RFS "KURSK": Torpedeado pela US NAVY?????

[P44]

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/co ... 03,00.html

US 'torpedoed Kursk nuclear sub'
Daniel Stacey, London

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.

An official inquest concluded that the disaster – in which all 118 crew drowned in the Barents Sea, 135km off the Russian coast – was caused by an accidental explosion of an onboard torpedo.

But Maurice Stradling, a former torpedo engineer and a key figure in the original investigation, believes a new French documentary, The Kursk: A Submarine in Troubled Waters, should change world opinion on the sinking.

"On the balance of probabilities, the Kursk was sunk by an American MK-48 torpedo," said Mr Stradling, formerly a senior member of the British Defence Ministry.

BBC editor Nick Fraser called the claim a "pack of lies" and has refused to air the documentary, which attracted a record audience of more than 4 million when it screened on French TV.

The BBC used Mr Stradling as its main authority for a documentary it made in 2001 – What Sank the Kursk?, in which Mr Stradling theorised that the sinking was caused by the malfunctioning of an old-fashioned HTP torpedo.

Mr Stradling, who also appears in the new French documentary, said: "At the time (2001), that was a perfectly reasonable film, given the facts as we knew them then, when there seemed to be no third-party involvement,"

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.

A US military source in the documentary declares the hole to be the trademark evidence of an American MK-48 torpedo, which is made to melt cleanly through steel sheet due to a mechanism at its tip that combusts copper.

The film suggests the attack happened while two US submarines, the Toledo and Memphis, were shadowing the Kursk in a routine military exercise.

The documentary says the Toledo accidentally collided with the Kursk, at which point the Russian submarine opened its torpedo tubes, leading to an attack from the Memphis, which was protecting the damaged Toledo while it retreated.

The cause of the sinking was covered up at the time in an act of diplomacy between then US presidents Bill Clinton and Russian President Vladimir Putin – a deal that included the cancellation of $US10 billion ($12.5 billion) of Russian debt, the film states.

After the documentary received its only public broadcast in Britain, some claimed the Russian navy had drilled the hole and fed doctored footage to the film-makers to create a false impression.

[Rui Elias Maltez]

Já na altura do acidente, essa hipíotese foi levantada, até por altos oficiais da Marinha da Rússia.

Mas isso foi considerada uma forma pouco elegante de tentar sacudir a água do capote de eventuais responsabilidades.

A versão oficial foi a de que um dos torpedos terá explodido ainda dentro dos tubos de lançamento.

Com o regresso dos restos do Kursk á superfície, creio que se tivesse ele sido objecto de um ataque, ainda que acidental, essas provas poderiam estar à vista de todos.

Mas parece que os estragos demonstram que a força da explosão terá saído de dentro para fora, não tendo havido implosão da estrutura, ou perfuração de dentro para fora, seguida de explosão.

Por isso, acredito que tenha mesmo sido um infeliz acidente.[/i]

[P44]

Possivelmente NUNCA saberemos a VERDADE...

[Rui Elias Maltez]

É mais um caso para os teorizadores de conspirações, como quem matou o J. F Kennedy, se o acidente do Sá Carneiro foi mesmo acidente ou não, se o voo 800 da TWA foi acidente ou se foi alvo de um míssil americano durante exercícios militares, se o Jimmy Hoffa morreu mesmo ou não, etc.

[P44]

É o "sistema"...

[Einsamkeit]

Conspiracy..............mais que tinham Los Angeles lá Tinham, Pelo Menos uns Dois, Mais se fossem alfas e algum los angeles batesse dificilmente afundaria, pois eram de Titanio, acho que o titanio por ser mais leve e nao Magnetico é bem melhor pra construir Submarinos, e os Typhoon Tinham as Baterias ao Lado do casco, elas quase serviam como Blindagem.

[César]

Bem, tem um tópico interessante sobre esse assunto, curiosamente postado por mim( ) em que é discutido o afundamento do Kursk.

Lá vai o link:

Afundamento do Kursk: Uma vergonha para a Rússia

Grande abraço!:wink:

César

[P44]

EIN....

o KURSK não era um Typhoon.

K-141 Kursk was a Project 949A Антей (Antey, Antaeus; also known by its NATO reporting name of "Oscar-II" class) nuclear cruise missile submarine named after the Russian city Kursk, where one of the biggest battles of World War II took place (Battle of Kursk). She was commissioned into the Northern Fleet of the Russian Navy. Kursk sank on August 12, 2000 with all hands lost.

Alternative claims about the cause of the explosion
Almost immediately after the Kursk sinking, Chechen independent news agency Kavkaz-Center (http://www.kavkazcenter.com/eng) reported that the explosion in the submarine was caused by a suicide bomber on board, a crew member originating from the Muslim region of Dagestan in southern Russia. Allegedly he blew himself up in support for Muslim fighters in Chechnya.

French filmmaker Jean-Michel Carré, in his documentary Kursk: a Submarine in Murky Waters (Koursk: un sous-marin en eaux troubles [2] (http://contrecourant.france2.fr/article ... rticle=219)), which aired on 7 January 2005 on French TV channel France 2, Atalleged that Kursk sank because of a collision with a US submarine. According to Carré, the Kursk was performing tests of a new torpedo called Shkval and the tests were being observed by two US submarines on duty in the region, Memphis and Toledo. At some point rhe Kursk and the Toledo collided, damaging the latter, and in order to discourage the Kursk from pursuing it, the Memphis fired a torpedo into the Russian submarine. According to the story, the US torpedo probably hit an old type Russian torpedo on the Kursk which did not explode until later, but when the explosion did occur it substantially damaged the Kursk. Carré alleges that Russian president Vladimir Putin deliberately concealed the truth about what happened and let the crew members die, in order not to strain relations with the US Government. (See article in French newspaper Libération (http://www.liberation.fr/page.php?Article=266435)). The New York Times later revealed that Memphis had in fact been observing Kursk during the torpedo tests. Another incident purportedly supporting the truthfulness of this story is that the Toledo took refuge in Bergen, Norway, where no non-Americans were allowed to inspect the submarine in its hidden dock (standard practice). Another circumstance purporting to confirm the story and its coverup is that the USA freed Russia from payment responsibility for a substantial monetary loan and even gave Russia permission to take out another loan. Today the remains of the Kursk have been melted down and destroyed. However, an official 2000 page report, published in 2002, concluded that the Kursk's sinking was caused by a test torpedo that exploded in the torpedo room. Some conspiracy theorists claim that the report was a coverup to further strengthen the relations between Russia and the USA.

MAIS DETALHES AQUI:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_submarine_Kursk

[Einsamkeit]

Sim P-44 eu sei que o Kursk é ou era um Oscar-II, Mais so falei que o Typhoon tem as baterias posicionadas para funcionarem como blindagem, mais Estes OscarII sao realmente fantasticos, Pena que estao sendo mau cuidados, Imaginem uma Força de 10 Akula e 5 OscarII, nem um GT Americano Resistiria.

[Rui Elias Maltez]

O problema da Rússia, é que durante os anos em que as FA's foram as vítimas dos cortes orçamentais, do grande número de submarinos de ataque e estratégicos que tinham, as poucas verbas serviram apenas para garantir a manutenção de um pequeno número, ficando os outros atracados no cais e apodrecer ao clima nórdico.

E agora pode ser tarde para reactivar essa formidável frota.

O Kursk pode ter sofrido um infeliz acidente, e este nem ter tido nada a ver com deficiências na sua manutenão, mas creio que a Rússia para não perder o seu papel de potência regional com tentação global terá que investir nesses meios estraégicos mais novos, e manter o que valha a pena ser mantido, até que novas plataformas surjam dos estaleiros de construção.

O mesmo se aplica em meios de superfície, nomeadamente fragatas e destroieres mais recentes, e com electrónica e sistemas de armas modernos, que compitam par a par com o ocidente.

E sobretudo em meios de projecção, não obstante a Rússia ser uma potência terrestre e com uma doutrina militar defensiva.