Swedish Military 'not interested' in Soviet sub wreck

[ReFaN]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

That photo is for sure a post WWII Soviet Sub, not some 1914 wreck. Very likely a Whiskey class.

If this sub wrecked I would be very curious if there is still crew aboard her, or if they rescued the crew of by DSRV or something.

For reference, it is a whisky Read it in a swedish paper.

[AVGWarhawk]

It always interests me these wrecks that show no sign of what caused the sinking. To what purpose to investigate the sub?

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

It always interests me these wrecks that show no sign of what caused the sinking. To what purpose to investigate the sub?

To find out what did cause the sinking because its not obvious?

Originally Posted by ReFaN

For reference, it is a whisky Read it in a swedish paper.

Right because the news gets details like that right all the time.

[Penguin]

I edited my quote to make clear that the guy meant another boat he found earlier.
The sub looks very much like a Whiskey - check out the vid/pics of the tower from the articles.

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

To find out what did cause the sinking because its not obvious?

My money would be on water, yes I am quite sure that flooding caused the sinking.

[AVGWarhawk]

To find out what did cause the sinking because its not obvious?

But to what end? It is an old boat. It would seem the owners are not to much interested in what happened to their men. Perhaps it is best to let her lay in her silence.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by Penguin

My money would be on water, yes I am quite sure that flooding caused the sinking.

Could have been a jam dive that caused her to get stuck in the mud and they couldn't get her out again with out a big noticeable salvage effort.

Originally Posted by AVGWarhawk

But to what end? It is an old boat. It would seem the owners are not to much interested in what happened to their men. Perhaps it is best to let her lay in her silence.

But is a part of history now. In 30 years she might be covered in mud and no one then will be able to find out what happened to her. If her crew died with her shouldn't the families learn the fate of them? In Soviet Russia they might not have been told that their submarine was lost at sea to cover up what happened.

Oh and since she was a Soviet sub she might have a couple of nuclear torpedoes aboard. Sub sunk in shallow waters + Nuclear Torpedoes = Tom Clancy Novel.

[UnderseaLcpl]

Originally Posted by TLAM Strike

Could have been a jam dive that caused her to get stuck in the mud and they couldn't get her out again without a big, noticeable salvage effort.

Who cares? It's just another Soviet hunk of metal that employed state-of-the-art sinking technology. Any useful inteligence we could have gleaned from the design has long since been obtained by other means, and Sweden wouldn't have a use for such a thing, anyway.

But is a part of history now. In 30 years she might be covered in mud and no one then will be able to find out what happened to her. If her crew died with her shouldn't the families learn the fate of them? In Soviet Russia they might not have been told that their submarine was lost at sea to cover up what happened.

I can understand that argument. History is history, regardless of the practical application, and it is probable that the Soviets covered the incident up, which would be why it is news today.

Oh and since she was a Soviet sub she might have a couple of nuclear torpedoes aboard. Sub sunk in shallow waters + Nuclear Torpedoes = Tom Clancy Novel.

That would make for a good novel, and I stress the word novel. If there were nuclear torpedoes aboard, the Soviets would have long since recovered them, as ferarful as they were about NATO recovering their technology, and given their strict monitorign of their military assets.

Actually, now that I think about it, did the Whiskey-class even employ nuclear torpedoes? IIRC, the design pre-dated nuclear torpedoes, which would suggest that the tubes were not designed to accomadate purpose-built nuclear warheads, unless of course, the warheads could be fitted into a standard-diameter warhead or there was a redesign of the tubes.

I'm not sure and I'm probably wrong about that last paragraph. Please explain.

[TLAM Strike]

Originally Posted by UnderseaLcpl

That would make for a good novel, and I stress the word novel. If there were nuclear torpedoes aboard, the Soviets would have long since recovered them, as ferarful as they were about NATO recovering their technology, and given their strict monitorign of their military assets.

Ok how? send a recovery ship out to raise the sub? Nope. Send in divers and cut the sub open and remove the torpedoes. Maybe.

Actually, now that I think about it, did the Whiskey-class even employ nuclear torpedoes? IIRC, the design pre-dated nuclear torpedoes, which would suggest that the tubes were not designed to accomadate purpose-built nuclear warheads, unless of course, the warheads could be fitted into a standard-diameter warhead or there was a redesign of the tubes.

I'm not sure and I'm probably wrong about that last paragraph. Please explain.

The Russians did have several 533mm nuclear torpedoes; the 53-58 (in service 1968), and they had a special warhead they could afix to a normal torpedo as needed even at sea (in service 1962).

[Gerald]

Well,Well,interesting comments and conclusions,that newspapers have been given tips on.