Reports of NUCLEAR submarine on fire at Russian shipyard

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

LOL everything I've read over the years concerning Fuku state that the world wouldn't be seeing sever effects until years to decades later. So, i'd say your scheduled evolution in to a glowing tumor is right on course; should be there by 2030

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: stosh64

Depends on what it was in the yard for. Depending on work being done, they may have removed the missiles. Major refits, refueling that's usually the first thing they do.

Again, I'm no expert, but even if they have removed the missiles, this sub is powered by a nuclear reactor

Found this.
Moscow Times.

It says no munitions were on board.
And appears the reactor was shut down.

A nuclear submarine caught fire in a shipyard in Russia's northern province of Arkhangelsk on Tuesday but there were no weapons on board, Russian news agencies reported.

The Emergencies Ministry declined comment on the reports of the fire at the Zvyozdochka shipyard, where the agencies said the 155 meter-long 949 Antei submarine was being repaired. There was no word of any casualties.

"There is a fire on the submarine. We are fighting the fire now," a shipyard source told Interfax news agency.

RIA quoted a spokesperson at the shipyard as saying there were no weapons on board the submarine.

A source told TASS news agency the submarine's nuclear reactor had been shut down prior to the blaze.

"The active zone of the reactor was unloaded at the start of repairs a few years ago," the source said.

a reply to: Hellas

Which is encased in a shell that will withstand the worst fire you can think of. And was already shut down according to reports.

a reply to: Hellas

I don't know about the Russian navy, but the US Navy removes all munitions prior to going into a shipyard for work being done. That means all missiles, gun ammo, torps, etc.

Vessels go to a weapons stations after it's done in a shipyard and takes munitions back on board.

originally posted by: stosh64
Found this.
Moscow Times.

It says no munitions were on board.
And appears the reactor was shut down.

A nuclear submarine caught fire in a shipyard in Russia's northern province of Arkhangelsk on Tuesday but there were no weapons on board, Russian news agencies reported.

The Emergencies Ministry declined comment on the reports of the fire at the Zvyozdochka shipyard, where the agencies said the 155 meter-long 949 Antei submarine was being repaired. There was no word of any casualties.

"There is a fire on the submarine. We are fighting the fire now," a shipyard source told Interfax news agency.

RIA quoted a spokesperson at the shipyard as saying there were no weapons on board the submarine.

A source told TASS news agency the submarine's nuclear reactor had been shut down prior to the blaze.

"The active zone of the reactor was unloaded at the start of repairs a few years ago," the source said.

Nice catch, looks like it's unlikely this will result in a nuclear incident based on that information. Of course, I'm reserving my judgement until it can be verified, but at least I'm hopeful this won't escalate now.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Yep, same info I found, Thanks as always Zaph

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

(Reads. Boggles.) Sledgehammers???? What the hell did they use sledgehammers for? Tuning forks?

It is part of their fine record with nuclear reactors.
Actually, they were breaking through the shielding, which included concrete, to find the leak.
You do have to wonder about the thought that went into that plan.

Keep an eye out for a US/UK/NATO sub turning up damaged somewhere. As we seem to be returning Cold War conditions this might be the first episode in a new series of what is known among the Sub-Surface fraternity as a "Crazy Ivan".

a reply to: Zaphod58

K-8 was under tow just before it went to the sea floor with 4 nuclear torpedoes and the reactors.
But they did have nuclear a accident on the K-8.... just in case the 'under tow' remark might lead someone to believe that there wasn't an incident:

On 13 October 1960, while operating in the Barents Sea, K-8 suffered a ruptured steam generator tube, causing a loss-of-coolant accident. While the crew jury-rigged a system to supply emergency cooling water to the reactor, preventing a reactor core meltdown, large amounts of radioactive gas leaked out which contaminated the entire vessel. The gas radiation levels could not be determined because instrumentation could not measure such large scales. Three of the crew suffered visible radiation injuries, and many crewmen were exposed to doses of up to 1.8–2 Sv (180–200 rem). 1970 Bay of Biscay fire During the large-scale "Ocean-70" naval exercise, K-8 suffered fires in two compartments simultaneously on 8 April 1970. Due to short circuits that took place in III and VII compartments simultaneously at a depth of 120 m, a fire spread through the air-conditioning system. Both nuclear reactors were shut down. [1] The captain ordered his entire crew to abandon ship but was countermanded once a towing vessel arrived. Fifty-two crewmen, including the commander, Captain 2nd Rank Vsevolod Borisovich Bessonov, re-boarded the surfaced submarine that was to be towed. This was the first loss of a Soviet nuclear-powered submarine, which sank in rough seas as it was being towed in the Bay of Biscay of the North Atlantic Ocean. Eight mariners had already died due to certain compartments being locked to prevent further flooding as well as the spread of the fire as soon as it was detected. All hands on board died due to CO2 poisoning and the flooding of the surfaced submarine during 80 hours of damage control in stormy conditions. Seventy-three crewmen survived. K-8 sank with four nuclear torpedoes out of total 24 on board to a depth of 4,680 m approximately 490 km northwest of Spain.[2]

Wikipedia: K-8 submarine
The K-219 incident, if one reads about it, reveals something about the vaunted safeguards(multiple redundancies) of the nuclear reactor. It did not shut down automatically as designed! It had to be shut down manually and the man that heroically did that died because of it.

However, it could be seen from instruments that although the nuclear reactor should have automatically shut down, it was not. 20-year old enlisted seaman Sergei Preminin volunteered to shut down the reactor, to be enabled by operating under instruction from the Chief Engineer. Working with a full-face gas mask, he successfully shut down the reactor. However, a large fire had developed within the compartment, raising the pressure. When Preminin tried to reach his comrades on the other side of a door, the pressure difference prevented him from opening it, and he subsequently died of asphyxiation in the reactor compartment.

Wikipedia K-219

originally posted by: Hellas

originally posted by: WineAndCheese9
a reply to: butcherguy

wait till you see what kind of Nuclear Accidents are waiting US mainland

too complicated to explain, so lets just call it Karma

I would be careful with those kind of comments in a public forum

The CIA already has assets outside his home.

The NSA has tracked every thing he or anyone he has talked to in the last 2 years and are sifting through the dara now.

Poor fellow.

a reply to: butcherguy

Yeah, and it's still a hell of a safety record. The US has had accidents too.

And none of them have irradiated large areas or even a large area around where they sank.

originally posted by: hotel1
Keep an eye out for a US/UK/NATO sub turning up damaged somewhere. As we seem to be returning Cold War conditions this might be the first episode in a new series of what is known among the Sub-Surface fraternity as a "Crazy Ivan".

What about the Russian Sub Hunter Ship that caught Fire in a welding accident November 4 2014 just south of Crimea Ukraine in the black sea hmmm????

Russia is reporting that there are no weapons on the sub, and the nuclear reactor is shut down. However, knowing what happened with Chernobyl I don't think any government is going to take their word for it.

I would assume all of our governments are currently watching this, and the IAEA should be watching this closely too.

originally posted by: KnightLight

originally posted by: hotel1
Keep an eye out for a US/UK/NATO sub turning up damaged somewhere. As we seem to be returning Cold War conditions this might be the first episode in a new series of what is known among the Sub-Surface fraternity as a "Crazy Ivan".

What about the Russian Sub Hunter Ship that caught Fire in a welding accident November 4 2014 just south of Crimea Ukraine in the black sea hmmm????

Wouldn't rule anything in or out at this early stage.

a reply to: ScientificRailgun

My question is directed mostly at you and zaphod, but anyone's input is welcomed.

Doesn't the reactors of a sub run like a standard reactor?

Can't they just Insert the cooling rods and absorb all the neutrons thus stopping all the nuclear reactions making a meltdown under let's say worst case scenario where the cooling system and it backups were compromised?

I don't see it as such a huge deal.

But then I thought that about Fukushima as well.

If the fail sfae fail safe of inserting the cooling rods didn't work at Fukushima why not?

I thought this was basic nuclear science.

a reply to: johnwick

They shut down the nuclear reactor.. Meaning the inserted the cooling rods or pulled out the uranium whatever.. It's perfectly safe.. Won't meltdown now.

At fukushima the rods didn't get separated because the earthquake bent the building.. At least that was my understanding? I havn't looked into it since 2011.. Memory.

originally posted by: johnwick
a reply to: ScientificRailgun

My question is directed mostly at you and zaphod, but anyone's input is welcomed.

Doesn't the reactors of a sub run like a standard reactor?

Can't they just Insert the cooling rods and absorb all the neutrons thus stopping all the nuclear reactions making a meltdown under let's say worst case scenario where the cooling system and it backups were compromised?

I don't see it as such a huge deal.

But then I thought that about Fukushima as well.

If the fail sfae fail safe of inserting the cooling rods didn't work at Fukushima why not?

I thought this was basic nuclear science.

The rods were inserted shortly after the quake regarding Fukushima. The trouble is that even when the rods are fully inserted, it still generates heat.

originally posted by: AngryCymraeg

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: butcherguy

That's two. I was looking at a list that was sunk, and forgot to look at overall. It's been a long time since they've had a reactor accident.

You need to look again.
K-219 lying on the bottom since 1986 16 nuclear missiles and 2 reactors.
K-123 in 1982... released 2 tons of radioactive molten metal coolant into the vessel after the reactor ruptured.
K-8 on the bottom since 1970, with the reactors.
K-140, 1968... reactor went out of control and released radiation into the vessel.
K-27- 1968...Reactor leaked and contaminated the vessel. The entire sub was scuttled in the Kara Sea.
Oh... and the icebreaker Lenin suffered not one, but two nuclear accidents with release of radiation. The one was a loss of coolant accident that partially melted the core. The later accident was a cooling leak... which they tried to locate using sledgehammers. Damage from the sledgehammers could not be repaired and the reactors had to be replaced.

Sounds all hunky dory to me.

(Reads. Boggles.) Sledgehammers???? What the hell did they use sledgehammers for? Tuning forks?

Lol I know right I read that and thought "whhaaatt?" " seriously?" "Who does that?".

originally posted by: Zaphod58
a reply to: Hellas

Which is encased in a shell that will withstand the worst fire you can think of. And was already shut down according to reports.

And removed years ago apparently.

Danger averted, just a welding fire, this happens all the time honestly.

Things burn when redhot steel hits them.