Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

'Storm over the Squal' -- Kursk Sunk Testing High Speed Torpedo
Scientific American ^ | 01/24/2002 | Staff

Posted on 01/25/2002 7:00:04 PM PST by ex-Texan

The Storm over the Squall

It has all the elements of a Tom Clancy thriller: a sunken Russian submarine with all hands lost, sophisticated Western naval surveillance, spies versus counterspies, high-level Kremlin intrigue, and a revolutionary secret-weapons technology that could turn battles. Although the story of the Russian VA-111 Shkval (Squall) supercavitating torpedo had been percolating in the West for years, it was really only last August 12 when the high-speed undersea missile splashed into the news. On that day the K-141Kursk, an Oscar II-class nuclear-powered submarine, sank mysteriously with 118 people on board in 354 feet of the icy waters of the Barents Sea.

More than twice the length of a jumbo jet, the undersea behemoth was one of the most modern subs in the Russian navy. It had been built with a single primary mission in mind--to attack NATO aircraft carrier groups. The Kursk's double-hull titanium construction and internal compartmentation made it extremely resistant to damage; only a very serious mishap could have sent it to the bottom.

The Kursk had been taking part in the largest Russian Northern Fleet exercise in a decade. Western naval intelligence assets were out in force to monitor the maneuvers. Not only were two U.S. Los Angeles-class attack subs on the scene to eavesdrop, but so was the USNS Loyal, a surface spy ship that tows a sensitive sonar array of listening devices. At least one British submarine was cruising nearby as well.

It soon became clear that the Kursk's tragic end was causing East-West political friction when word came that the U.S. had presented the Russian government with detailed surveillance data collected on the day of the incident. Such an exchange was unusual, to say the least, given that it would provide the Russians with the dimensions of the American secret monitoring effort. Whatever the case, it's clear that the U.S. Department of Defense believed the Kursk's mission to be highly significant. The question was why?

Although the Russian government claimed at first that the calamity had been caused by a collision with one of the foreign subs in the vicinity, this assertion was dismissed as disinformation in the West. The scuttlebutt in Pentagon circles was that the sinking was precipitated by an explosion during a test of an improved version of the Shkval torpedo, a unique device that manages to defeat hydrodynamic drag and achieve extremely high subsea speeds by traveling inside a cavity of water vapor. America and the European powers have been seeking information on this novel weapons technology ever since news of it arrived after the fall of the Soviet Union.

Read Rest of Article and View Graphic of Torpedo Scientific American

UNDERWATER MISSLE. The VA-111 Shkval (Squall) supercavitating torpedo, shown here being launched from a Russian Navy Oscar II-class submarine, rockets to a speed over 200 mph, which would give a targeted vessel little chance to evade it.



TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 next last

1 posted on 01/25/2002 7:00:04 PM PST by ex-Texan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
More on the Kursk and 'Warp Drive Underwater'

Another Article from Scientific American

2 posted on 01/25/2002 7:07:33 PM PST by ex-Texan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
[Some Western observers subscribe to entirely different theories regarding the cause of the sinking. One involves the accidental launching of a antisubmarine missile from a Russian cruiser taking part in the naval exercises.

This is my favorite theory.  Russia initially gave a false
timeline for the disaster, saying it had occurred much
later than it actually did.  This was to give the Peter the Great
time to steam away from the accidental launching, and
be out of the area when the explosion was to have happened.
There are statements from people, including non-Russians, aboard
the Peter the Great at the time to give this credence.  The initial
mistiming needs explaining, and this does it.

3 posted on 01/25/2002 7:10:42 PM PST by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
Too bad about the crew of 100 plus people. Glad their technology is not developed enough to deploy against our carriers holding 5000 plus people.
4 posted on 01/25/2002 7:11:36 PM PST by joeyman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
Odd that the Russians are going backward from US technology. The US left liquid propellants for any type of military rocket propelled weapon for solid fuel. The Nike Ajax missile of the '50's used liquid propellants and was considered too cumbersome and too dangerous to continue to the next generation of rockets and missiles.

The Kursk could have sunk because some crewman in the torp room had to smoke when they were transfering liquid Ox.

Rest in peace, Russ.

5 posted on 01/25/2002 7:48:14 PM PST by elbucko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
This is what really happened. Accidental launch and Kaaaboom!
6 posted on 01/25/2002 7:59:01 PM PST by ex-Texan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
It is beginning to look like it. As to the Squall, if you read more of the article, you will see that these babies are already up for sale. China has taken delivery on Moskit-type Sunburn and Yakhont supersonic antiship missiles, along with the Dovremny(sp)-class destroyers to launch them, that can hardly be defended against. Couple that with supercavitating torpedoes below the surface, and I'm glad I'm not in the Navy anymore.
7 posted on 01/25/2002 8:21:03 PM PST by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
bookmark bump
8 posted on 01/25/2002 8:24:49 PM PST by Cacique
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: joeyman
they and the chicoms have other weapons mounted here note the sunburn missiles come as both conventional and nuke, a true sea skimming cruise missile who's sole purpose is to take out aircraft carriers. the chicoms have two now with two more on order.
9 posted on 01/25/2002 8:26:16 PM PST by IRtorqued
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
China has got 'em and maybe one or two bad boys in the M.E. may have a few as well.

China would love to sink a U.S. carrier if we move to defend their invasion of Taiwan. There are even more terrible plans going on in Beijing ..... at least I believe so.

E.g. Scenario -- terror attacks weaken U.S. and China decides to test us on the Wesy Coast.

10 posted on 01/25/2002 8:29:33 PM PST by ex-Texan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah ; Travis McGee ; harpseal
Here's that toy yer always talking about Pooh !

Ya'll stay safe !

11 posted on 01/25/2002 8:30:21 PM PST by Squantos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
E.g. Scenario -- terror attacks weaken U.S. and China decides to test us on the Wesy Coast.

Than all of China becomes *Boomer Bait*.

12 posted on 01/25/2002 8:39:03 PM PST by The Cajun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
Appears the Shkval torpedo works. Now they just have to tweak it to make sure it sinks the right vessel.
13 posted on 01/25/2002 8:45:03 PM PST by LarryLied
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gcruse
China has taken delivery on Moskit-type Sunburn and Yakhont supersonic antiship missiles, along with the Dovremny(sp)-class destroyers to launch them, that can hardly be defended against. Couple that with supercavitating torpedoes below the surface, and I'm glad I'm not in the Navy anymore.

Sounds like you are ready to pack it in. What should we do first, surrender or learn Chinese?

14 posted on 01/25/2002 9:36:17 PM PST by Mind-numbed Robot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Mind-numbed Robot
What should we do first, surrender or learn Chinese?

Attack them first?  I dunno.  You tell me.

15 posted on 01/25/2002 9:41:50 PM PST by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
It only takes two or three Sunburns to take out a carrier. The Yakhont has movable launchers that can operate from shore. The Gulf fleet is in trouble when Iran or Iraq gets these.
16 posted on 01/25/2002 9:43:49 PM PST by gcruse
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ex-Texan
How about China uses Mexican, Arab, and gang connections along with a power shutdown for pumping water on the West Coast? They can tie up a few of our military resources in Colombia, Venezuela, and perhaps again Nicaragua. They also have large immigrant populations in the British Colombia/Seattle area.
17 posted on 01/25/2002 10:18:01 PM PST by Carry_Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
Don't forget they can also shut down the Panama Canal [thanks Jimmy Carter!] and make it difficult to transfer fleet assets between Atlantic & Pacific Oceans.

Regards,

18 posted on 01/26/2002 2:00:33 AM PST by Jimmy Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
All of those options may be used. China now has control of the Panama Canal. China's PLA owns COSCO, and Cosco has been caught delivering tons of weapons to the Zapatistas in Mexico.

Los Angeles may become the next Ground Zero.

19 posted on 01/26/2002 3:12:48 AM PST by ex-Texan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: IRtorqued
...they and the chicoms have other weapons mounted here note the sunburn missiles come as both conventional and nuke...

1. There are weapon systems onboard surface ships designed to defend against missle threat (the last ditch one being the CIWS gattling gun)

2. There is no counter to a 200 mph torpedo - I can't even think of what the counter would be aside from not letting the submarine get into range in the first place.

20 posted on 01/27/2002 8:53:25 AM PST by joeyman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-26 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson