JOCHEN PEIPER Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 Well if the loss of life on the Stricken sub "KURSK" is total then its through no fault but their own... I feel sadness at what has happened,,, to the sailors and their families,... HOWEVER,,, bloody Russian politician's who can't just swallow their pride and ask for help pisses me off... And not having a decent rescue sub of their own is just insane... The british do and they when compared with the russians have a pissweak sub-fleet and yet have a better rescue sub ??????? WEIRD... I put it down to economic meltdown in russia today... ------------------ Quote. If you see a white plane it's American, if you see a black plane it's the RAF. If you see no planes at all it's the Luftwaffe." ---German soldier on the Western Front, 1944. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
howardb Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 Somehow I don't think these kinds of posts will be particularly well received here. Try to tone down your thoughts a bit as we have several Russian people on our board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rwwald Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 Jochen if you played a few pbem games with people whose SECOND language was english you would most likely begin to learn the english language. ------------------ Gramps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 Sadly though Jochen's reaction is a mirror image of the reaction of the general public, uninformed as it is of the particulars and difficulties inherent in the situation. As such it has some value in delineating common reactions for us but is nonetheless quite "worrisome" nonetheless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tailz Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by JOCHEN PEIPER: HOWEVER,,, bloody Russian politician's who can't just swallow their pride and ask for help pisses me off... And not having a decent rescue sub of their own is just insane... The british do and they when compared with the russians have a pissweak sub-fleet and yet have a better rescue sub ??????? WEIRD... I put it down to economic meltdown in russia today... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> The political delay is completely irrelevant... the RN has stated publicly their rescue vehicle could NOT have been on-site any earlier, even if the Russian's had requested assistance on day one. Furthermore, you can't blame ANY navy for not wanting 'foreign powers' involved in retrieving a, comparatively, brand new piece of hardware. If a Seawolf was bottomed off of Chesapeake Bay, do you seriously believe the USN would ask for help from the Russians? (Assuming the Russians had a suitable rescue device and the US didn't) Lock this one up... PLEASE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
howardb Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 Personally I would think the general public would wait with that kind of comments until the Russian people have had some time mourning for their fathers, brothers and sons on that boat. If someone is to critisize it's them. I don't think they need help critisizing Russian politics right now, what they need is moral support. To my Russian neighbours all I can say is I certainly hope some of the Norwegian deep sea divers sent in can be of assistance and something good can be taught of this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commissar Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 Being Russian myself, I cannot blame Jochen for his strong feelings. It is something all Russian people have felt for a long time now, but unfortunately un-able to do anything about it. Russia throughout its long history has been well known for its low value of human life. In the time of the Czars where cities would be built on the dead bodies of the millions of working serfs that were forced to build them, to WW2 with it's "wave of bodies" tactics employed for almost a year by commanders. It's still in effect now, and I believe it will be for a long time yet, unfortunately. As strange as it might seem to outsiders however, Russian people have come to accept it as their duty and are still very patriotic towards their homeland. Well, my salutes go off to the poor sailors on the downed Kursk. ------------------ ...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..." - Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mr. Johnson-<THC>- Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 I feel the same way as you Commissar. I hope things improve there for the Russian people. Its been a very tough last few hundred years for the Russians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 Interesting point about if the Americans found themselves with a sunk sub, such as maybe a LosAngeles class, and whether or not they would ask for help. I think here in America most of our Military types put as much value on individual life as much as their Russian counterparts. I don't blame them or critize them at all. I feel they are just doing thier jobs, which is national defense, and if they feel allowing such access to a highly classified submarine could possibly jeprodize national defense they are gonna make the call. Regardless of the life lost. On the other hand... Our politicians I feel respect (fear?) public opinion more than thier Russian counter parts. So, if our country rose up and called out to our leaders demanding assistance outside the US I think they would respond much quicker. THe Russians... well.. you've seen what has happened. No offense but the state of Russian politics at times borders on organized crime I feel. I hope Putin cleans things up. Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Aitken Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 Regardless of what should be done now that the disaster has happened, the Russian government is guilty of sending men out on dangerous missions without proper insurance. It's ridiculous that they should be unable to rescue the men themselves. They're desperate to portray an image of military strength, but it's really just a fragile facade, and it's the Russian men and women who suffer the consequences. jshandorf wrote: > On the other hand... Our politicians I feel respect (fear?) public opinion more than thier Russian counter parts. Very, very true. If the British or American governments let the crew of a sub asphyxiate on the sea bed, there would be anarchy. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mr. Johnson-<THC>- Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 Originally posted by jshandorf: "On the other hand... Our politicians I feel respect (fear?) public opinion more than thier Russian counter parts. So, if our country rose up and called out to our leaders demanding assistance outside the US I think they would respond much quicker. THe Russians... well.. you've seen what has happened. No offense but the state of Russian politics at times borders on organized crime I feel. I hope Putin cleans things up." At what cost? And why would he clean up the people who supported him in his rise to power? And whats wrong with Anarchy? It seems to me like orgnaized government is in competition with infectious diseases as to who can kill more. Anarchy is the political philosophy that each individual is the sole authority on whats best for that individual. And as long as you don't hurt or damage anyone else or anyone else's property then there is no need for self-policing. hehehe, funny I don't know how to turn this into CM joke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Commissar Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 Some info you might not have known - David mentioned dangerous missions. Do you know WHY the Sub encountered problems? Let me post some information which was broadcasted on Russian news programs: First off, it was as much a military planning blunder as one of the crew. The Kursk was on a training mission. For reasons I know not, the training area of the ocean was only 100 metres deep (maybe they were passing through the area). The Kursk apparently was passing close to some civilian ship, and to avoid it, decided to dive rapidly (again, for reasons I don't know). So, considering the Kursk is 150 metres long (they showed Russian footage of the Kurs when it was first built, it is GIGANTIC), the sub hit the Ocean floor and apparently a few torpedos exploded. There you have it, or at least what was fed to Russian audiences. Russia's politicians are crooked, every single last one of them. Since the break up of the USSR, Russian economy has gone haywire. Putin did clean up some, by throwing in jail a few of the rich buiseness men who were pretty much controlling and exploiting the economy. Of course, in this case he let his reputation take a big hit. I'm interested although admitedly not very eager to see where the situation goes from there. Speaking as one who still has relatives in Russia, I do not wish to see them in more trouble then they already are in. ------------------ ...Every position, every meter of Soviet soil must be defended to the last drop of blood..." - Segment from Order 227 "Not a step back" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tailz Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken: Regardless of what should be done now that the disaster has happened, the Russian government is guilty of sending men out on dangerous missions without proper insurance. It's ridiculous that they should be unable to rescue the men themselves. If the British or American governments let the crew of a sub asphyxiate on the sea bed, there would be anarchy. David <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Exactly what type of insurance should they have? Last time I checked, serving with the military carried the implied risk of death or injury in the service of one's government. Is the Russian government any more guilty than the Canadian government, or US or British, or French etc., when troops are deployed for training or otherwise, and an accident happens? What 'dangerous mission' was the KURSK on? I thought the news said it was some sort of fleet maneuver/training mission? Her complement is 109 (?) Ten extra crew... believed to be observers I think... how risky/dangerous could her mission possibly have been? Accidents happen... and military service carries more risk than most careers... blame is hardly relevant, unless evidence comes to light suggesting the Kursk was being operated at beyond her performance envelope or in a deliberately overly risky manner for a training mission. .... anyway, what's your favorite CM mod? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dumbo Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 Actually if it was an American Sub they would probably be asking for the same help from the Royal Navy. The reason being that the RN sub is uniquely designed for this exact situation and it is closer to the accident site than any american rescue sub. Both the Russian navy and US navy and the RN have lots of "standard" rescue craft and frankly the special sub being sent is rarely of any use (which is why the Brits havent made any more and this one is 20 years old). There is nothing wrong or shameful about this if it was a British sub I wouldnt feel at all bad if we dailed up for some Russian Sub hunting air craft (which are very good btw) or some American Airlift capacity. When lives are at stake in peacetime who cares about flags? _dumbo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 "Regardless of what should be done now that the disaster has happened, the Russian government is guilty of sending men out on dangerous missions without proper insurance." Umm, it's a training mission. NO government in the world sends guys out on training missions with rescue choppers etc etc sitting on the tarmac "just in case". It is too expensive and you shouldn't be chastisting people as being "guilty" when not even the richest country in the world has a different SOP regarding subs sailing. "It's ridiculous that they should be unable to rescue the men themselves." Let's look at the facts... After taking about a day to figure out the basics of what happened they had asked for their own navy to send their own rescue submersibles in. Those rescue submersibles had to contend with terrible weather.. However, in the 2 days since the weather has gotten half-way decent they've made over twenty attempts to get to the sub. These attempts were made in near-zero visibility. The rescue submersibles HAVE managed to get down to the sub and HAVE managed to attempt docking with both rear and forward escape hatches. BOTH hatches got deformed by the explosion and THAT is why the submersible couldn't dock. IF a US sub had been in similar circumstances I doubt they'd have gotten a DSRV out much quicker and NO DSRV can dock with a sub whose hatches are cluster****ed unless it is equipped to simply disregard the hatch and go through the hull itself. In essence, again, I doubt any Navy in the world would have been able to do materially better given the terrible shape of the Kursk. I suggest you really go and check your facts. Hell, the fact that the internal bulheads held after the second explosion ( which measured a 3.5 on the Richter scale) says volumes about how tough the Oscar class is. In many ways the Russians have done some wonderful things with respect to metallurgy ( and lets not forget that CHobham should REALLY be called Burlington and was invented by the British... of course it has been refined by the US..). My simple point is that I think you are taking too "populist" and "uninformed" a view of things. It's considerably more complicated than you might initially think, as with all things worth knowing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tailz Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by dumbo: Actually if it was an American Sub they would probably be asking for the same help from the Royal Navy. The reason being that the RN sub is uniquely designed for this exact situation and it is closer to the accident site than any american rescue sub. Both the Russian navy and US navy and the RN have lots of "standard" rescue craft and frankly the special sub being sent is rarely of any use (which is why the Brits havent made any more and this one is 20 years old). There is nothing wrong or shameful about this if it was a British sub I wouldnt feel at all bad if we dailed up for some Russian Sub hunting air craft (which are very good btw) or some American Airlift capacity. When lives are at stake in peacetime who cares about flags? _dumbo<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> If you want peace, prepare for war... so flags matter even in peace. (IMHO) Furthermore, help between NATO allies is considerably different than help between adversaries. (to think the Russian navy no longer drills to hunt Western naval forces and attack Western targets is rather short sighted. Do you think now that the 'cold war' is over the USN has stopped tracking Russian boomers?) If a Seawolf was lying on the bottom, I'm certain the Russian navy is still on the bottom of the USN's "People to call if we need help" list. In any event, the Brit sub still may not be successful, simply because the Kursk is almost lying on her beam ends. Were she upright, the Russians could conceivably have been on her days ago. (weather not withstanding) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mr. Johnson-<THC>-: Originally posted by jshandorf: "On the other hand... Our politicians I feel respect (fear?) public opinion more than thier Russian counter parts. So, if our country rose up and called out to our leaders demanding assistance outside the US I think they would respond much quicker. THe Russians... well.. you've seen what has happened. No offense but the state of Russian politics at times borders on organized crime I feel. I hope Putin cleans things up." At what cost? And why would he clean up the people who supported him in his rise to power? And whats wrong with Anarchy? It seems to me like orgnaized government is in competition with infectious diseases as to who can kill more. Anarchy is the political philosophy that each individual is the sole authority on whats best for that individual. And as long as you don't hurt or damage anyone else or anyone else's property then there is no need for self-policing. hehehe, funny I don't know how to turn this into CM joke. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hmmm.. The operative word in my statement was "hope". Anarchy is actually a pretty interesting form of government, (or should I say lack of government?) but sadly it is about as real as true communism. Fairy land stuff... Make believe as you will. I will be impressed though, if they drag anyone out of that sub alive. Just trying to imagine being in a 150m long sub that smacks into the sea bottom, and then having the wits about you to make sure you do what you have to do in the 5 seconds before a few thousand gallons of sea water comes rushing your way...all I can say is damn. Ahhh.. Now I remember why I never joined the armed forces. It's that dying thing. Jeff [This message has been edited by jshandorf (edited 08-18-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Aitken Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 tailz wrote: > Exactly what type of insurance should they have? The ability to rescue men slowly asphyxiating in a submarine. Training accidents certainly do happen in every army, but this situation isn't just an accident, it's a crisis. The men weren't killed instantly, they are/were waiting for help, which is very different. > What 'dangerous mission' was the KURSK on? The dangerous mission which ended up with an explosion and left it lying crippled on the sea bed. In the military, even training missions are dangerous. Fionn wrote: > My simple point is that I think you are taking too "populist" and "uninformed" a view of things. Well, I'm looking at things more from a political viewpoint. If this happened to a British or American sub, the government would move heaven and earth to get those guys out, because they're extremely PR conscious, and this would be an image disaster for them. I agree that the Russians' situation is technically complicated, but a government under dire threat to its image has a surprising capacity to do the impossible. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tailz Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by David Aitken: Well, I'm looking at things more from a political viewpoint. If this happened to a British or American sub, the government would move heaven and earth to get those guys out, because they're extremely PR conscious, and this would be an image disaster for them. I agree that the Russians' situation is technically complicated, but a government under dire threat to its image has a surprising capacity to do the impossible. David <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> "Technically complicated"... oh man, is that an understatement. Hmmm... so the big issue is the Russian delay in asking for international assistance.(when in fact the delay is irrelevant... who's to say they didn't know the earliest time the Brit submersible could be on station and simply waited until they played every card they had before they asked for its use?) Do you think the Russians have tried any less hard to save their crew than the Americans or British would have? "Move Heaven and Earth"... HA... I don't believe for a second that the USN wouldn't behave in exactly the same fashion... delay until the last possible moment before asking for external help in the same type of operation. (The rescue of a state of the art nuclear submarine...) And as far as "dire threat to its image" generating action... Viet Nam, Afghanistan... both meatgrinders for their respective combatants with widespread public opposition that didn't influence government direction at all. I sincerely doubt the loss of single military asset (even in such a public and tragic fashion) is going to topple governments. The Kursk is nothing more than a military accident... a human tragedy (and no doubt there will be reprecussions... the same shakeout that would affect the RN, USN etc. if this horrible event had happened to them.) ... so, played any good PBEM's lately? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fionn Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 Quick comment... The Soviet DSRV seemingly has been staying down right until its environmental systems redline. The rescue guys are consciously risking their lives for just a few more minutes of trying to help their comrades in the Kursk. Also, a Russian news reporter on the scene today reported an emergency surface by one of the DSRVs there. He said that the crew appeared ill and were immediately taken to hospital ( sounded a bit like an environmental system problem to me). Suffice it to say that the Russians are trying as hard as anyone could AND it is militarily short-sighted to condemn them for not calling their "enemy" in to help immediately. All in all I think they're pushing themselves hard enough to actually suffer more fatalities among the rescuers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Aitken Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 tailz wrote: > And as far as "dire threat to its image" generating action... Viet Nam, Afghanistan... both meatgrinders for their respective combatants with widespread public opposition that didn't influence government direction at all. Vietnam is the benchmark by which all new military engagments are gauged. The US government is constantly seen to be "avoiding another Vietnam". That isn't an example of how the government can ignore public opinion - it's one of the reasons why the government is so concerned about public opinion. A lot has changed in the past ten years, let alone thirty. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Priest Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 Guys soldiers are soldiers and right now they deserve our respect even if their military does not. Poor planning is not reserved to any one countries military. Now I do not know what happened but people are dead and it is ridiculous to use your energy blaming the Russians, Jochen, when you should be praying for them. Here is an idea, when something tragic or contraversial comes up think more than usual before you speak or in this case post. ------------------ Sir are you sure you want to go to red alert...it would mean changing the bulb -Priest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Aitken Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 Fionn wrote: > The rescue guys are consciously risking their lives for just a few more minutes of trying to help their comrades in the Kursk. I'm not disputing your point, but this is to do with individual Russians, not the government. All credit to the rescuers for their superhuman efforts - but that is removed from the issue of what the government has done to empower the rescuers. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jshandorf Posted August 18, 2000 Share Posted August 18, 2000 This is an intersting snipet I took from a CNN article on the Kursk accident. "Meanwhile, the United States has assembled a team of experts in under-sea operations to act as "consultants" to gain access to the stricken submarine." I bet they do! "U.S. Defense Secretary William S. Cohen made the offer in a letter to Russian Defense Minister Igor Sergeyev, who "expressed appreciation for the offer of assistance and he asked that we work through NATO channels," Cohen said Friday in a briefing at the Pentagon." I otherwords, there is no way in hell you are getting near our sub unless you go through NATO. I bet this "consultant" team has a guy or two that constantly wears sunglasses with a long tan or black trench coat. Heh heh. Jeff Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorak Posted August 19, 2000 Share Posted August 19, 2000 Guys, I think the point is pretty much moot. As much as I pray that any of the crew left gets out ok. I fear the worst. Even he cameras on the rescue subs have recorded a lot of damage to the outer hull. In fact I think they saw a gapping slash. Considering that the explosion came from inside, passed thru the inner hull and caused this much damage to the outer hull does not look good. Even the russians (last I heard) say that almost all of the 118 crewmen would have been in the damaged/flooded section from the com tower foward. As for "the americans would have already had them out." Thats crap. Your looking at a very damaged sub, in freezing waters, no visibility, at 350 feet at a 60 degree angle with damaged hatches. They is no way in hell that we could get them out either. Unless you landed, attached to the sub, and were able to cut through the hull. (fat chance). You also have to realize that the hatches can only be opened from the inside. So unless there is someone still able to climb the ladder and unlock the hatch it is a no go. As for crew servival.. I think Cold is as big an enemy as air. That sub most likly reached about 40 degrees F within a couple hours of sinking. Hate to seem like a pessimist. but thems the facts. Lorak Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts