One and a half months later after the tragic wreck of Kursk atom submarine, September 28, 2000, the full texts of analytical review “Russian Society and the Kursk Submarine Wreck: History and Prospects” got to the desks of functionaries from Vladimir Putin’s surrounding. The review was signed an a mysterious way: “Internal Predictor of the USSR.” Though the President surrounding knew very well that this was a kind of collective pseudonym of the group, which had participated in creation of “Conception of Social Security (KOB),” heard by the State Duma in 1995. Political science professors know KOB as “Dead Water.” The question is there about Russia’s place in the global historical process. In the first analytical note on Kursk, prepared on the base of the Dead Water theses, it was said that Kursk had become a victim of a “regular accident” and wrecked by a foreign military ship.” This sounds mystically, though the conceptual scientists in some unknown way predicted the September 11 events in the US, which took place in 13 months after the Kursk wreck.
One of these days, PRAVDA.Ru correspondent from Seaboard Region received a copy of the second “conceptual” text. This time, the author, a great specialist on the field of Russian underwater machine-building, signed the note with the real name and left to the correspondent his address.
Second anniversary (Thoughts about the Kursk wreck)
One year ago, I personally sent four letters to the Northern Fleet commander, admiral Vacheslav Popov, in which I expounded my version of the Kursk wreck. I addressed to the admiral because of his mental condition, when he, with tears in his eyes, told about the submarine wreck. In my letters, I did not accuse Popov personally of the Kursk wreck, knowing from my own experience that the ships of the new line, i.e. strategic ships belong to the competence of the Fleet Commander-In-Chief of the country. No one training navigation can be carried out without his agreement. And it is not that a ship should not put out because it has just returned from a navigation, for it is usual for the first line ships – to be always prepared for putting out to execute battle tasks. Though, it is at least absurd to sent ships like that to shallow water areas to increase the number of ships participating in manoeuvres.
This reminds me a story of manoeuvres carried out by huge armoured ships in well-known Marquise puddle, in Baltic Sea. You could imagine this picture: huge ships manoeuvring in shallow water, while frightening each other with heavy guns! Thanks God, no one ship suffered in these absurd manoeuvres. Though, there is the Einstein theory, which I mentioned in my letters to admiral Popov. According to Einstein’s plausibility theory, if some acts are being repeated monotonously, a catastrophic situation will take place, sooner or later.
In ocean, too many military submarines have been gathered. Their ways, in contrast to that ones of above-water ships, cannot be predicted, and they are not shown in any maps. Though, on these submarines usual people serve, sometimes with unbalanced psychics. And when they are in fighting trim for a very long time, everything could happen.
During that manoeuvres, NATO’s torpedo submarines were certainly in the water area. For, information plays a decisive role in our days. They were not interested in the outward appearance of our ships, because they know it very well. They were interested in the methods, formations of our both march and fighting lines, methods of carrying out training fights, ways of repelling attacks. When Kursk arrived in the area of the manoeuvres, a NATO submarine, let us call it “X,” intercepted a report from some above-water ships, that in the early morning, torpedo shooting at underwater targets will be carried out. This was why, they decided to leave the manoeuvre area, while the most secure way lied through the quarter where the Russian ships stood.
They hoped that noise produced by the Russian ships would allowed to them to leave the area of shooting area without troubles. They went probably under anti-aircraft periscope, having pulled it at the minimal length and put on sonar in a passive regime…
Andrei Mikhailov PRAVDA.Ru Severodvinsk
To be continued...
Translated by Vera Solovieva
Read the original in Russian: http://pravda.ru/main/2002/06/12/42555.html
A US-based TV channel named curious details about the trials of the new Russian missile, such as, for example, the failed launch in October 2017
During the recent Helsinki summit, Russian President Vladimir Putin offered to hold a referendum in the Donbass. Trump asked not to voice this idea at the press conference
The International Olympic Committee is ready to take Russia back, the head of the organization Thomas Bach said