Twenty die on Russian submarine

ahhh the mighty russian war machine

makes you wonder why people we're so worried in the cold war! I bet their nukes wouldn't even launch let alone explode and achieve critical mass

reply to post by IntoTheVortex


Seriously all you people bashing Russia, get your heads out your arse, also try and stay on topic.

Yes it is tragic, but if it is not for the navy rushing through these technological advances, the Russian navy would not be as capable as it is today.

Where the US pours billions of dollars into new technology and researches it to perfection before even considering trials, the Russia Navy seems to pour a fraction the amout of funding, then fix/tune/hone the technology through trial and error in the field. Like I said very tragic that people die to advance their navy, but I think the Russians cannot justify billions being poured into projects, given the fact Russias resurgence has only been for the last 10 years and there level of spending will still never match that of the US for a few more decades (assuming the US has not collapsed before then).

this is saddening ... RIP to those died in the accident

The reports are there was NO fire and quite likely the accidental release of the firefighting gas - subs have various systems for fighting fires


http://__._/leak/us-submarine-firefighting-1998.pdf


is the USA submarine firefighting manual , and they use substances like CO2 and Potassium Carbonate - and in the quantity of CO2 released - typically 70% by volume - then death from asphysixation will occur (page 31-22 of the manual)

so gas release system is activated by accident - the bow section sealed doors are closed on automatic, releated to a fire warning - and the compartment is filled with gas;


great - in the event of a real fire , but as you can sadly the see the results of accidently discharges.


im very sure orangetom can tell us of similar occurances on subs in the US fleet


bassplyr - stop being so biased about russian equipment - in this case it does very much seem as an accident and has nothing to do with the quality of the subs.

just read in the other post that it was a freon leak, which is nasty, not toxic or poisonus as such, just heavier than air and can suffocate.

this stuff used to scare me daily, although i never actualy came in contact with it. I worked in an ice rink and this was one of the gassess used to cool down the brine (which freezess the water ect), i had to do loads of reaserch and risk assessment on that area of the building and it freaked me out as if their was a leak, guarenteed its in a place i woudl deffo have to go in at some point through the day, their was alarms ect, but it was a council ran facility and i wouldnt have trusted the alarm to alert me.

reply to post by maloy


You seem to take much of this personal.

Russia has a history of hiding known facts from the people. The Russian navy has a history of hiding bad publicity or causes of accidents.

True statement about the more modern Russian space program. Both Russia and the USA had bad starts. Shuttle re-entry explosion was based on 30 year old technology, even though Challenger was in 80's and not so nearly old. we did learn from that tragedy.

Russia is still playing it's part of the cold war. Only the West and USA declared the cold war was over. Your comments seem to vindicate that statement.

I'm very sorry to hear about this accident. But in reply to early contributors who are dissing Russian kit I merely say "there but for the grace of God go we".

Most navies have suffered from recent submarine accidents over the last few years. HMS Tireless suffered an explosion whilst under the polar ice cap in 2007, losing two crewmembers. In 2004 HMCS Chicoutimi took on water off Ireland, resulting in a fire and the death of a crewmember. And in 2005 USS San Francisco struck an uncharted undersea mountain, with the loss of one crewmember, an incident so serious it nearly led to the loss of the boat.

It's a very dangerous business, the Submarine Service, and very brave men risk their lives every day.

reply to post by Niall197


Totally agree. Russia loses a few subs while uS loses a few space ships...... it happens

Originally posted by hinky
You seem to take much of this personal.

I may it taking this personal, but there are way too many people who just come into this thread to make idiotic and irrelevant comments about something they have no knowledge of. I am just putting them into their place.

Originally posted by hinky
Russia has a history of hiding known facts from the people. The Russian navy has a history of hiding bad publicity or causes of accidents.

Yes, but that ties neither to the quality of Russian technology not to its military capabilities. Stuff like this happens when from time to time, and it should not be an excuse for people to voice their prejudice.

Originally posted by hinky
Russia is still playing it's part of the cold war.

How so? By testing a military submarine which is meant for export to the Indian navy? How is the Cold War tied to this accident in any way?

Originally posted by hinky
Only the West and USA declared the cold war was over.

Oh really? Was that before or after U.S. placed missiles in Eastern Europe, and NATO expanded to include much of Eastern Europe, and possibly Ukraine and Georgia? Was it before or after U.S. funded coups in Ukraine and Georgia to oust pro-Russian politicians and install pro-Western ones?

Who is playing Cold War games here?

Ooops it seems my Polish sources are unreliable, I thought it was the Podolsk, pennant number K223 Calmar class (Delta III), but it was in fact an Akula II with an Indian/Russian crew, more here.

www.strategypage.com...


[edit on 9-11-2008 by Retseh]

Gentlemen,

I must make haste in this post but would like to say ..this incident/accident is a tragedy no matter to who's navy it occurred.

All submariners are aware of the risks and dangers as well as are surface ship sailors.

I do know that the Kursk tragedy was a wake up call to all navy's. Not just to the Russians.

I am not into such chest thumping to the extend as are some of you but Gentlemen ..please realize that all navy personnel are aware of the dangers..the risks....surface and subsurface.
This is not a time for chest thumping.

In continuance of the aspects of the technology..I am aware of incidents where pumps have started on their own...not by manual intent ....but on their own..out of the blue. This is not a new phenomenon...it is however ..very dangerous for a piece of equipment to start on its own...leading to danger to the ship and or personal. Such things are very dangerous. At the wrong time and place such as in this case...it is obviously tragic.
So you see...a fire system doing this is not a surprise to me. It is however a tragedy..and one which needs clear and thorough inspection/investigating and problem solving. It is possible that they may have this same problem lurking on other boats out on patrol or in the ports/yards.

Also ..someone correct me if I am in error...but is not Halon fire suppression system...the Halon is a type of freon based fire system. As to the percentages of such chemical compounds..I do not know. I only know that freon displaces air...and quickly too. Remember..here in a submarine one is in a very confined space..verses..say a surface ship..where ventilation is more readily available by virtue of being already on the surface.

It appears that the boats crew was made up of sailors as well as vendors and yard personnel. This is not an unusual crew compliment on a sea trial.

Not to appear uncourageous but I have no interest in going on sea trials either on a submarine or aircraft carrier..or any other ship. I get enough excitement working on them in construction and or overhaul. Never did want to go out to sea ..I'll pass on that one
.
The US Navy lost civilians as well as navy personel on the sinking of the USS Thresher in the early 1960 during that sea trial. I was told by the olde timers by whom I came into contact...that the company Raytheon would not send people out on sea trials for many years after that due to the people lost on that boat.

Gotta make haste and shove off.
Thanks to all for thier posts.
Orangetom

A quick tour around cyberspace reveals more recent submarine accidents than I originally thought.

2001 USS Greeneville ... collides with and sinks a Japanese fishing vessel, killing nine.
2002 USS Dolphin ... flooding & fire. Boat abandoned, later recovered. No fatalities.
2002 HMS Trafalgar ... strikes rocks off the Scottish coast. 3 injured.
2003 HMAS Dechaineux ... Flooding occurs at maximum depth. Boat nearly lost.
2003 Ming 361 ... Chinese boat, 70 crew killed by suffocation, malfunctioning diesel engines causing oxygen starvation.
2003 USS Hartford ... runs aground entering a Sardinian port. No casualties.
2005 AS-28 ... Russian minisub snags nets & bottoms out. Boat & crew saved by intervention of allied navies.
2006 USS Minneapolis-Saint Paul ... four crewmembers washed overboard & drown off the English south coast.
2007 USS Newport News ... collides with a Japanese oil tanker in the Straits of Hormuz
2008 HMS Superb ... strikes a rock pinnacle in the Red Sea, damaging sonar equipment

And that's just the accidents made publically known. I agree with Orangetom, now's not the time for tubthumping.

harlequin,

you are right I am being a little hard on the russian equipment. I am biased, think other countries do a better job building subs. but, you are right I am over looking the fact that this is tragic and I should be a little more respectful. Sometimes I need you and schaden, orangetom, oxilini etc to set me straight and to stop being a jackass which I can be from time to time, which I am thankful for.

I should recognize any nation that can build a workable sub, it's a serious achievement and it should be recognized as such.

And don't get me wrong I recognize that human beings lost their lives in this incident and be more respectful.

[edit on 9-11-2008 by BASSPLYR]

"

TWENTY people died of gas poisoning and another 22 were injured in an accident on a Russian nuclear submarine in the Sea of Japan that revived memories of the Kursk submarine disaster in 2000.

The submarine's nuclear reactor was not damaged and background radiation levels in the naval testing zone where the accident occurred were "normal," a naval spokesman said.

"During sea trials of a nuclear-powered submarine of the Pacific Fleet the firefighting system went off unsanctioned, killing over 20 people, including servicemen and workers," said Captain Igor Dygalo, the navy's spokesman.

The high-speed attack submarine was being tested after a construction process that began in 1991 and became bogged down after the Soviet collapse.

State media said the vessel had been due to be delivered to India's navy.

Officials said three naval officers and 17 civilians had died in the accident. Capt Dygalo said the victims included servicemen and shipyard workers who had been participating in the trials.

Autopsies showed the victims died from inhaling freon gas released into part of the submarine when its fire extinguishing system activated for reasons that are unclear, news agencies quoted Vladimir Markin, spokesman for the federal investigative committee, as saying.

Source
www.news.com.au...


Thats the latest I have.
Cheers

Mungo

reply to post by BASSPLYR


Glad to hear you say that. From what i can tell from lay reading the margins are always small and that's the reason procedure becomes more and more involved and training ( rather indoctrination) becomes more and more important as the job becomes more hazardous. A combination of very small breaks in procedure combined with equipment not operating as advertised can get result in your zipping up body bags quite quickly.

Edit: I should add that sometimes circumstances just conspire to kill people however good standards and however much experience and training they have. Admittedly that isn't a large proportion in peace time and even when it seems to be the case you do your best to prevent them in private/contract armies by the creation of a few additional procedures.

I suppose we can always trust fox news to expose the fact that war really isn't 'that bad' for the US armed forces.

More active members of the military died during two years of peacetime in the early 1980s than died during a two-year period of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to a government report.

The Congressional Research Service, which compiled war casualty statistics from the Revolutionary War to present day conflicts, reported that 4,699 members of the U.S. military died in 1981 and '82 — a period when the U.S. had only limited troop deployments to conflicts in the Mideast. That number of deaths is nearly 900 more than the 3,800 deaths during 2005 and '06, when the U.S. was fully committed to large-scale military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The CRS, which is the public policy research arm of Congress, issued its findings in the June report "American War and Military Operations Casualties: Lists and Statistics."

Military analysts say the current decrease in military casualties, even during a time of war, is due to a campaign by the Armed Forces to reduce accidents and improve medical care on the battlefield.

"Getting killed on the battlefield is one way that people in the military wind up dying, but it's not the main way."

According to the raw figures, of the 2,380 members of the military who died during active duty in 1981, 1,524 were killed in accidents, 145 by homicide, 457 by illness and 241 from self-inflicted wounds. That compares with the 1,942 killed in 2005; of that number, 632 died from accidents, 739 from hostile action, 49 from homicide, 281 from illness, 150 from self-inflicted wounds and 72 whose causes of death were still pending. Eleven deaths in ’81 and 19 deaths in ’05 were classified as “undetermined.”

www.foxnews.com...

Or for something more up to date :

farm3.static.flickr.com...

I suppose we can find similar data for the Russian armed forces and if anyone wishes to post that we may see just how the safety standards compare. Either way i believe the point becomes obvious that despite the best efforts and the recruitment of some of the smarter folks who sign up to serve in the US navy these things happen everywhere especially as navies grow larger and standards and enforcement of them suffer accordingly.

Stellar

[edit on 9-11-2008 by StellarX]

stellarx,

I can't argue with anything you wrote in that last post. Wish I had more to add to this thread, but really remembering these people who died in this incident, and seeking to understand how it happened and what can be changed in the future to try and prevent it from happening again, there is not much else to say.

[edit on 9-11-2008 by BASSPLYR]

reply to post by BASSPLYR


Hey Olde Man,

Proud to see you stand up straight on this. Well done.

This is indeed a tragedy and proper respects and condolences are due. All these people have families ..the sailors as well as civilians.

Stellar X,

And You too Olde Man. Absolutely correct in this statement.

Glad to hear you say that. From what i can tell from lay reading the margins are always small and that's the reason procedure becomes more and more involved and training ( rather indoctrination) becomes more and more important as the job becomes more hazardous. A combination of very small breaks in procedure combined with equipment not operating as advertised can get result in your zipping up body bags quite quickly.

As equipment becomes more technical and precise...so do the proceedures and training...right on Stellar. The company for which I work has invested much more extensively in training and proceedure compliance in the last ten years....and still increasing in this. I can't begin to count the number of classes ..and requalifications to which I have gone in the last year. Every time I turn around I am being rescheduled for another. Some of us must keep our qualifications up or we will not be able to work in certain speciality fields. This company even has its own department for producing training videos and also training publications as well as the latest proceedures and updates. It seems at times as if the race never ends so to speak.

And yes...Stellar...they can become quite anal ... so to speak.. about this...proceedure compliance. As much as we become weary of it at times...there is indeed a method to the madness.

Well said too Stellar..well said!!

Orangetom




[edit on 9-11-2008 by orangetom1999]