Russian Submarine Fire (Updates)

[TomSea]

Fourteen Sailors Killed in Russia Submersible Fire
By Reuters

MOSCOW—Fourteen crew on board a Russian defense ministry submersible were killed after a fire broke out, the ministry was quoted as saying by Russian news agencies.

The deep-sea research vessel was carrying out a military survey in Russian territorial waters, it was quoted as saying.

The incident took place on Monday, July 1, and the fire has been extinguished.

Read more at: https://www.theepochtimes.com/fourteen-sailors-killed-in-russia-submersible-fire_2986700.html?utm_source=pushengage&utm_medium=pushnotification&utm_campaign=pushengage

[Elderberry]

USNI News  By: Sam LaGrone and Ben Werner July 2, 2019

https://news.usni.org/2019/07/02/14-sailors-die-on-secretive-russian-nuclear-submarine

“On July 1, 14 submariners – sailors – died in Russian territorial waters as a result of inhaling combustion products aboard a research submersible vehicle designated for studying the seafloor and the bottom of the World Ocean in the interests of the Russian Navy after a fire broke out during bathymetric measurements,” read a translation of the statement from the state-controlled TASS news service.

The fire was extinguished “thanks to the self-sacrificing actions of the team,” the ministry said. The incident is believed to have occurred off Russia’s northern shore in the Barents Sea on Monday, but the MoD has not specified.

The submarine was towed to the Russian North Fleet headquarters in Severomork and an investigation is underway, according to the news agency.

According to a report in the state-controlled Sputnik news service, Russian President Vladimir Putin said seven captains of the first rank and two Heroes of Russia have died in the incident. Putin stated.

“This is a great loss”, Putin said.

Losharik is among the most mysterious of the closely guarded fleet. Fielded in the late 1990s, specifics for the nuclear-powered boat are few. It’s estimated to carry a crew of about 25 and can dive to thousands of feet below the surface, according to the Military Russia blog.

The about 2000-ton boat can travel slung under the belly of a specially modified Delta III nuclear ballistic missile submarine, according to open source intelligence analysts. The purpose and capabilities of Losharik are shrouded in mystery.




A cutaway rendering of the Losharik (AS-12) submersible used with permission. H I Sutton Image

The sub’s name is derived from a popular Russian cartoon horse that’s made out of juggling balls. The use of orb-shaped compartments, while diminishing the amount of space for living quarters, operating equipment and the propulsion unit, makes the sub stronger and able to dive deeper than a traditional submarine hull.

As for what Losharik does, it’s suspected the Russian government has used the sub’s deep-sea diving capability to extened Russia’s territorial claims to the sea floor under the Arctic Ocean. In 2012, Losharik was part of a large Russian naval exercise in the Arctic, collecting samples to prove the Lomonsov and Mendeleyev Ridges on the sea floor are part of the Russian continental shelf, according to Unconstrained Foreign Direct Investment: An Emerging Challenge to Arctic Security, a 2017 report by CNA.

More at link

[sneakypete]

Not much scarier than a fire aboard when you are submerged.

[TomSea]

Excerpt:

A high-ranking crew in a shallow sea We asked Russian military experts to explain the Barents Sea submarine fire
12:57 pm, July 3, 2019
Source: Meduza

....

Mikhail Khodarenok

Former employee of the Russian military’s General Headquarters, now a military columnist for Gazeta.ru

It was a tragedy. Seven first-rank captains, three second-rank captains, and a captain-lieutenant died. Four people survived, possibly including civilians. Of course, some might think to ask how civilians could turn up on a craft like this one, but there is actually nothing unusual there. The capacity of the vessel was a crew of 14 and a research group of up to five people. It is entirely possible that the research group included civilians. They also received burns during the fire.

More generally, a fire on a vessel that is underwater is the most frightening thing you can imagine. My sources in the Defense Ministry say the fire was sparked by a short circuit. Then, the hydrogen vapors coming from the batteries caught fire, and disaster followed. The reactors on submarines and other deep-sea vessels aren’t typically very well-protected. Technology is technology: chance lurks around every corner, and it’s impossible to foresee every possible event.

Read more at: https://meduza.io/en/feature/2019/07/03/a-high-ranking-crew-in-a-shallow-sea

Excerpt again:

‘Ask the Defense Ministry’ A transcript of the Kremlin's non-answers on the Severomorsk deep-sea fire that killed 14 sailors
8:41 am, July 3, 2019
Source: Meduza

...

Ekho Moskvy: So the Norwegians are just spreading disinformation?

Peskov: Ask the Defense Ministry. There was an announcement yesterday.

https://meduza.io/en/feature/2019/07/03/ask-the-defense-ministry

There was some sort of story per Norway in this, Norway said they had not found increased rates of radiation:

Norway Says Not Detecting High Radiation After Russia Submarine Fire
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2019/07/03/world/europe/03reuters-russia-submersible-norway.html

[edpc]

That sub is no research vessel. You can believe it’s used in espionage, sabotage, or counterespionage activities.


Stealing secrets beneath the sea Spying: A new book on Cold War submarine espionage brings to the surface the exploits of U.S. sailors who silently cruised the icy waters off the Soviet Union.

https://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bs-xpm-1998-11-22-1998326043-story.html

[EdJames]

I think that sub was tapping undersea comm cables....

 

[TomSea]

I'm going to prioritize this and put this as one of the top threads. There's certainly a lot of info, a lot of info we are NOT getting, it looks suspicious to me.

Here is some Radio Free Europe coverage, I don't think, on their own proprietary stories, one is even dealing with copy-writes... excerpted nonetheless.

Late Reports, An Article Scrubbed: Details Scant Following Deadly Russian Submarine Fire

MOSCOW -- At 11 a.m. on July 1, Yevgeny Karpov, a journalist from the Arctic port of Severomorsk, received a call from one of his sources at the city’s naval base – the headquarters of Russia’s Northern Fleet.

An accident had occurred on one of the vessels, he was told.

“He informed me, on condition of anonymity, that the naval hospital is preparing to receive a large number of casualties,” Karpov told RFE/RL on July 3.

Less than two hours later, Karpov got a call from a man who did not introduce himself. He was asked to delete his article.

More: http://severomorsk.bezformata.com/listnews/severlife-ru-postupila-informatciya-o/75966806/

I don't ordinarily consider Debka a good source here but what they are saying really does seem to make sense.

https://www.debka.com/the-mystery-of-the-ultra-secret-russian-losharik-submarine-disaster/

So, we can see what shakes out.

[TomSea]

Russia submersible fire 'was in battery compartment'

Russia says the main cause of the deadly fire on board a submersible which killed 14 crew on Monday was a fire in the battery compartment.

Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu also said the top-secret military craft was nuclear-powered but the reactor had been isolated from the fire.

Fourteen crew members died of smoke inhalation as a result of the fire on the submersible in the Barents Sea.

The craft is now at Severomorsk, the main base of Russia's Northern Fleet.

Read more at: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-48865332?intlink_from_url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world&link_location=live-reporting-story

[TomSea]

This analysis below is pretty much what a lot of analysts are saying, this  Losharik named sub, had a mothership.

New Details On Russian Submarine Fire Emerge Along With An Intriguing Schematic (Updated)

...

The few details we have seem to point to a possible scenario where Losharik was attached to its mothership when the fire broke out or its crew got the sub back to its mothership just before the fire overwhelmed them, with the civilian being saved before sealing-off a compartment—or possibly the entire submarine—to protect Losharik and maybe even the larger submarine it was attached to from being completely lost. It's also possible that eye witness accounts are inaccurate and that Losharik was operating independently and was able to make it to the surface intact. Whatever the situation was, the official narrative from the highest levels of the Russian military is that the highly-trained crew on the small, but extremely valuable submarine heroically died saving at least one civilian onboard.

Read more at: https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/28814/new-details-on-russian-submarine-fire-emerge-along-with-an-intriguing-schematic

That's a main point in a nutshell. Witnesses? I'll have to read on.

[sneakypete]

Russia submersible fire 'was in battery compartment'

Russia says the main cause of the deadly fire on board a submersible which killed 14 crew on Monday was a fire in the battery compartment.

Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu also said the top-secret military craft was nuclear-powered but the reactor had been isolated from the fire.

@TomSea

Ok,I know next to nothing about any submarine,never mind specialized research vessels. Even as ignorant as I am,I still have to question why a sub would have a nuclear reactor and batteries. Why would it even need batteries?

[Elderberry]

The Deadly Russian Submarine Fire (Updated)
Reports and rumors are flying about the accident, which may have been aboard the shadowy spy sub Losharik, as Putin clears his schedule.
BY JOSEPH TREVITHICK
JULY 2, 2019
THE WAR ZONE

https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/28804/heres-everything-we-know-about-the-deadly-russian-submarine-fire

[TomSea]

I think that sub was tapping undersea comm cables....

 

Check the latest:

https://futurism.com/russian-sub-fire-internet-cables

Russian Sub That Caught Fire Possibly Sent to Cut Internet Cables

 And it may have been nuclear-powered, too.
 
 Kristin Houser(https://futurism.com/authors/kristin)19 hours ago
 
Fire Down Below
 
On Monday, a Russian submarine caught fire during a mission, killing 14 sailors on board.

 But the public didn’t find out about the incident until the next day, when Russia finally [released a statement](https://www.cnbc.com/2019/07/02/sailors-killed-in-russia-submersible-fire-ministry.html) about the accident — though two days after the event, the nation still wouldn’t say exactly what kind of sub caught fire or whether it was nuclear-powered.

A possible reason for Russia’s caginess? ...  .

Cutting cables? I had not heard this This certainly puts things in a new perspective, Kudos, @EdJames  .

Now, this isn't proven or anything.... I would think, it may well be so.  A theory or what? If this is so, it blows a hole in everything, could they be cutting cable to people would not get the net in Russia maybe? I've got to read the whole article.

[TomSea]

@TomSea

Ok,I know next to nothing about any submarine,never mind specialized research vessels. Even as ignorant as I am,I still have to question why a sub would have a nuclear reactor and batteries. Why would it even need batteries?

@sneakypete

Maybe batteries for some tasks. I am not an expert either.

[sneakypete]

Check the latest:
Cutting cables? I had not heard this This certainly puts things in a new perspective, Kudos, @EdJames  .

Now, this isn't proven or anything.... I would think, it may well be so.  A theory or what? If this is so, it blows a hole in everything, could they be cutting cable to people would not get the net in Russia maybe? I've got to read the whole article.

@TomSea

They weren't cutting cables. That is a waste of time because an immediate repair order will be issued.

They might have been tapping into the cables,though.

[jpsb]

Boeing 787 has the same problem. Boeing "fixed" the problem by putting the batteries in a fire proof box.

[sneakypete]

Boeing 787 has the same problem. Boeing "fixed" the problem by putting the batteries in a fire proof box.

@jpsb

Airliners have batteries because unlike subs,they don't have nuclear reactors.

[Axeslinger]

@TomSea @sneakypete
The battery banks (picture a room filled with batteries) are primarily there in the event of a problem which results in the reactor being scrammed (shutdown) or being taken offline.  The vessel still needs power to critical systems which on a sub will be the pumps used for ballast control, the reactor cooling systems, propulsion, steering, emergency lighting, etc

Source: I am a graduate of USN Nuclear Power School.

[Elderberry]

Specification
Note that the specifications available online for this submarine are often incorrect. The below are best estimates.
Boat: AS-12 (Factory number: 210) "Losharik"
Class: Project 10831 (NATO: Norsub-5)
Laid down: 16th July 1990
Launched: 26th August 1995
Entered Service: 1997
Displacement: <1,000 tons
Speed: 10-11kts submerged (estimate)
Operating depth: 1,000m (3,300ft)
Length: ~70m
Beam: ~7m
Power plant: 1 x nuclear reactor driving a single screw. Estimated 5 MW
Crew: 25

http://www.hisutton.com/Spy%20Sub%20-%20Project%2010831%20Losharik.html

[Bigun]

@TomSea @sneakypete
The battery banks (picture a room filled with batteries) are primarily there in the event of a problem which results in the reactor being scrammed (shutdown) or being taken offline.  The vessel still needs power to critical systems which on a sub will be the pumps used for ballast control, the reactor cooling systems, propulsion, steering, emergency lighting, etc

Source: I am a graduate of USN Nuclear Power School.

Makes perfect sense to me!  Every offshore oil production platform I have ever been on (quite a few) has a similar system

[jpsb]

@jpsb

Airliners have batteries because unlike subs,they don't have nuclear reactors.

True but they do have powerful jet engines that produce a lot of electricity. IIRC the 787 uses batteries to start the engines that would not be necessary with a nuke power plant since they are pretty much always running


The 787 main electrical power generation and start system is a four-channel variable frequency system with two 250 kVA VFSGs on each of the two main engines. The power from these generators is supplied to the main load buses through generator feeders and generator circuit breakers (see fig. 3).



The variable frequency starter generator is a six-pole machine within an aluminum housing driven directly from the main engine gearbox. The generator is a brushless, three-phase, alternating current, and variable frequency synchronous machine. It has a nominal rating of 235 volts alternating current (VAC), 250 kVA, three phases, and 360–800 Hz output.

[TomSea]

@TomSea @sneakypete
The battery banks (picture a room filled with batteries) are primarily there in the event of a problem which results in the reactor being scrammed (shutdown) or being taken offline.  The vessel still needs power to critical systems which on a sub will be the pumps used for ballast control, the reactor cooling systems, propulsion, steering, emergency lighting, etc

Source: I am a graduate of USN Nuclear Power School.

Good, you answered @sneakypete  's question. I did not ask the question.

[sneakypete]

@TomSea @sneakypete
The battery banks (picture a room filled with batteries) are primarily there in the event of a problem which results in the reactor being scrammed (shutdown) or being taken offline.  The vessel still needs power to critical systems which on a sub will be the pumps used for ballast control, the reactor cooling systems, propulsion, steering, emergency lighting, etc

Source: I am a graduate of USN Nuclear Power School.

@Axeslinger

Thanks for the correction. I had no idea,and don't really understand why they can't come up with a better solution than batteries.

[Elderberry]

They need backup power to the reactor. They very well couldn't raise a snorkel to run a backup diesel. They could run fuel cells.

[EdJames]

Check the latest:
Cutting cables? I had not heard this This certainly puts things in a new perspective, Kudos, @EdJames  .

Now, this isn't proven or anything.... I would think, it may well be so.  A theory or what? If this is so, it blows a hole in everything, could they be cutting cable to people would not get the net in Russia maybe? I've got to read the whole article.

My initial thought (based on what I read), was that they were applying taps...

@TomSea

[Smokin Joe]

@jpsb

Airliners have batteries because unlike subs,they don't have nuclear reactors.

Redundancy is king!

As an example, a 737 or A320 has three generators onboard (one on each engine and one attached to the APU). >snip< (US Airways 1549) when the second engine failed, the Ram Air Turbine would provide backup electrical and hydraulic power. While not as capable as the APU, it would have provided power for flight instruments for the captain and flight-control computers and hydraulic power for the flight controls

https://www.usatoday.com/story/travel/columnist/cox/2013/05/06/ask-the-captain-do-vital-functions-on-planes-have-backup-power/2138467/