General Discussions
This is the place to discuss general issues related to the U-boat war or the war at sea in WWII.
RE: Kursk
Posted by:
John Griffiths
()
Date: May 28, 2001 07:35PM
<HTML>Yuri,
I believe that the ethics and morals behind the decision to raise the Kursk are excellent, as it allows closure to those relatives of the crew to at least know their loved ones are coming home.
I also believe - know - that Russia does not have the technology to lift the Kursk - most nations outside of the US are in the same situation - which is why the Dutch have been contracted. No-one knows salvage better than the Dutch.
I will reiterate, however, the issue about the wreck being sectioned for lift. The mid / stern sections contain the reactors and the risk of pollution is far too great for the Soviets to leave it on the sea bed. As early as February this year, Western Naval Sources forecast that if the wreck was to be lifted then only the stern / midsection would be lifted - not the bow. The reasoning behind this was that Senior Russian Naval Officers stated that the bow section is to be destroyed in situ afer the lift. Western analysts state the reasons as:
1 - That the bow section was the seat of the disaster that sunk the Kursk.
2 - That a torpedo explosion in the fore end caused her to rupture internally and was the cause of the loss.
3 - If the bow section was lifted, the whole world would see that the damage caused was a torpedo firing malfunction and subsequent explosion.
4 - Raising the bow section would show, clearly, that no collision took place.
Politically, 1 - 4 cannot be allowed to happen. It would lose faith in the Navy, would show that Riussia has a continuing pathological mistrust of the West - and would show Putin as a liar. By leaving the bow section down, Russia can continue to blame the West which, in terms of centreing the nation behind Putin, is a good move.
In terms of export sales, any defects in what is termed a \'state of the art\' Soviet leading edge warship would be a disaster and would lose Russia sorely needed hard earned currency. The whole exercise is a political one designed to maintain blame on the West and ensure Putin - who lost face when she sank by being so ignorant and insensitive - is suddenly transformed into a caring person.
Yuri, if my posts sound a bit anti-Russian to you - as I am sure they do - then please realise that it is not a personal attack. I am only reporting what is freely available to all.
The loss of the Kursk is a tragedy that shook the world and created great sympathy for the seamen who died aboard her performing their duties. That is no criticism. The raising of the boat is, however, an exercise in political skullduggery dressed up as concern.
Politics, whether we like it or not, dominate our lives. The covert / overt reasons for leaving the bow section on the sea bed will possibly remain a secret. However, if Russia continues to blame the West for a collision - and there has never been any proof shown that a collision took place - then we are also allowed to theorise on what we percieve as the reason for her loss.
No disrespect. Please do not take this so.
Aye,
John</HTML>
I believe that the ethics and morals behind the decision to raise the Kursk are excellent, as it allows closure to those relatives of the crew to at least know their loved ones are coming home.
I also believe - know - that Russia does not have the technology to lift the Kursk - most nations outside of the US are in the same situation - which is why the Dutch have been contracted. No-one knows salvage better than the Dutch.
I will reiterate, however, the issue about the wreck being sectioned for lift. The mid / stern sections contain the reactors and the risk of pollution is far too great for the Soviets to leave it on the sea bed. As early as February this year, Western Naval Sources forecast that if the wreck was to be lifted then only the stern / midsection would be lifted - not the bow. The reasoning behind this was that Senior Russian Naval Officers stated that the bow section is to be destroyed in situ afer the lift. Western analysts state the reasons as:
1 - That the bow section was the seat of the disaster that sunk the Kursk.
2 - That a torpedo explosion in the fore end caused her to rupture internally and was the cause of the loss.
3 - If the bow section was lifted, the whole world would see that the damage caused was a torpedo firing malfunction and subsequent explosion.
4 - Raising the bow section would show, clearly, that no collision took place.
Politically, 1 - 4 cannot be allowed to happen. It would lose faith in the Navy, would show that Riussia has a continuing pathological mistrust of the West - and would show Putin as a liar. By leaving the bow section down, Russia can continue to blame the West which, in terms of centreing the nation behind Putin, is a good move.
In terms of export sales, any defects in what is termed a \'state of the art\' Soviet leading edge warship would be a disaster and would lose Russia sorely needed hard earned currency. The whole exercise is a political one designed to maintain blame on the West and ensure Putin - who lost face when she sank by being so ignorant and insensitive - is suddenly transformed into a caring person.
Yuri, if my posts sound a bit anti-Russian to you - as I am sure they do - then please realise that it is not a personal attack. I am only reporting what is freely available to all.
The loss of the Kursk is a tragedy that shook the world and created great sympathy for the seamen who died aboard her performing their duties. That is no criticism. The raising of the boat is, however, an exercise in political skullduggery dressed up as concern.
Politics, whether we like it or not, dominate our lives. The covert / overt reasons for leaving the bow section on the sea bed will possibly remain a secret. However, if Russia continues to blame the West for a collision - and there has never been any proof shown that a collision took place - then we are also allowed to theorise on what we percieve as the reason for her loss.
No disrespect. Please do not take this so.
Aye,
John</HTML>
