The naval community continues to discuss the version of the death of the Kursk submarine in August 2000, which was announced yesterday by the former commander of the Northern Fleet, Admiral Vyacheslav Popov. According to him, the explosion on the Kursk provoked a collision with an unknown submarine. This assumption has been criticized by many naval experts.
For example, retired naval officer Viktor Meshcherinov told MK that the reasons for the death of the Kursk nuclear submarine had long been established, “but they will not be published for a long time” because of the secret information contained in the commission’s conclusions.
“The reason for the death of the Kursk, as well as the Komsomolets nuclear submarine on April 7, 1989, was the human factor. Moreover, in the case of the Kursk, this human factor could have been Popov himself, the commander of the Northern Fleet at that time, “said Viktor Mescherinov.
In his opinion, Popov’s words that the Kursk submarine “died after a collision with a NATO submarine” are misunderstood.
“This is a play on words. “After the collision” and “from the collision” are different things. There may have been a collision, but it was not the cause of death – that is, the cause of the explosion on the Kursk, – said Viktor Mescherinov. – Try to understand an elementary thing for a sailor: if the explosion was from a collision, that is, the direct contact of two boats, then the second would have remained in the same place, in the immediate vicinity of the Kursk. In the best case, the second boat would have surfaced without moving, and she also had to be rescued. “
The officer explained that at sea a ship can be blown up by a contact method and non-contact (bottom mines explode when the ship passes over them).
“When contactless, the ship receives a water hammer. There may not be any holes in the case, but engines and other mechanisms are coming off the foundations. Strongly longitudinal connections of the corps are violated, ”said Viktor Mescherinov.
The explosion on the Kursk was so powerful that any submarine, if it was in the immediate vicinity, would inevitably receive damage that would, at least, prevent it from continuing to sail. As a maximum, it would have remained at the bottom next to the Kursk.
According to the specialist, the statements that the Kursk was torpedoed also do not stand up to criticism. No corresponding damage was found on the light hull of the boat.
