job to get him & him group to certain places, drop them off & then come back for them. Survivors guilt is real for him, probably a close relation to post tramatic syndrome. He seeems to dwell in the depths in comfort & in company, as much lost to us as his mates. Barry |
|
17 Aug 00 - 12:44 AM (#279370) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Sourdough One of the great submarine adventure stories of all time is the story of a US sub, the Squalus. She left Portsmouth and sank of New Hampshire. This was in 1939, I think. At that time, there had never been a submarine rescue. However, a submariner, an Annapolis graduate, named Swede Momsen, had been aware of the problem of underwater rescue and he designed the bell which is basically the design the Russians are using today. As I understand it, the Russians have a far better rescue vehicle than the bell but it hasn't been kept up since 1990 and is now useless. Anyway, they managed to rescue a good part of the crew. I can't believe that German submariners of that time took any pride in the fact that US submariners were trapped at the bottom of the Atlantic or that they weren't releived when at least some were raised. InOBU - I had the chance to sail on the Pride of Baltimore when she was on the west coast. I did a story on her and was very impressed by the captain (who had an unspellable name that I can't recall) and the crew. (I was really impressed with the lapstrake dory the captain had built, too.) Such a beautul clipper, such a young, enthusiastic crew and then a rogue wave and a lot of bad luck. Sourdough |
|
17 Aug 00 - 07:31 AM (#279483) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: InOBU Sourdough: Excuse the threadcreap, but after the event, I read Chesipeke by Mitchner, and he describes the tendancy for Baltimore Clippers to burry their bow in a chapter. The new Pride has more freeboard and is as a result safer but less rakish. She remains in my mind's eye a lovely haunting immage. I was building a currach in the Philidelphia Maritime Museum's workshop on the water. One of the servivors worked in the shop, nice fellow, I don't recall his name, but the chance that any were saved was a miracle. Let's hope and pray for miracle for our Russian shipmates. Larry |
|
17 Aug 00 - 07:38 AM (#279485) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Peter K (Fionn) Spaw, my (flimsy) understanding was that a British rescue mission was mobilised because a British DSRV could be got to the scene fastest? Are you sure the US could have had one there within 24 hours? Where would it have had to come from, and where would it have been landed? What has amazed me about the British intervention is that the vessel was flown not to Murmansk but to Trondheim, and is now travelling onwards from there by sea - a journey time of 50 hours. I assume there are logistical reasons why it could not have been flown nearer, but maybe it was to do with security. Anywy I've not seen an explanation. Ickle Dorrit, just in case you misheard radio reports as I did at first, the Kursk is in the Barents sea - though I realise you may have known this. Just thought I'd mention it, as they sound so similar on the radio. *BG* In fact Barents and Baring are in nearly opposite directions from the north pole. Not sure whether it's relevant for this kind of rescue, but the Barents must be much the colder - all of it is well within the Arctic circle. (I think the Baring is entirely outside the Arctic.) |
|
17 Aug 00 - 07:58 AM (#279488) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: catspaw49 Sorry Fionn, but I meant at least to the same place the British unit has now arrived. The Navy has these on standby with transport aircraft and can be flown anywhere in the world within that time. I did see that the weather is improving with a high moving in and the winds and seas are both calmer. Also, the Kursk is lying at a down angle and listed at 60 degrees. The bell method is dificult at best, but at those angles and with the prevailing weather conditions, it'd be damn near impossible. Hope the DSRV arrives at the wreck with good weather as it too needs at least a somewhat stable platform to dive from. Spaw |
|
17 Aug 00 - 08:40 AM (#279499) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: McGrath of Harlow The nightmare element to this, wich somehow seesm to make it worse than most sea and air disasters, is the idea of it being dragged out into slopw motion. Trapped and doomed. As someone said up the thread, more like a mining disaster like the Springhill than anything else. I can't believe that the US or the British governments would behave any better in this sort of situation when it came to asking help. That doesn't in any way excuse Putin and his cronies, and if I was a Russian I'd want his scalp. But note, he's the darling of the British and American governments, regardless of Chechyna or whatever. "We can do business with him." For all those years we were told how terrible and all powerful these communist Russians were. Now the very same people who used to tell us that are saying how weak and incompetent they are now they've switched to capitalism.
If you believed them it's not much of a advert for capitalism. In fact I imagine the truth is somewhere in between, and the Russians have been muddling through all along, cocking it up sometimes and covering up, like everyone else. Only they aren't as good as covering it up these days.
I think fiasco was not the right word to use of such a horrible tragedy while still in progress. |
|
17 Aug 00 - 08:58 AM (#279514) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GeorgeH Lepus. Sure, the Russian Gvmt. carries out atrocities. Just like the US. And the UK. And the only reason they'll be "concerned" is that of public opinion. All of which is irrelevent to the human tragedy of this event. G. |
|
17 Aug 00 - 10:35 AM (#279579) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: L R Mole And as Mr. Ochs said of the Thresher, "For the ocean has no pity/For the waves, they never weep." Sometimes prayer is the only way to speak to that which is bigger than us. |
|
17 Aug 00 - 12:17 PM (#279639) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GUEST,C Dye Unfortunately, the Russians aren't the only people whose pride is preventing outside help. The US Forest Service has been offered the use of Russian tanker planes which can drop huge amounts of water onto wilderness fires, but keeps turning away the technology as "untested." Is it only in huge catastophes, like earthquakes, that we can accept help from others? |
|
17 Aug 00 - 10:54 PM (#279967) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Lepus Rex George, yeah, I know. I wasn't trying to say that this isn't a tragedy, or to change the subject. What I was trying to say (but didn't get across) was that any survivors will probably die because their government values it's pride over the sailor's lives. (Off the subject, George, but just wanted to respond to something you said: Russian atrocities make American and British atrocites look like acts of kindness) ---Lepsu Rex |
|
17 Aug 00 - 10:55 PM (#279969) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Lepus Rex ---Lepus Rex, even |
|
17 Aug 00 - 11:15 PM (#279990) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: ol'troll I spent Four years is the USNavy during Viet Nam. The song," Eternal Father.. "was known to us as the Navy Hymn and I, for one, sang it with feeling and frevor. The men aboard the Kursk and our brothers in peril no matter what nationality and, since all I can do for them and their families at this point is pray, I'm doing that. The last I heard was that there was a huge rent in the bow, probably caused by an explosion. Barry Finn, I feel for you and your family. May you- and your brother- find peace. Some do recover from survivor guilt. troll |
|
17 Aug 00 - 11:54 PM (#280032) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Brendy I saw that they sailed out of Trondheim, Thursday, and ETA is sometime on Saturday afternoon, local time. I have either not enough words, or too many of them, to express myself on this one, except that I hope that each sailor walks off that rescue ship into the arms of his loved ones. 'Karsk', on the other hand, is a well known Norwegian alcoholic drink, consisting of a large measure of local moonshine - also known as 'Nitti Sex', and a correspondingly very small measure of strong black coffee - also known as tar. B. |
|
18 Aug 00 - 12:52 AM (#280067) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GUEST, Banjo Johnny When I first heard about this, it was "Karsk" and taking place in the Bering Sea. Both wrong. This was on BBC, but they were trying to get info from the Russians, so I really don't blame the Beeb. On the other hand, I still say it's a fiasco from the first .. and a tragedy as well. Right now it looks as though a torpedo exploded. == Johnny |
|
18 Aug 00 - 07:05 AM (#280128) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Peter K (Fionn) Thanks Spaw - I've got back to my PC at last. Looks like they went to Trondheim cos that's the nearest point at which they could embark a ship with some kind of giant A-frame from which they can lower the DSRV. Looks like they've ruled out any chance of a stable platform. The guys with the DSRV think they're equipped to launch in most conditions - the only problem being that they're likely to get on the scene way too late. The latest I heard is that the hatches are compatible, but that the forward hatch - the one they were intending to aim at - is unusable. Does anyone know of a tragedy in which a damaged British sub got partially submerged somewhere off Liverpool, or even perhaps within Liverpool Harbour itself? A large part of the ship was exposed,but they couldn't get the crew off and most, if not all, died over a period of several days. This would have been well within some people's memory (just before or just after WW2?), and I'm sure I've read about it somewhere. But in the last few days I've not found anyone who recollects the incident, which is pretty amazing. For some reason the name"Thetis" comes to mind, but I could have got that from somewhere else. |
|
18 Aug 00 - 07:14 AM (#280132) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Wolfgang copied from: English submarine accidents. 1 June, 1939 - The Thetis founders after flooding through the #5 forward tube, killing a total of 99 crewmembers, civillian technicians, and senior naval observers. One observer, one officer, and two crewmembers escaped. Thetis is salvaged and recommissioned as HMS Thunderbolt. (Johnson, "Thetis Submarine") . Congratulations to your memory, Fionn. Wolfgang |
|
18 Aug 00 - 03:44 PM (#280393) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Peter K (Fionn) Many thanks Wolfgang. Did you know about it, or did you look it up? With part of the sub above water, and just a stone's throw from land, it must have been a traumatising saga. I'm surprised it's not better remembered, or maybe I've just been picking on the wrong oldies to quiz. Latest news from the Kursk is as depressing as anything so far. Seems like a large part of it is completely flooded. Anyway, here's hoping one or two come out alive. |
|
18 Aug 00 - 04:14 PM (#280410) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Kim C I was searching the CNN web page yesterday for news, and one story showed a picture of a sailor's mother, and a picture of the sailor himself. He's just a boy..... I read that most of the crew are in their late teens to early 20s. The photos certainly make it so much more real to me. I still can't help thinking, what if it was somebody I loved? What if it was my son, or brother, or husband, or friend? I hate to say so, but at this point I have given up hope for them, as all rescue attempts have thus far failed. It absolutely breaks my heart. |
|
18 Aug 00 - 04:28 PM (#280414) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Irish sergeant I was a surface sailor. Barry, I do hope your brother finds the peace he and your family so richly deserve. National pride, incompetence, and finger pointing aren't important! At this point, what is important is trying to get those men off that vessel. It would be very nice in my opinion if it were American technology and Jack Tars that did so, but only because it would mend a lot of rifts that shgould have never been there in the first place but were because of the cold war. If the British can help, have on and let's brink those brave men back to their families! At this point, they have no place to go and it is the obligation of every maritime nation to render whatever assistance is needed to save the men of the Kursk. Not because it's a law, it isn't, but because it is the morally right thing to do. Anyone who has spent time at sea, will likely share that sentiment. It's not about national integrity, it's about sailors lives damn it! Kindest reguards to all, Neil |
|
18 Aug 00 - 05:28 PM (#280444) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Brendy Strange thing heard on the news earlier on: The Norwegian Seismology Institute, based in Kjeller, just outside of Oslo, has confirmed that two explosions were recorded in the Barents Sea last Saturday afternoon. The second of the two measured 3.2 on the Richter Scale. Make of that what you will! B. |
|
18 Aug 00 - 05:35 PM (#280448) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GUEST, Banjo Johnny I'm getting more actually information here on the Mudcats, than on all four of our so called networks. Thanks gents! == Johnny |
|
18 Aug 00 - 05:52 PM (#280460) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: katlaughing There is a very lengthy, very informatibve article from UPI if you Click Here. Covers not just the rescue attempts, which by the way they were at the hatch and couldn't attach properly because it was damaged, but also the Russian government, media, and people, as well as otehr giovernments involved. It is very interesting. I would have posted it, but it really is in-depth. I would ask that if the men are not rescued, that their spirits find a passing over free from pain, fear, and sorrow according to whatever their beliefs are. It is still my hope and prayer that some will make it out alive, though. kat |
|
19 Aug 00 - 04:40 AM (#280672) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Wolfgang Fionn, I looked it up, I sometimes do that for the fun of it and then especially seafaring of all kind and accidents on sea have always interested me. I looked in a search machine for web sites that had the two words 'submarine' and !accidents' in them and got a couple of thousand hits. I decided to try only the first one of them and it had a link to right site. Pure luck, I would have stopped after the first try. Wolfgang |
|
19 Aug 00 - 09:25 AM (#280712) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Banjer Not being very knowledgeable of naval warfare, I fail to understand what useful purpose submarines serve in modern times. Are there not a whole arsenal of sattelites capable of detecting any activity in the waters? Do we still really need subs? If the further construction of such underwater vessels is still thought to be necessary, then why could they not be designed with a small capsule with sufficient room to carry the crew to safety. They would not need to be built with comfort in mind, but simply as a lifeboat escape device for however many crewmembers are aboard. This device could possibly be mounted behind the conning tower(correct term?)and be accessed through a hatch connecting it to the vessel. When it became neccessary to 'abandon ship' the crew could be loaded into this device which would then make a controlled ascent to safety. During normal operation they could be used as extra sapce for off duty crew activities. Maybe mount two of these things on the vessel. They wouldn't need to be any bigger than a small bus. I hope that the rescue efforts are successful, but with each new news report it seems to be more hopeless....My thoughts go with the crew and their loved ones. |
|
19 Aug 00 - 11:44 AM (#280766) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: SpitWhistle I'm the skipper of the Jefferson City (SSN 759) in San Diego... this has been a pretty interesting thread to follow! The crew has been pretty somber about the entire event of course, and its not looking too good for the Kursk this morning... as you might imagine, we relate very well with their plight. Banjer asked some pretty good questions there, and I may be able to help with a couple of them. Many subs do have escape devices or methods such as you describe, but you have the understand that their use depends on a lot of factors (a lot of things that have to go RIGHT)... that they were undamaged by the casualty, that the crew is physically able to get to them, that the water is shallow enough to use them and so on. In Kursk's case, the news suggests that there was significant damage to the hull and sail areas which may have made it impossible the access these devices (assuming they even have them). Even attempting a rescue externally is like to trying to thread a needle that is 400 feet away... the technical difficulties are extraordinary, even for trained experts. With regard to the usefulness of subs in modern times, they are still used for surveillance, anti-ship/sub warfare, missile strikes (we carry tomahawk conventional missiles), SEAL operations and so on. They are, like all military forces, "instruments of policy by other means". (naturally, you do not have to agree with the policy that makes such instruments useful, but given the policy...there you are) We just returned from a six month deployment were we traveled over 40,000 nm... and there was PLENTY to do. There ARE fleets of satellites BTW, but they cannot penetrate the seas... it is one of the things that makes stealthy platforms like ours so necessary today. We still have hope that those men will make it out, but from an insider's perspective, it looks pretty grim. Ron |
|
19 Aug 00 - 11:54 AM (#280768) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: catspaw49 Thank you Ron. Expert knowledge is always appreciated. So I have a question........Considering the varying reports on an internal explosion which is generally accepted as the cause at this time, AND considering the force of that explosion which seems to be quite significant........Even in a sub as large as the Kursk, what were the chances of survival from the gitgo? Also looking at the design of the Kursk wouldn't a large majority of the crew be in an area from the sail forward? Not meaning to be so doom-like, but the more we here the worse it sounds. And BTW....Welcome to the 'Cat. Spaw |
|
19 Aug 00 - 02:26 PM (#280812) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Micca Two points, one, the old collision problem that jams hatches applies to emergency escape stuff too, When I served in the Merchant navy it was a rule on British ships that cabin doors were NEVER shut at sea but had a short hook that held them partly opened, because in a collision or explosion (I served in Tankers, mostly) the door frame could distort and imprison you..so in the case od the Kursk and explosion( big enough to register 3.4 on the Richter in Norway) could easily have bent things enough to prevent escape mechanisms from working, and 2 I have been to the Barents Sea( one early spring trip to Archangel)it is one of the most inhospitable places on the planet the currents are amazing (10kts against in places and certain states of the tide) so keeping a stable platform for anything on it is going to be very difficult so even the locals were having probs. I hope they find anyone who is alive and get them out as it must be the most horrible feeling to be buried alive under the Arctic seas , not knowing if there is any help coming..Thanks to Spit Whistle for his expert knowledge... |
|
19 Aug 00 - 02:49 PM (#280820) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: InOBU Dear Ron: Not to change the subject, but to add a note of levity when we are all so concerned about so many fellow mariners... Did you ever catch the Groucho Marx - "You bet your life" episode when a US sub comander was a contestant? Groucho asked him about life on a sub, and the skipper said, "we play alot of cards..." "Poker, eh?" Groucho asked. "Oh no, no gambling, just a bit of Acey Ducey." Later in the show, the skipper screwed up and said, "I guess my me are laughing at me now." Groucho replied, "Laughing so hard they are dropping all their poker chips!" Best wishes to all in the old up and down biz, as Tristan Jones used to say... Larry |
|
19 Aug 00 - 02:56 PM (#280824) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: catspaw49 Quick footnote Larry.....My son is named Tristan for Tristan Jones. After reading all his books and following his exploits for years, I was struck speechless when I encountered him at Annapolis one year at the Sail show. My wife said she had never seen me so awestruck and that she thought I was going to kneel and kiss his hand. I eventually got out enough words for a conversation. One helluva' man. Spaw |
|
19 Aug 00 - 03:51 PM (#280842) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Brendy Taken from today's Aftenposten, Norway's national daily. The 'Kursk' collided with another submarine?The submarine 'Kursk' probably sank because of contact with a foreign body. What this object was is still not known, but it could have been another submarine, according to the Russian accident investigation commission.The vice-chairman of the commission, Deputy Prime Minister Ilja Klebanov, held a press conference on Saturday evening dealing with the findings of the commission. The commission think that in all probability the 'Kursk' sank because it collided with another object. This would have happened at a depth of 16 - 18 metres. This collision led to a powerful explosion, after which the 'Kursk' started to sink. Two minutes after it hit the sea-floor, there was another explosion. One theory is that the 'Kursk' hit another submarine, either a Russian one, or one from another country. British submarines are often patrolling these waters. On Saturday, the British ruled out any involvement of one of their submarines in the accident. The collision would have happened at 11.40 local time, last Saturday, when contact with the submarine was lost. The 'Kursk' was located five hours later. The two explosions were so powerful, that the 'Kursk' was severely damaged, and Klebanov believes that at least half of the crew died instantly. Another theory the commission are working on, is that the submarine hit a Second World War mine . "A Norwegian submarine has, on a mission for the United States, been following the Russian Navy manouveres in the Barents Sea. The 'Kursk' probably fired a warning torpedo at the Norwegians, who shot back seriously damaging the 'Kursk' "A planned blowing up of a Russian submarine. What we have here is a direct military confrontation between the armed forces of NATO and Russia", said Zjirinovskij. He also related the background to this incident: "The American Government is unhappy with the change of direction within Russian foreign policy; contact with North Korea, better relations with Libya, and Moscow's wish to lift the sanctions against Iraq", claims the the ultra nationalist politician." Curiouser and curiouser. B. |
|
19 Aug 00 - 06:31 PM (#280893) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: InOBU Ah SpawBach (again as Tristam would have called you...): I was a teanage warfrat when Tristam was on the bum in New York in the early days of South Street Seaport, good to know others remember him. Yup Brendy, it is an Alice in Wonderland world, and we poor sods who work - get hurt and wet. Did you ever hear the Phil Oachs song, "The men behind the guns"? It would be a good tribute to the men of the Kursk to post it. All the best, Larry |
|
19 Aug 00 - 06:34 PM (#280897) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Banjer I'm assuming that the 'sail' that is being refered to here is what I called the conning tower. Thanks to SpitWhistle for sharing with us his firsthand knowledge. Granted, many things would have to go RIGHT for any system to work, but it seems with our high levels of technology that things could be developed that could overcome such circumstances. What would it take to develop some sort of system, an advanced form of life jacket if you will, that an indivual could be issued and keep with him during his tour aboard a sub that could be easily accessed in times of emergency that would give him enough air to get to the surface? It could also be fitted with a locating beacon that would be picked up by sattelite and transmitted to rescue personell. I know they would have to rise in stages to prevent nitrogen narcosis, but given the other option I think I would have to try it. If at least a few of the Kursk's crew had been able to escape in this fashion, how different would have been the rescue efforts with their knowledge of what happened? Will continue to monitor news reports for any glimmer of hope. |
|
19 Aug 00 - 06:47 PM (#280906) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Irish sergeant Ron; From an old surface sailor, welcome to mudcat. I did my time on bird farms. I rather doubt the scenarios posted above. We (The U.S.) are not going to risk a nuclear war because Moscow takes a different tack with Libya or North Korea. The idea sounds like paranoia (A failing not limited to Russian politicians by any means) The U.K. or Norway certainly aren't going to risk that type of war either. I believe it was a collision or some sort of torpedo coook off. Meanwhile I continue to pray for those men and hope the rest of you do also. kindest reguards Neil PS As I write this, the news is saying that the crew of the Kursk is likely dead, God have mercy on them if they are. I shall mourn them for the brave men they were if it is true. |
|
19 Aug 00 - 07:46 PM (#280918) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Banjer I don't if it was coincidence or on purpose but I just watched a History Channel presentation on submarine rescue and Cmdr Charles "Swede" Monsen(sp?). It showed footage of the rescue of the men of the Squalus in the 1930's. Many of the thoughts I had earlier about ways of escaping a sub were covered in the show. There was a type of breathing apparatus designed by Cmdr Monsen that would allow a person to leave a sunken sub and breathe through a controlled ascent to the top. Yes, Neil, I too heard similar news reports that hope is fast dwindling. My thoughts and prayers to all the families involved with this tragedy. Even though the brave men involved were of a foreign government, once our enemy, their dedication to their duty and their ideals are no less significant. (Almost sounds like a recent discussion of the imminent internment of the Hunley crew, doesn't it?) |
|
19 Aug 00 - 07:59 PM (#280920) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Brendy Well, Neil, that was Zjirinovskij's take on it, anyway. The thing about those kind of statements is that they do not need to be true. They only need to raise the spectre of doubt. And after all, what do we mere mortals know about what really goes on in the corridors of power? The Men Behind the Guns - by Phil Ochs and John Rooney Good choice, Lorcán. B. |
|
19 Aug 00 - 11:55 PM (#281010) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: raredance I personally think the "collision" scenario is Russian PR spin that may play well with some of their constituents at home. A collision with another ship (sub)followed by an exlposion would have done just as much damage to the other vessel and would have left it foundering or on the bottom also. The presence of a large underwater mesa would be obvious on everybody's sonar. It seems improbable that a 400 foot ship running into a beluga whale would trigger such a disaster. I guess two subs exchanging torpedo volleys can't be totally ruled out (Russian/Norwegian, or perhaps a Russian/Russian friendly fire exchange). A torpedo malfunction seems more likely. The initial explosion would set off the remainder of the asenal in a bigger second explosion. Today's CNN reports from the head of the Russion navy indicated that forward damage was much more severe than earlier reports and that they don't have any real hope for survivors. Even the rear escape hatch suffered some damage (see the posts above about doors and hatches). It is likely that most of the sailors were killed in the initial explosions. Russian TV has scrolled the names of the lost sailors. I had heard earlier in the week that the US sub rescue equipment was stationed in California, so the British equipment was much closer by sea or by air. I hope the families of the sailors get some straight answers. rich r |
|
20 Aug 00 - 08:35 AM (#281099) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Peter K (Fionn) I don't think this point has been made above (sorry if it has and I've overlooked it) but apparently the Russian navy was reissued with a new type of torpedo in 1998. The naval high command resisted like hell, on the basis that the new ammo was considered to be dangerously volatile and hard to handle. |
|
20 Aug 00 - 03:36 PM (#281238) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Brendy I heard, though, Fionn, that the ammunition they were issued for the manoeuvres was TNT, which would mean the detonation of between 1 1/2 and 2 tons, to measure 3.5 (the revised figure) on the Richter. I also heard today that one Russian sailor is trapped in the airlock between the hatches, and he may be alive. The Norwegians, and the British, on the other hand, are trying to make a tool that will open the damaged hatch. More to come, no doubt. B. |
|
20 Aug 00 - 09:24 PM (#281376) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GUEST, Banjo Johnny Zhirinovski said, "The American Government is unhappy with the change of direction within Russian foreign policy; contact with North Korea, better relations with Libya, and Moscow's wish to lift the sanctions against Iraq" -- HE GOT THAT RIGHT ! What I would like to know is -- perhaps Spit Whistle can answer this -- is there such a thing as a "warning torpedo" ?? == Johnny in OKC |
|
20 Aug 00 - 09:41 PM (#281385) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Brendy I think it is accepted (depending on where one gets one's News from), that the British had two 'vessels' in the immediate vicinity at the time of the explosion. Irrespective of whether an exchange of fire took place, the British military, and by association, every other NATO member, knew of this explosion when it happened. The Russians were heavily criticised at the time for not notifying the rest of the World about the Chernobyl incident; they were only forced to admit it after the reindeer herds in the north of Norway were shown to have have radio-active shit. B. |
|
20 Aug 00 - 09:59 PM (#281402) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Sorcha Unfortunaltely, yes, Brendy. Look up the story of the USS Indianapolis, South Pacific, late WW2. Her captain was court martialed for doing what he was told to do, and for making executive decisions in the face of danger.
Policy is- - - NATIONAL SECRECY ABOVE ALL!! Why should we need this sheeeeeeit at all? We have a Global Community here at Mudcat,we don't needTorpedoes wejust play a few songs, have a good argument, and it is yesterdays news.
Think about this: You are the ONLY person left alive on a submarine, out of nearly 200--are you EVER going to be really OK again? I, personally, would rather go down with my friends than live with that. And, another thought--even if there were escape suits/pods, etc for the Sailors, just how long could a human survive unprotected in an Arctic sea? Not very damn long, my friends, not very damn long. Nor in a warm sea with sharks and no water, either. |
|
20 Aug 00 - 10:02 PM (#281405) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Brendy Oh I'm sure Ted Turner could make his misery a bit more bearable. B. |
|
20 Aug 00 - 10:12 PM (#281412) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Sorcha Show me Ted Turner, ALL ALONE in a kapok life vest or a single flotation device in an Artic sea, and I will show you a dead man. Show me Ted Turner as the only survivor after a week alone on the Artic sea bed, and I will show you a crazy man. I don't know him personally, but I seriously doubt the man is a true Survivor Personality. And, you know I wasn't talking about media people......come on Brendy, I think somewhere inside you DO know better, you are just trolling in the wrong place. |
|
20 Aug 00 - 10:20 PM (#281422) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: catspaw49 Actually Sorcha, the captain of the Indianapolis did make an executive decision NOT to zig-zag as per standing orders and was court martialed for that offense. The Captain of the Japanese sub that torpedoed the Indianapolis testified at the trial and stated that he would have made the shot whether or not the cruiser was zig-zagging or not, but in the part of the testimony that was emphasized he stated that the ship was tracking straight. He had seen the Indianapolis outbound for Tinian and laid in wait in its path on the return. Your point however is well taken as the US had NO IDEA that the ship was missing for several days because of the secrecy of the mission. No one ever really shouldered the blame for that error and the loss of most of the men was due to the extra days spent in the water. Spaw |
|
20 Aug 00 - 10:24 PM (#281423) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GUEST,Barry Finn With survival suits a person can survive (hence the name) cold water for quite awhile & as for surviving I'm very lucky to still have a brother even if he's only part of his former self & he only visits his mates in his mind, thank God he's not resting there with them. Barry |
|
20 Aug 00 - 10:48 PM (#281435) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Sorcha Spaw, they made him a Captain because he was supposed to be good at making Exective Decisions--would you zig-zag if you couldn't see the bow from the stern? And, and the Japanese captain said, he would have shot anyway,well, anyway, as you said, the point is still valid. For you who missed the point, the point is: Captian made decision in extremis. Ship went down. Very few survivors, because US Command REFUSED to HEAR mayday cries. US Command was afraid that would give away the fact that they had broken the Japanese Naval Code, so they let sailors die instead. Crap like this happens all the time in any country's military. Ask my brother--he is currently in US Army, Ft. Sill, OK. You people would NOT beleive (OK, maybe you Catters would, but not John Q Public)just what is "withheld" from the general populace. The government does not consider this to be "lying". Just National Security. |
|
20 Aug 00 - 10:58 PM (#281440) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Brendy Come on, Sorcha. Do not doubt my concern and saddness surrounding this incident. What would I be trolling to get?. Those few words that I wrote will sum up the situation after this one scared Russian sailor gets stretchered into hospital. What's going to happen then? I don't doubt at all that this man (if he does indeed exist), will never be the same man again. But at least he will be able to afford the best of psychiatric help. It will be his ticket out of the Navy, and the chance for a well-deserved new life. It's not me being cruel, Sorcha. It's just the way things go, because the vultures have to have their share. Ooops ;) B. |
|
20 Aug 00 - 11:03 PM (#281442) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Sorcha OK, Brendy, point taken. Sorry, friend. Apology tendered, and I now understand what you meant. Yes, unfortunately, you are correct. If there is a survivor, the vultures will gather. They always do, don't they? And make a little money in the process. Again, sorry, and it is hard to do sarcasm in print, without a lead in. |
|
20 Aug 00 - 11:26 PM (#281449) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Brendy It's no problem, Sorcha....I'm used to it *RLGSLOLT* (*rather large grin showing loads of lovely teeth*) But seriously, though,, I see that the Russians, Norwegians, and the British have been arguing all day about whether the escape hatch is damaged or not. They have been debating this point all day, and I have just heard that they will begin a 3-4 hour descent soon (whatever that means). On board will be some Russian divers as well. Can't have the Brits de-briefing the corpses, I suppose. B. |
|
20 Aug 00 - 11:34 PM (#281452) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Sorcha OH, JAYSUS!! such crap, no? We would NOT want the Brits or the Norsks to be the first to debrief the corpses, now would we? My gut has said for days that they are all dead. Just bring up the sub, and tell us WHAT HAPPENED! I doubt that will ever happen, though. The World will never really know, as per National Security. "GOD Save the Nation!"-- not the Planet. sarcasm, there. |
|
21 Aug 00 - 06:18 AM (#281547) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Peter K (Fionn) Brendy, having distanced yourself from the "warning shot" theory, I see you're now flying another kite! Whether it's "accepted" that the Brits had two ships in the area is not really the point. The (Royal"!) navy have said none of their ships was involved in any incident, and if they were lying aout that, they would soon be exposed. It's not so easy to keep the lid on things as 50 years ago, as I hope the imminent return to Britain of the renegade MI5 (secret service) officer David Shayler will soon be reminding us. I can understand your preference (and the media's) for a dramatic explanation, but my money's on a self-contained incident - most likely a torpedo exploding in the hatch. That would be enough to explain Russian unease at having foreign rescue teams crawling all over the wreck. |
|
21 Aug 00 - 06:25 AM (#281549) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Brendy Well, I hope you have your nice, safe, explanation confirmed, Fionn. I'm not flying any kites, old stick; I'm telling you what has been reported on NRK radio and T.V., plus the Norwegian newspapers. The 'film scenario' will never happen, though. Not by any of the survivors, anyway. As of 12.16pm CET, ALL sailors have been confirmed dead. Wonder what light Shayler may shine on the Stalker Report? Love to be a fly on that wall, eh? B. |
|
21 Aug 00 - 06:32 AM (#281552) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Brendy And don't try to tell us Fionn, that if the same fate were to befall one of the Royal Navy's Trident Class subs, that their brass would let a French crew into the thing to have a look around. And they're supposed to be allies. In that they would have acted no different to the Russians. And lives would have been lost just the same. B. |
|
21 Aug 00 - 06:38 AM (#281556) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Cobble Cut out the politics, our thoughts should be with the family's of the crew. I was a Royal Navy submariner. |
|
21 Aug 00 - 06:43 AM (#281558) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Brendy I'm afraid, Cobble, they should have cut out the politics last Saturday. If that had happened, our thoughts would have been with less crew members' families at this stage in all probability. They always have been in my thoughts B. |
|
21 Aug 00 - 08:42 PM (#282035) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Peter K (Fionn) Couldn't agree more about the Tridents Brendy. It's my view we shouldn't have them in the first place. As for Shayler, I haven't followed it too closely and didn't realise he had a connection with the "shoot to kill" scandal. I'd be more interested to know what was in those files that were lost in a mysterious fire in an upstairs office at Carrickfergus. And I'm hoping we'll get to hear more about how some innocent folk got killed in that alleged attempt at murdering Gadaffi. Sorry for thread drift, but all hope has long since gone for the crew of the Kursk. |
|
21 Aug 00 - 09:46 PM (#282062) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Irish sergeant I understand the British divers went in today sometime early and the damage was even worse that previously assumed. God speed those poor souls to the gates of whatever heaven they believe in. I do hope the families receive honest answers in a timely manner. I, for one, believe it was a torpedo cooiking off. This time. God almighty knows there is enough "National security" crapola that goes on in all govenrments all the time. If I am wrong or not probably doesn't matter. What matters is that the sailors of the Kursk deserve a better eulogy than "OOPS! This doesn't happen in Mother Russia so let's sweep it under the rug." May they be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows they're dead. Kindest reguards, Neil |
|
22 Aug 00 - 06:51 AM (#282236) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GUEST,sledge It seems that the Norwegian divers have opened the Kursk and found a flooded Submarine, there will be no Survivors. As an Ex RN submariner I am gutted that this is how it all ends, I was at sea on my boat when the Soviet submarine Komsolets, caught fire at sea several years ago, the only feeling on board was to want to help. That feeling is still there. Should such an accident occurr again I hope it will be born in mind that the desire to help in the Submariner community is genuine. I wonder how that Prick Putin will explain this to the families. Stu |
|
22 Aug 00 - 09:46 AM (#282304) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Brendy I saw a programme on NRK (Norwegian Broadcasting Authourity) the other night, where the obligatory 'panel of experts' were in place to discuss all of this, and it's implications. Among those present was a representative of the Russian News Agency, and he was asked more or less the same question that sledge now asks. He told us that we have to bear in mind that Putin is a relative 'new boy' at diplomatic things. That he has advisors inexperienced in the art of the video and sound byte, and that in all probability, the newsman said, Putin thought that by going up to Murmansk, he would be putting more pressure on the rescuers; that this was not the field of his particular expertise, so he basically 'let the professionals do their job'. For an inexperienced diplomat, I can see the logic of this action. I don't agree with the premise, but I can see the line of argument. But to be interviewed at his Black Sea resort, in a white shirt, drink on table, looking very relaxed and suntanned, even smiling at times, was a big mistake, in the eyes of the journalist. Norwegian T.V. news yesterday made a big point of the fact, that it took the Norwegian divers 1/2 hour to do what the Russians couldn't do in a week. Which leads me to suggest that Putin should have been there, byte or no byte. The mafias are blowing up apartment blocks in big cities, killing hundreds of people; big news when it started, cos the Chetchen freedom fighters were blamed originally, but now seems like old news, even though it happens almost on a weekly basis. I have been looking at Russian T.V over the past week, on and off, and although it is seen as a tragedy, and there are angry people ringing in to their stations, it doesn't have that 'lingering story' feel about it. On the whole, I have found the reporting of this story by the Norwegians incredibly even handed (although I saw that they were a little 'proud' of their achievement). But whatever about what BBC, CNN, or Sky, not covering the 'hostile attack' thoery, I can assure you that it is still a talking point here, and privately being discussed at higher levels, from what I can glean from it all. But just like the bombing of the Chinese Embassy, if there was going to be a war, I think we would have known about it by now, one way or another. I'll be keeping a close eye on reindeer shit statistics over the next weeks, though; we haven't heard any adverse stories about leaks yet, and I don't know whether this is good news or bad news. Just to give you a few chronological facts: 1: The Norwegians, British, and Russians (N. B. R.) go down to open the sub. I haven't heard any news today, yet. Keep you posted! B. |
|
22 Aug 00 - 02:10 PM (#282547) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Brendy Just on the News, 10 mins ago: Putin has just met the families of the crew. The Press were not allowed to participate in this, and were kept away. B. |
|
22 Aug 00 - 02:29 PM (#282566) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Cobble today our hearts must go out to the families of the sailors. Tomorrow we must look to what happens now!! Do the Russians have the means to make the Nuk. Reactors safe. Or will they leave them on the bottom of the sea to pollute the sea for ever? Cobble's SO |
|
23 Aug 00 - 02:19 AM (#283051) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Brendy Can a picture paint 1000 words, or what? The caption says: With downcast eyes President Putin is saluted by Vladimir Kurojedov, Chief of Command of the Russian Navy. The article is about his visit to see the relatives of the crew members, and about his travelling route to the scene, being kept secret. There's also sketchy reports, oddly enough, by Russian T.V. of increased radiation (7 times normal) in the Barents Sea area; The Norwegian Radiation Institute, have detected no increase. If I start sprouting a second head, or something, I'll let you know!!!! Don't even joke about it, Brendy B. |
|
23 Aug 00 - 08:46 AM (#283157) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: catspaw49 I think it would depend on the location of the head Brendy. Spaw |
|
23 Aug 00 - 09:03 AM (#283165) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GUEST,Brendy I've already lost my cookie, 'Spaw. What do I do, man? This is getting all surreal and purply!!!! Anyway, I'd logged out, and I just heard, that Putin has gone back to Moscow, WITHOUT attending the service of rememberance, which is scheduled for today. This sum is being paid by insurance companies; I didn't hear anything about the Russian Government putting their hand in their pocket to see how much spare change they had. Anyway, thanks for the concern. I'll definately keep an eye out for any kind of head. But that's sort of like a sixth sense, anyway. B. |
|
25 Aug 00 - 08:21 AM (#284929) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: IanC Roger wrote I am pessimistic that the belated rescue attempts will be in time, I fear that someone will be composing a ballad to a lost brave crew on the lines of the "Springhill Mine Disaster" soon. He's obviously been proved right, though what was going round in my mind was the Franklin expedition rather than Springhill. Quite uncharacteristically, whilst commuting to and from work, a song developed. This is the first and probably the only song I'll write, but I've posted it here for what it's worth. Perhaps somebody will make soething useful out of it. The last 2 verses were originally alternative endings, but I've kept both.
THE SUBMARINE KURSK
One Sunday morning I lay half-awake
Whilst cruising slowly neath the Barents Sea
Some said there was news, and some said none,
Those seafaring peoples they called upon
And when The Kursk was opened in the deep
Ye bold submariners, as you pass by
And, yes, my memory it does give me pain |
|
25 Aug 00 - 08:30 AM (#284938) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Troll IanC: It was worth posting. And I hope you write many more, albeit on happier subjects. troll |
|
25 Aug 00 - 09:47 AM (#284986) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: jeffp A fitting tribute, IanC. |
|
25 Aug 00 - 08:22 PM (#285364) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: InOBU IanC Lovely song! As I scolled down, I though, Lady Franklynn, and sure enough, that is what you thought. Lovely song, and I am sure it will grace a focsle or two soon. Larry |
|
25 Aug 00 - 10:19 PM (#285426) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Brendy Nice one IanC, fair play to you. The last two lines are brilliant. B. |
|
26 Aug 00 - 12:49 PM (#285634) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GUEST,Mudcat@online.no |
|
26 Aug 00 - 01:13 PM (#285640) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GUEST,Mudcat@online.no Regarding the KURSK tragedy.... As a norwegian, I have a sincere interest in the actions of the Russian millitary, and the Russian nawy in particular. For many years, Russian subs have patrolled Norwegian territories, for purposses unknown. There have even been millitary submarines in the Oslo bay at broad daylight. It seemes obvious that the Russian authorities never intended to rescue anyone from Kursk, no more than they wanted the sub to surface ever again. (Wich might be just as well, concidering the risk of radioactive pollution) And what the hell were they doing anyway, prepearing to launch torpedoes in international waters, with foreign ships an population nearby? These are dangerous times. -Mudcat-
|
|
26 Aug 00 - 10:59 PM (#285913) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GUEST, Banjo Johnny That is why I can't get too choked up about the "brave Russian sailors". Their tubes aren't loaded with Candy Kisses. We should remember that until their boat sank, they were able and willing to destroy any vessel if ordered to do so, including the boats of their "brother" submariners of other countries. == Johnny in OKC |
|
27 Aug 00 - 12:09 AM (#285935) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: The Beanster I feel bad for them (and their families, of course). If they were unlucky enough to live through that explosion, no one deserves to die by way of slow suffocation, freezing cold, in the dark. A bunch of dumb kids in a tin can under the sea. They were no different from any soldier, the world over. |
|
27 Aug 00 - 01:06 AM (#285945) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: katlaughing IanC, I, too, hope you write many more. That was just beautiful and so poignant. I hope you will share it with Aine and allow her to put it in the Mudcat Songbook. And, I agree, teh last two lines, esp. were brill...thank you kat |
|
27 Aug 00 - 01:19 AM (#285949) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Sorcha Uh Oh, Auntie Scorch is finally on the rampage----Banjo Johnny--are you williing to die 350 feet down on the floor of a freezing sea? In absolute darkness with NO air to breathe? Can you possibly imagine a worse way to die? Do you think that these sailors PERSONAL deaths had anything at all to do with their PERSONAL POLITICS? or more to the point, with the International politics of RUSSIA, or whatever it is politically called on August 26th?
These were PEOPLE, 118 of them or possibly more. REAL people with mothers, fathers, wives, children ......without a real voting alternative to their governing body, and you Johnny, want to bring in the POLITICS of Government? Bottom line, Johnny, is that these were REAL two legged people,and they died in the worst way I can imagine--alone, in absolute dark, in the cold, cold water without air to breathe. Think about that, will you? Then tell me POLITICS!!! Excuse me, but NO! and NO! and NO! These mens' PERSONAL politics had NOTHING BUT NOTHING to do with their dying. International politics MAY have, faulty technology MAY have,but YOUR country (USA) has ships/boats in International Waters, too. |
|
27 Aug 00 - 09:20 AM (#286035) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GUEST,Mudcat@ Sorcha... Believe me when I say I cried for the crew of Kursk. They suffered a death so nightmarish and undeserved it should bring tears for many years to come. Furthermore, it became their destiny to die for a nation who gladly left them in the sea to cover their own miserable hides. I totally agree that politics is far from the most relevant issue here, but still: -the way everything turned out is the result of politics- -Mudcat- |
|
27 Aug 00 - 11:43 AM (#286078) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: Naemanson I am sorry I missed following this thread through the last ten days or so. It was a terrible tragedy and fed all sorts of demons and angels. Some comments: Thanks to IanC for that beautiful tribute to those sailors. I was a surface sailor but was originally supposed to be a nuclear submariner. Only a certain stubborn claustrophobia kept me on the surface. This tragedy touched me too. Wolfgang provided the list of English submarine accidents. One of the topics played with in the posts was national pride and national security as it touched on these accidents. Has anyone else noticed that there were no submarine accidents in that list between 1939 and 1949? That was a time of extreme activity for submarines. Funny thing, that. I wonder if there are similar gaps in lists for other nations. It wouldn't surprise me at all. Spit Whistle - Thanks for your contribution. As others have said it is greatly appreciated to hear the voice of experience in times like these. Fair winds and following seas, my friend. It is easy to point fingers when there is a disaster such as this. We must remember that "those who give the orders won't be among the dead and maimed and on each end of the rifle we're the same." Those sailors who someone pointed out were ready to kill are the same as our new friend Spit Whistle. He is out there doing the job he was trained to do. That job is to defend the country he loves. He has made certain sacrifices for that country. The sailors on the Kursk made sacrifices too. They may not have volunteered for Naval Severice but their sacrifices were as real as if they did. And when they sacrificed their lives they gave their nation the greatest gift they could. We must respect them and honor them, no matter what we think of the poitical system they were defending. |
|
03 Sep 00 - 10:14 AM (#290273) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GUEST,InOBU & The Popular Halfwit Dear Ian C: The popular halfwit and I are learning your Kursk ballad to sing in Bath England shortly, hello to all Larry (InOBU)and the Popular Halfwit. |
|
04 Sep 00 - 07:59 AM (#290665) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: IanC Larry & PH Honoured & pleased.
Cheers! |
|
04 Sep 00 - 11:44 AM (#290764) Subject: RE: BS: Karsk fiasco From: GUEST, Banjo Johnny Latest info shows that a torpedo blew up inside the Kursk. These torpedos are capable of sinking a battle ship, so I wouldn't be surprised to learn it sank the sub. The concussion alone should have been enough to rupture the blood vessels of everyone aboard. The entire bow was blown open like a cracked nut. I have been a diver long enough to know that at 350 ft there are about ten atmospheres of sea pressure. Under these conditions, I don't think they suffered for very long. == Johnny |