Haunting Photos Show the Aftermath of the Kursk Submarine Disaster in 2000 (rarehistoricalphotos.com)
142 points by mooreds 5 days ago
vrosas 5 hours ago
One of the most interest facts about this disaster is that if the submarine was standing on its tail straight up, its nose would be sticking 150ft OUT of the water it sunk in.
petepete 4 hours ago
It was 155m long and the ocean was 108m deep, in case anyone else was wondering.
niwtsol 2 hours ago
I didn't realize how big the submarine actually was
- Ohio class - US' largest: 18,750 tonnes displaced submerged, 170m long, 13m beam
- Typohoon-class - USSR's biggest: 48,000 tonnes displaced, 175m long, 23m beam
- Oscar II-class (Kursk) - 19,400 tonnes submerged, 154m long, 18.2m beam
SoftTalker 2 hours ago
I think I read something similar about the Edmund Fitzgerald i.e. it sank in water that was less deep than the length of the ship.
thedanbob 5 hours ago
And yet even in that shallow of water the pressure would have been around 10 atm. It's amazing how dangerous something as mundane as water can be.
watwut 3 hours ago
This is the first time I see someone refer to 100m deep as shallow.
QuantumNomad_ 2 hours ago
stronglikedan 3 hours ago
lencastre 4 hours ago
nothing but respect for water
atomicnumber3 4 hours ago
kelnos an hour ago
Similarly, a human can drown in only a few inches of water, not even enough to fully submerge you while lying face first in it, let alone while standing.
Water is not to be trifled with.
drivebyhooting 3 hours ago
High Test Peroxide is incredibly dangerous. Even a slight contaminant can catalyze a runaway decomposition. This is the main reason HTP has been abandoned as a storable propellant.
headsman771 25 minutes ago
> Dutch company Mammoet was awarded a contract in May 2001 and, within three months, designed, fabricated, and deployed over 3,000 tonnes of custom equipment aboard a specially modified barge.
Impressive, particularly by today's standards.
jvuygbbkuurx 4 hours ago
That is an absolute unit. The photos at the end with people inside the wreck put it in perspective.
fusslo 4 hours ago
The description of the survivors last hours is horrifying.
LgWoodenBadger 2 hours ago
I'm surprised 5-7 torpedo warheads detonating didn't do more damage to it. About 2750kg-4000kg of high explosive.
serf an hour ago
nuclear submarines are first and foremost built as a protective sarcophagus for the powerplant, and that's on top of submarines being designed to compartmentalize damage, anyway.
i.e. if it could totally destroy itself with a full payload that'd be a very bad design choice, not that there wasn't plenty of bad choices wrt the kursk.
jeffrallen 5 hours ago
Soundtrack for this post: https://youtu.be/3qF95ANVHSg
Kursk, by The Vad Vuc
FridayoLeary 5 hours ago
The story depresses me a little. One of the greatest engineering marvels in history, destroyed by stereotypical Russian negligence, incompetence and corruption and more then 100 lives lost in the process. The Soviets for all their many sins were at least capable of building incredible things, the protections on the nuclear reactor held up, for example, preventing a massive environmental catastrophe.
giraffe_lady 4 hours ago
It's stereotypical now but I remember at the time this was taken as a kind of confirmation that russia had been coasting on and also neglecting a lot of the soviet-era infrastructure. It's hard to reflect back now but in 2000 the soviet collapse was recent memory and the role and effectiveness of its successor was an open question, internationally.
I do remember that in the 90s the "russia understanders" were split into two camps: now that russia is free of the shackles of communism it will step into its destiny as supreme global superpower vs the soviet system was actually quite effective at large scale mundane infrastructure & logistics in a way the russian federation isn't.
By 2000 the weight of evidence was already fairly strong for the second view but this disaster, and especially their response to it, really settled the matter. This is how I remember feeling about it all anyway.
hencq an hour ago
I also remember how frustrating and depressing it was that they wouldn’t allow foreign teams to help with the rescue effort. At the time it was clear that the Russians lacked the capabilities to do it. I also think in hindsight it was a sign how little interest Russia had in being part of the West.
vkou 8 minutes ago
Gagarin1917 4 hours ago
Russia had roughly half the population as compared to the Soviet Union. There’s just no way they could have ever competed on the global stage the same way.
mitthrowaway2 4 hours ago
ge96 4 hours ago
Damn that's crazy seeing Putin back in 2000
andyjohnson0 2 hours ago
He had the same dead look as he does today.
Klaster_1 6 hours ago
[removed]
pavel_lishin 5 hours ago
Reading a note written by a sailor, in the dark, by feel, estimating his changes to be 10%, certainly felt haunting to me.
Mikhail_Edoshin 5 hours ago
Chomsky wrote that Western media publishes only what is "useful" for certain ends, usually political. So you think the article is useful, don't you?
brookst 5 hours ago
I found the story and photos entirely haunting. Those sailers had no chance.
tokai 4 hours ago
The survivors possibly had a change if Russia had accepted the offer for help from the Norwegian rescue divers right away.
gbuk2013 3 hours ago
infecto 5 hours ago
Found it pretty haunting myself. You could pick a different descriptive word but haunting fits.
ahhhhnoooo 6 hours ago
I found several photos haunting.
giraffe_lady 5 hours ago
Being able to look at a full actual likeness of a person who is dead is incomprehensibly novel to human experience. It has never stopped giving me chills.