It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
From: The Fatherland Is in Danger!
the official version has been stated: an exploding torpedo inside the sub is what caused the disaster.
As you probably remember, the nose of the "Kursk", was sawn off before the sub was raised, allegedly to avoid the possibility of an explosion during transport. Skeptics claimed that the government was really trying to leave the evidence for the real cause of the disaster on the ocean floor. Their suspicions were increased by the fact that no pictures of the sub's nose were ever shown to the public. It's possible that the nose of the sub was completely undamaged, for example, which would destroy the government's official explanation of the disaster.
But the official cover-up went awry when the sub was finally raised, for there, for all to see, was a perfectly round hole on the sub's hull, just at the point where the nose had been sawn off. (Apparently they sawed in the wrong place.) This hole was bent in at the edges, and could only have been caused by impact of an external object traveling at an extremely high speed.
Oh, if it weren't for that damned round hole, seen by millions of people on television.
There it is, right there in the middle of the hull, that round hole, whose diameter corresponds exactly to the impact point of our new weaponry, and the edges of that accursed hole are neatly bent inwards, so that even a child can understand that if he takes a hammer and pounds a nail into a tin can, the same sort of hole with the edges bent inwards will result... What's worse, Midshipman Borisov managed to scrawl a note about the real reason for the tragedy and put it into a bottle. We had to do a bit of "arm-twisting" on his mother to get her to say that a mere midshipman couldn't have understood anything about the real reasons, only those higher in rank. But no normal person's going to believe that nonsense.
From: Kursk story unfolding
From the report filed by the Staff of the Northern Fleet to the Governmental Kursk Inquiry Commission:
“On the port board of the submarine, at the binding frame of the first and second compartments, a rupture hole the size of 2x3 meters was found. The edges of the rupture hole are curled inside the boat and melted.”
Comments by the Navy’s representative at the Dagdisel plant (torpedo manufacturer), Captain of II rank, Vyacheslav Lohmatov:
“Only a missile could have rammed the submarine. There are no explosives at the binding frame between the first and second compartments. If the Kursk was rammed by another submarine, there would be only a hole there without signs of fire.
From: U.S. Offers Help To Rescue Submarine
U.S. experts said whatever sank the submarine Kursk, which was designed to withstand a torpedo attack with its double-layer hall, had to be massive.
John Pike of the Federation of American Scientists said the 13,900-ton submarine was designed to be hard to sink.
From: Two or More Explosions
Seismic stations as far away as Canada, Germany and Alaska recorded the events. But scientists are paying particular attention to sounds recorded by Norwegian stations, part of a global network, which were closest to the sub and may provide the most reliable readings.
The first, smaller reading “certainly would be consistent with what you might expect from either a torpedo or cruise missile warhead exploding,” says John Pike, of the Federation of American Scientists, adding, “it would not exclude bumping in to an old WWII sea mine.” The second recorded sound or sounds, says Pike, would be consistent with single or multiple near simultaneous torpedo or cruise missile explosions — or possibly the collapse of one or more pressurized bulkheads. From the two-minute delay, he says, “one could speculate that the initial explosion caused a fire in the torpedo room, and that that set off another weapon, or weapons or that initial explosion breached part of the hull, which damaged another pressure bulkhead subsequently causing it to collapse.”
Official version: A torpedo exploded on the inside of the sub by accident.
Evidence: A hole in the sub´s hull showing clearly that a torpedo hit the Kursk from the outside.
The question is: Who fired that torpedo and did it happen by accident?
Basically the main theory about the demise of the Kursk was the testing of an experimental torpedo. Apparantly it had some dangerous gas in it that has proven in the past to be extremely volatile, and I think especially when it comes into contact with water.
Originally posted by Rasputin13
How Russia could sit there and listen to the men banging on the walls and pipes of the sub begging to be rescued, and be so arrogant as to not accept outside help and listen to the banging slowly cease as their men died, is just beyond my comprehension.
The Australian: US 'torpedoed Kursk nuclear sub'
May 09, 2005
A FORMER British military official has backed a sensational claim that the Russian nuclear submarine, the Kursk, was torpedoed by US forces in August 2000.
The new explanation for the Kursk's downing is based on film footage of a hole in the side of the vessel, and evidence placing US submarines in the area at the time it was sunk.
The French film shows stills of the Kursk raised above the water after being salvaged, with a precise circular hole in its right side. The hole clearly bends inwards, consistent with an attack from outside the submarine.