kev 99
Member
Last edited by a moderator:
Twenty die on Russian submarine
- Thread starter kev 99
- Start date
- Status
A tragic loss of life. My sympathies go out.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/11/09/2414415.htm?section=justin
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/11/09/2414415.htm?section=justin
Really? The submarine in question was on trials and brand new so maintenance should not be an issue. The system malfunction was in a fire suppression system that went off automatically so hardly a crew training issue.
Everyone is welcome to their opinion but a lot of people should really think about intaking a bit more information before forming a view point on an issue.
that many casualties after auto fire suppression activated would seem to indicate that it was a Halon system.
what will be of interest was whether it occurred in thge weaps stowage area - as Halon has been a "no no" for most modern militaries in habitated environments for more than 10 years.
we certainly banned its use in confined and unsecurable spaces more than 12 years ago.
one article states that the chemical was freon,i didnt know that freon was used for fire fighting ,i thought it was coolant ,that has been banned due to its adverse effects on the ozone layer.
here is the link and the article:
http://indiatoday.digitaltoday.in/i...view&issueid=79&id=19761&Itemid=1§ionid=4
Indian Navy experts reacting to preliminary reports of the accident on board the Nerpa say it could have been the result of an accidental discharge of deadly Freon gas used in the AFFF system to combat serious fires on submarines.
The Akula-2 nuclear powered attack submarine, the Nerpa, was on sea trials off the Sea of Japan on Saturday when 21 personnel were killed due to an accidental activation of its fire fighting system.
I'd say Halon as well but usually these systems have a 30 second to a minute delay to allow the closure of ventilation system and to allow the crew a chance to escape.
The USN only uses it on engineering and HAZMAT spaces
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Having read the article, it appears that there were a large number of civilians aboard, likely contractors from the shipyard. The sub Nerpa had 208 people aboard, of which 81 were seamen, and the normal crew of an Akula II-class SSN is ~73. Part of the speculation is that of the civilians (17 of the 20 who died) did not know how to use the individual breathing kits, which as I understand it are to be employed in a situation just like this to keep crew from being suffocated.
I am also not so certain that maintenance would not have been the initial cause of the problem. Construction Nerpa was apparently started in 1991, but due to funding issues, had to stop. Depending on how far along it was prior to stopping, as well as the conditions underwhich the sub was mothballed awaiting completion, I can easily see that being a potential contributing factor. Particularly if there was a quality control issue on resumption of construction.
I can see where a situation, not unlike what occurred aboard HMCS Chicoutimi could have happened. Having laid in a dock, corrision could have occurred in wiring or on terminals, etc which the dockyard could have ignored or just overlooked when construction resumed. And then under just the right (or perhaps wrong) set of circumstances, events unfolded with tragic results.
It will be interesting to see what the Russian Navy announces as their findings of what caused this accident
-Cheers
Yes and there are many cases of ship's being built in more conventional time schedules with faulty components and the onset of corrosion thanks to poor shipyard practices. But the post I was responding to presented the stereotypical view of Russian submarines rusting at pierside with a crew of conscripts as the factual cause of this accident without any attempt to check the many news stories that show a very different story. This kind of detail should in no way validate such an approach to expressing opinion.
With a 140 extra people on board, that is probably the first place to start looking...
Way too big a crowd, especially as it sounds like most were untrained in submarine operations.
Speculative here - but it sounds almost like every man & his dog who had something to do with the contract were getting in on the act, & people like that tend to act like they know a hell of a lot more than they do, ie. I've got the right to poke around in stuff I have no idea about how it really works.
Hopefully we'll find out what really happened down the track..
Another article:
_http://www.spacewar.com/2006/081109180700.ovo688so.html
Way too big a crowd, especially as it sounds like most were untrained in submarine operations.
Speculative here - but it sounds almost like every man & his dog who had something to do with the contract were getting in on the act, & people like that tend to act like they know a hell of a lot more than they do, ie. I've got the right to poke around in stuff I have no idea about how it really works.
Hopefully we'll find out what really happened down the track..
Another article:
_http://www.spacewar.com/2006/081109180700.ovo688so.html
Todjaeger
Potstirrer
Quite true about errors and problematical ship construction. I remember hearing of a sub built in Electric Boat's Groton facility which due to an error when reading the blueprints, had a number of the fittings installed backwards. IIRC it was either the USS Connecticut or the USS Jimmy Carter.
From what I remember of the story, the vessel had to be re-worked while under construction due to the construction issues. For some reason, submariners do not like it when their torpedoe tubes are installed to fire into the sub, instead of out of it. Makes them cranky...
-Cheers
Guys my reference to poor maintenance, and poor training was a more general lamentation about the state of the Russian Navy, rather then a critique of this specific incident. I don't see that we have enough information, at least at the moment, to make more specific conclusions as to what caused this tragic event.
I wouldn't say that most of those civilians were untrained, chances are they were systems engineers and other specialists to be on hand for the shake down, I think most were killed because there was not enough emergency equipment for everyone on board, probably enough for the crew and a few extra's but I'd be willing to bet they never brought on extra safety gear for all the contractors.
Many fire retardant systems work by suppressing Oxygen. The chemicals they use to do so cannot be easily detected by humans. So such systems are actually very dangerous. If - as it appears to be - in this case a system malfunctioned and released the fire suppression gas without warning the people in that compartment wouldn’t have known what was going on. Suddenly they find themselves unable to breathe because there is no Oxygen in the air. Surviving that situation is as much about luck than experience and training.
If you want to talk about a poorly put together and constructed USN ship just look at the San Antonio.
Accident on Russian nuclear sub suffocates 20
It could be a combination of crowding, lack of safety gear/training, and system mulfunctions. They still probably pull sailors from other subs to comlete the crew before going to sea, like in Soviet times- most of them didn't even know each other! Hence, poor coordination.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/11/09/russia.submarine/index.html#cnnSTCVideo
It could be a combination of crowding, lack of safety gear/training, and system mulfunctions. They still probably pull sailors from other subs to comlete the crew before going to sea, like in Soviet times- most of them didn't even know each other! Hence, poor coordination.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/11/09/russia.submarine/index.html#cnnSTCVideo
Last edited:
there were supposedly a more automated system which the Indians had asked for which according to some sources decided to activate due to a software issue which is as frightening as another ideas of the cause.
will the Russian report be reliable as the Russian high command acted shamefully over the Kursk.
will the Russian report be reliable as the Russian high command acted shamefully over the Kursk.
The submarine is allegedly destined for the VMF rather then India. It was to be accepted into the VMF at the end of this year.
http://newsru.com/russia/09nov2008/ythgf.html
http://newsru.com/russia/09nov2008/ythgf.html
- Status