Wiki Actu en

August 25, 2016

North Korea fires balistic missile from submarine

North Korea fires balistic missile from submarine

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to: navigation, search

Thursday, August 25, 2016

North Korea
Related articles
Location of North Korea
North Korea (orthographic projection).svg
Collaborate!
  • Pillars of Wikinews writing
  • Writing an article

North Korea test fired a ballistic missile from a submarine yesterday, which landed in the Sea of Japan after travelling approximately 500 km (about 300 miles), according to officials of South Korea and the US.

File photo of a North Korean soldier.
Image: Staff Sgt. Bryanna Poulin.

The missile was fired from a submarine off North Korea’s east coast near Sinpo, officials said, and was reportedly North Korea’s first successful launch after missiles only traveled a small distance in previous tests. The South Korean military accused the North Korean government of using the test to increase military tension during the annual South Korean–US joint military drills, which involve 80,000 South Korean and US troops. North Korea has threatened a preemptive nuclear strike saying the drills were practice for an invasion.

This came on the same day as a meeting between the leaders of China, Japan, and South Korea where, according to Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida of Japan, they “urge[d] North Korea to exercise self-restraint regarding its provocative action, and to observe the UN Security Council‘s resolutions”. Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe called the test’s intrusion into Japan’s air defense identification zone “a grave threat to our country’s security.”


Sources[]

Bookmark-new.svg

This text comes from Wikinews. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 licence. For a complete list of contributors for this article, visit the corresponding history entry on Wikinews.

May 11, 2011

Swedish Navy confirms investigation of border violation

Filed under: Archived,Military,Politics and conflicts,Submarines,Sweden — admin @ 5:00 am

Swedish Navy confirms investigation of border violation

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to: navigation, search
Sweden
Related articles
Location of Sweden
Sweden (orthographic projection).svg
Collaborate!
  • Pillars of Wikinews writing
  • Writing an article

Wednesday, May 11, 2011

The image of the submarine, taken by Hanna Harge in April.
Image: Hanna Harge.

The Swedish Navy have released a picture regarding a foreign submarine discovered in the Saltsjöbaden river of Lake Mälaren in Stockholm, the capital city of Sweden, situated on the western coast of the Baltic Sea.

The submarine was seen by Hanna Harge, a 40-year-old entrepreneur who lives locally, when walking with her dog on the morning of 13 April this year. She woke up her family, brought them to the location and took pictures of the submarine, before it disappeared. She and her family immediately called the Swedish Navy, believing it to be an exercise, and told them to hide the vessel better.

The Navy, however, had no knowledge of such an exercise, and no reports from other nations regarding the submarine. Soon afterwards, the Navy’s intelligence agency visited Harge, taking the pictures to technical staff. The Harge family compares them to the submarines of the former Soviet Union and the early Russian Federation which allegedly violated Sweden’s border in the same vicinity.

In addition to the Armed Forces of Sweden, other government agencies are also involved in the investigation such as SMHI and Environmental Protection Agency. According to Andersson Larsson of the technical staff, the proceedings of the investigation are classified and it is expected to be finished and sent to the Government of Sweden within two months.


Sources

Bookmark-new.svg


This text comes from Wikinews. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 licence. For a complete list of contributors for this article, visit the corresponding history entry on Wikinews.

May 5, 2011

Flight recorders from Air France Flight 447 found

Flight recorders from Air France Flight 447 found

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to: navigation, search

Thursday, May 5, 2011

The cockpit voice recorder of Air France Flight 447.
Image: BEA/ECAPD.

Officials from France’s aviation accident investigation agency, the Bureau of Enquiry and Analysis for Civil Aviation Safety (BEA), announced on Tuesday that they had recovered the cockpit voice recorder (CVR) of Air France Flight 447. It was located and brought to the surface by a Remora 6000 unmanned submarine, then taken aboard the Île de Sein, one of the vessels taking part in the recovery and salvage efforts.

This came two days after an announcement on Sunday that the crash-survivable memory unit of the flight data recorder (FDR) of the aircraft had been located and brought to the surface. The chassis of the FDR was located on April 27, with the memory unit missing. It was found a short distance from the chassis. It was also brought to the surface by the Remora 6000.

With the recovery of both recorders, which are reported to be “in good condition”, French officials hope to determine what caused the Airbus A330-200 to crash into the Atlantic Ocean on June 1, 2009, when it departed Rio de Janeiro’s Galeão International Airport before it was lost 600 miles (965 km) off the coast of Brazil en route to Paris’ Charles de Gaulle Airport with 228 passengers and crew on board.

Cquote1.svg If you were to throw a computer into the ocean, imagine how all the parts would eventually split and you have the corrosive effects of seawater and the depths involved. Cquote2.svg

—Phil Seymour, International Bureau of Aviation

The leading theory at the moment is that the crew received incorrect air speed readings from the aircraft’s pitot tubes, devices which measure how fast the aircraft is traveling. Experts say the tubes may have become iced over, causing the crash. The plane’s Aircraft Communications Addressing and Reporting System (ACARS) sent out 24 messages over a four-minute long period stating numerous problems and warnings, including incorrect air speed warnings occurring aboard the aircraft, just prior to it going down.

However, chief operating officer of the International Bureau of Aviation, Phil Seymour, speaking to CNN, believes the memory unit will not be of much use to investigators saying because of the depth it was located at, “If you were to throw a computer into the ocean, imagine how all the parts would eventually split and you have the corrosive effects of seawater and the depths involved.” Seymour believes the wreckage will help reveal what happened as more is recovered.

File photo of the Airbus A330-200 (F-GZCP) involved in the accident
Image: Pawel Kierzkowski.

“It may be that the more wreckage they find will help them to piece it all together, which bit by bit could help them build a picture of what caused the plane to come down,” he added.

A BEA spokesperson had agreed with that possibility a few days earlier when speaking to the Associated Press about the recovery of the flight data recorder. “We can’t say in advance that we’re going to be able to read it until it’s been opened,” the spokesperson said. As

The wreckage of the Airbus A330-200, was found back on April 8 at a depth of 3,800 and 4,000 meters (2,070 to 2,190 fathoms or 12,467 feet and 13,123 feet), by a team from the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, using a Remus robotic submarine and its side-scan sonar. After the wreckage was found, another Remus robot submarine with cameras was sent down to the site, where it filmed bodies in the wreckage. The location of the recorders were localized within 2 square miles (5 square kilometers) of the flight’s last position last year.

In March, a French judge placed the European aircraft maker Airbus and Air France under investigation for possible involuntary manslaughter charges in the 2009 crash. Both are paying the cost of the search which is estimated to be $12.7 million (nine million euro). The crash is the deadliest in Air France’s history.



Related news

Sources

Bookmark-new.svg


This text comes from Wikinews. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 licence. For a complete list of contributors for this article, visit the corresponding history entry on Wikinews.

July 31, 2010

After 100 days, Deepwater Horizon oil spill still threatens Gulf coast

After 100 days, Deepwater Horizon oil spill still threatens Gulf coast

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to: navigation, search

Saturday, July 31, 2010

Deepwater Horizon disaster
Other stories about the Deepwater Horizon disaster
  • 24 April 2011: U.S. Coast Guard investigation finds ‘poor safety culture’ contributed to Deepwater Horizon disaster
  • 16 April 2011: Experts raise serious questions over safety of U.S. oil industry and warn another spill may be ‘unavoidable’
  • 30 March 2011: BP lose laptop containing sensitive claimant data
  • 21 October 2010: Scientist demands end to US ‘addiction to oil’
  • 20 September 2010: Deepwater Horizon oil well finally dead, authorities say
NASA photo of Deepwater oil slick

Oil  spreading north-east from the leaking Deepwater Horizon well in the Gulf of Mexico

Several workers wash a pelican caught in the spill
Image: International Bird Rescue Research Center.

Development Driller II digs a relief well in order to permanently close the leaking well.
Image: Barry Bena/US Coast Guard.

Wednesday marked the 100th day since the beginning of the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, and although the leaking well was recently capped, the estimated three million or more barrels of oil already in the Gulf of Mexico are still causing trouble for many residents of the Gulf coast.

There are still many unanswered questions about the long-term impact of the spill, including how it has affected the environment and natural habitats of the Gulf as well as whether residents of the area will be able to return to their jobs and livelihoods now that the leak has been capped. US government officials say that, even after the oil well is permanently sealed, workers will still have a lot to do, including the removal of around 20 million feet (6.1 million metres) of containment boom. “I would characterize this as the first 100 days. There’s a lot of work in front of us,” said Rear Admiral Paul Zukunft of the US Coast Guard.

Authorities will use submarines to assess damage underwater, while teams on the ground assess the shoreline. While removing oil from beaches is expected to be fairly straightforward, cleaning the marshlands will be particularly difficult, as boats are needed to maneuver through small channels and workers are unable to stand on solid ground. At least 638 miles (1,027 kilometres) of the Gulf coast have been hit by the oil.

The government is focusing on both cleaning sensitive coastal regions and looking for underwater oil plumes, but is also probing into what may have been the largest accidental oil spill. The US Justice Department, as well as Louisiana, Mississippi, and Alabama, are all investigating what contributed to the disaster. The Washington Post reported one team is looking into whether a close relationship between BP and government regulators played a role in the spill. The Post also said that Deepwater Horizon operator Transocean as well as oil services group Halliburton were being investigated.

BP officials say that they will try to perform the “static kill” process on Monday, a process which involves pumping a thick mixture of mud and cement down into the cap currently stopping the leak. At the end of next week, one of two relief wells currently being drilled should reach the leaking well, and officials will then know if the static kill has worked. It is hoped that this “bottom kill” operation will be able to permanently seal the damaged well.

Even though BP is close to sealing the oil reservoir, it still faces legal battles, economic struggles, and internal changes. On Tuesday, BP announced Tony Hayward would step down from his position as the company’s chief executive. His replacement, American Bob Dudley, will be the first non-British CEO of the company.

On Thursday, lawyers met at Boise, Idaho hearing to determine how around 200 various lawsuits against BP will play out. Depending on whether the suits can be consolidated, BP could be facing years of legal disputes. BP, Transocean, and Halliburton had already blamed each other for the disaster during a May hearing before the US Senate. Federal regulatory officials were criticized for allegedly taking bribes and not thoroughly inspecting the oil rig.

The company also reported a quarterly loss of US$16.9 billion and said it has allocated US$32.2 billion to pay for the spill. BP has a US$20 billion fund to help make up for the massive losses of the Gulf fishing, oil, and tourism industries and will pay damages for each of the millions of barrels of oil lost in the disaster.

BP says that it is the “responsible party” for cleaning up the spill because it owned the leaking well and had leased the Deepwater Horizon oil rig, but claims that it is not responsible for the entire spill.



Sources

Bookmark-new.svg


This text comes from Wikinews. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 licence. For a complete list of contributors for this article, visit the corresponding history entry on Wikinews.

May 24, 2010

US and South Korea to conduct naval exercises in response to warship sinking

US and South Korea to conduct naval exercises in response to warship sinking

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to: navigation, search

Monday, May 24, 2010

Politics and conflicts
Related articles

UN Members Flags2.JPG
Collaborate!
  • Pillars of Wikinews writing
  • Writing an article

Following a report blaming North Korea for the sinking of a South Korean naval vessel in March, the United States and South Korea plan to hold joint naval exercises “in the near future.”

The exercises are planned to focus on anti-submarine patrols, as well as improving both country’s ability to detect shipments of nuclear material, which are currently banned. According to analysts, the patrols are not intended to serve to intimidate North Korea; rather, they are considered a gesture of support towards the South. The announcement marks the first response from the US military to the incident, although economic measures were announced earlier today.

Several hours before the announcement of military patrols, South Korean President Lee Myung-bak announced economic measures against North Korea in response to the attack. The measures, endorsed by the US government, include the following:

  • Ending trade between the two Koreas;
  • Preventing North Korean vessels from entering South Korean ports or waterways;
  • The resumption of a Cold War tactic known as “psychological warfare,” including propaganda broadcast at the border and the dropping of leaflets from balloons;
  • Requesting the intervention of the United Nations

The moves are considered the most aggressive steps South Korea could take short of war. In a statement, President Lee said that “[w]e have always tolerated North Korea’s brutality, time and again. But now things are different. North Korea will pay a price corresponding to its provocative acts. Trade and exchanges between South and North Korea will be suspended.”

The United States has not said what measures it will take in response to the incident beyond the announced naval patrols. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is to meet with President Lee on Wednesday, after which she will announce the US response.

Clinton did say, however, that “[t]he Republic of Korea can continue to count on the full support of the United States. Our support for South Korea’s defense is unequivocal.” She is currently in China, for talks between the US and Chinese governments.

North Korea has continually denied its involvement in the warship’s sinking, and the country’s military released a statement warning that “[i]f [South Korea] sets up new tools for psychological warfare such as loudspeakers and leaves slogans for psychological warfare intact, ignoring our demands, we will directly aim and open fire to destroy them.”

A North Korean military commander told the state newspaper that “[m]ore powerful physical strikes will be taken to eradicate the root of provocation if [South Korea] challenges to our fair response.”

A South Korean 1,200 tonne Pohang-class corvette of the Republic of Korea Navy (ROKN), the ROKS Cheonan, sank March 26, 2010 near the disputed maritime border with North Korea. Of the 104 aboard, 46 seamen went down. The multi-national Joint Civilian-Military Investigation Group (JIG) investigation determined that a shockwave and bubble effect from a non-contact underwater horning North Korean torpedo explosion caused the naval vessel to split apart and sink.

Related news



Sources

Wikipedia
Wikipedia has more about this subject:
ROKS Cheonan sinking
Bookmark-new.svg


This text comes from Wikinews. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 licence. For a complete list of contributors for this article, visit the corresponding history entry on Wikinews.

March 17, 2010

Officers reprimanded for crashing British nuclear sub

Officers reprimanded for crashing British nuclear sub

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to: navigation, search

Wednesday, March 17, 2010

United Kingdom
Related articles
Location of the United Kingdom
United Kingdom (orthographic projection).svg
Collaborate!
  • Pillars of Wikinews writing
  • Writing an article

A British Royal Navy commander was reprimanded on Monday by a court martial, after pleading guilty to “failing to ensure the safe direction” of the submarine HMS Superb. Commander Steven Drysdale was in charge of the nuclear-powered submarine in May 2008, when it struck a rock pinnacle 132 metres below the surface. A navigation chart showed the pinnacle, but Drysdale said that he had misread its depth as 732 metres.

Officer of the Watch Lieutenant-Commander Andrew Cutler and Navigating Officer Lieutenant Lee Blair were also reprimanded for their part in the incident by the court martial, held at the HMS Nelson centre at Portsmouth naval base.

Cquote1.svg The three defendants all looked at the chart and the sub was taken to 250m. No thorough check was made to establish whether this depth was safe from obstacles. Cquote2.svg

—Captain Stuart Crozier, prosecuting

The £32 million submarine was in the Red Sea, heading for the Persian Gulf, and was suffering from technical problems at the time which were slowing it down. The officers decided to dive from 100m to 250m, which would allow them to travel faster and reach their destination on time.

According to prosecutor Captain Stuart Crozier: “The three defendants all looked at the chart and the sub was taken to 250m. No thorough check was made to establish whether this depth was safe from obstacles.”

Lieutenant-Commander Cutler then realised that a change to the route could shorten it. “On assessing the chart, Officer of the Watch Cutler saw he could cut the corner of a dog-leg, saving about three to four miles,” said Crozier. “He then instructed the plot officer to draw a new line on the chart. However Lieutenant-Commander Cutler did not check the depth around this new track.”

“Unfortunately, with the sub now dived to 250m, this new track went directly over a pinnacle which showed only 132m of available depth.”

The new route was plotted directly over the pinnacle on the chart, and the court martial was told that this made it harder to spot the error. None of the officers, including Commander Drysdale, realised that they had put the vessel on a collision course.

HMS Superb struck the pinnacle at 10.01 on May 26, suffering damage to its bow and sonar equipment. There were no casualties, but the submarine was forced to abandon its mission and return to the United Kingdom. It was decommissioned in September 2008, though the Ministry of Defence said that this was not due to the accident.

Commander Alison Towler, representing Drysdale, said that he accepted full responsibility and had “deep remorse and regret” over the incident. “He believes that due to the surrounding information he simply misread 132m as 732m” she said. “It was only later that he realised the plot officer had drawn the sub’s new transit straight through the pinnacle, which made it even harder for it to be seen.”

Navigating Officer Blair also pleaded guilty to failing to take into account all the dangers in or near the planned movements, and Officer of the Watch Cutler pleaded guilty to failing to supervise the plot officer adequately. All three officers will continue to serve in the Navy, but Drysdale has been moved to a desk job and will not be taking up the position in Washington DC he had planned to.

Captain Philip Warwick, president of the court martial board, told the three: “It was indeed fortunate that no one was hurt and we note that the submarine could not complete its deployment in full. The failings were unacceptable and we take an extremely dim view of them.”

The Royal Navy has since brought in new procedures on submarines to prevent a repeat of the incident, requiring that all depths are rechecked when plotting a new route.



Sources

Bookmark-new.svg


This text comes from Wikinews. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 licence. For a complete list of contributors for this article, visit the corresponding history entry on Wikinews.

June 8, 2009

Tail from Air France jet recovered from Atlantic Ocean

Tail from Air France jet recovered from Atlantic Ocean

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to: navigation, search

Monday, June 8, 2009

Air France Flight 447

Air France Airbus A330-200 aircraft, similar to the one used for Flight 447
An Air France Airbus A330-200 aircraft, similar to the one used for Flight 447
Related stories

File:Air France Flight 447 Empennage removal 2.jpg

Teams of Brazilian Navy and Air Force members recover wreckage from Air France Flight AF447.
Image: Divulgação Aeronáutica.
(Image missing from commons: image; log)

A search team from Brazil has recovered a part of the tail section of Air France Flight 447, which crashed in the Atlantic on June 1. The Brazilian armed forces have released pictures of divers near the tail fin, painted with the Air France colours of blue, red, and white.

Meanwhile, France said that it has dispatched a nuclear submarine to search for the airplane’s flight data recorders, which could provide information as to how and why the jet crashed.

Sixteen bodies have been recovered from the waters of the ocean last weekend.

Brazilian president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva said that “everything was being done […] so that we can find, if possible, all the bodies, because we know how much it means for a family to receive their lost loved one.”



Related news

External links

  • Wikipedia-logo-v2.svg Air France Flight 447

Sources

Bookmark-new.svg


This text comes from Wikinews. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 licence. For a complete list of contributors for this article, visit the corresponding history entry on Wikinews.

February 18, 2009

Two nuclear submarines collide in the Atlantic Ocean

Two nuclear submarines collide in the Atlantic Ocean

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to: navigation, search

Wednesday, February 18, 2009

A port bow view of the British nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarine HMS Vanguard (SSBN-50) approaching the harbor entrance. The vessel is accompanied by two civilian tug boats. Port Canaveral, Florida, USA

Disasters and accidents

F5 tornado Elie Manitoba 2007.jpg
Related articles
Collaborate!
  • Pillars of Wikinews writing
  • Writing an article

The Nuclear ballistic missile submarines Triomphant, from France, and HMS Vanguard, of the British Royal Navy, collided deep under the middle of the Atlantic Ocean in the middle of the night between February 3 and 4, despite both vessels being equipped with sonar. The collision caused damage to both vessels but it did not release any radioactive material, a Ministry of Defence (MOD) official confirmed Monday.

A Ministry of Defence spokesman said nuclear security had not been breached. “It is MOD policy not to comment on submarine operational matters, but we can confirm that the U.K.’s deterrent capability was unaffected at all times and there has been no compromise to nuclear safety. Triomphant had struck ‘a submerged object (probably a container)’ during a return from a patrol, damaging the sonar dome on the front of the submarine,” he said.

A French navy spokesman said that “the collision did not result in injuries among the crew and did not jeopardise nuclear security at any moment.” Lack of communication between France and other members of NATO over the location of their SLBM deterrents is believed to be another reason for the crash.

According to Daily Mail, the vessels collided 1,000ft underwater in the Bay of Biscay (Golfe de Gascogne; Golfo de Vizcaya and Mar Cantábrico), a gulf of the North Atlantic Ocean. It lies along the western coast of France from Brest south to the Spanish border, and the northern coast of Spain west to Punta de Estaca de Bares, and is named for the Spanish province of Biscay, with average depth of 5,723 feet (1,744 m) and maximum depth is 9,151 feet (2,789 m).

Each submarine is laden with missiles powerful enough for 1,248 Hiroshima bombings, The Independent said.

It is unlikely either vessel was operating its active sonar at the time of the collision, because the submarines are designed to “hide” while on patrol and the use of active sonar would immediately reveal the boat’s location. Both submarines’ hulls are covered with anechoic tile to reduce detection by sonar, so the boats’ navigational passive sonar would not have detected the presence of the other.

Lee Willett of London’s Royal United Services Institute said “the NATO allies would be very reluctant to share information on nuclear submarines. These are the strategic crown jewels of the nation. The whole purpose of a sea-based nuclear deterrent is to hide somewhere far out of sight. They are the ultimate tools of national survival in the event of war. Therefore, it’s the very last thing you would share with anybody.”

First Sea Lord Admiral Sir Jonathon Band GCB, ADC of the United Kingdom, the most senior serving officer in the Royal Navy, said that “…the submarines came into contact at very low speed. Both submarines remained safe. No injuries occurred. We can confirm the capability remains unaffected and there was no compromise to nuclear safety.”

“Both navies want quiet areas, deep areas, roughly the same distance from their home ports. So you find these station grounds have got quite a few submarines, not only French and Royal Navy but also from Russia and the United States. Navies often used the same nesting grounds,” said John H. Large, an independent nuclear engineer and analyst primarily known for his work in assessing and reporting upon nuclear safety and nuclear related accidents and incidents.

Map of the Côte d’Argent, Aquitaine, France (French for the Silver Coast, a touristic name given to a section of the French Atlantic coast).

President of the Royal Naval Association John McAnally said that the incident was a “one in a million chance”. “It would be very unusual on deterrent patrol to use active sonar because that would expose the submarine to detection. They are, of course, designed to be very difficult to detect and one of the priorities for both the captain and the deterrent patrol is to avoid detection by anything,” he said.

The development of stealth technology, making the submarines less visible to other vessels has properly explained that a submarine does not seem to have been able to pick out another submarine nearly the length of two football pitches and the height of a three-story building.

“The modus operandi of most submarines, particularly ballistic-missile submarines, is to operate stealthily and to proceed undetected. This means operating passively, by not transmitting on sonar, and making as little noise as possible. A great deal of technical effort has gone into making submarines quiet by reduction of machinery noise. And much effort has gone into improving the capability of sonars to detect other submarines; detection was clearly made too late or not at all in this case,” explained Stephen Saunders, the editor of Jane’s Fighting Ships, an annual reference book (also published online, on CD and microfiche) of information on all the world’s warships arranged by nation, including information on ship’s names, dimensions, armaments, silhouettes and photographs, etc.

According to Bob Ayres, a former CIA and US army officer, and former associate fellow at Chatham House, the Royal Institute of International Affairs, however, the submarines were not undetectable, despite their “stealth” technology. “When such submarines came across similar vessels from other navies, they sought to get as close as possible without being detected, as part of routine training. They were playing games with each other – stalking each other under the sea. They were practising being able to kill the other guy’s submarine before he could launch a missile.Because of the sound of their nuclear reactors’ water pumps, they were still noisier than old diesel-electric craft, which ran on batteries while submerged. The greatest danger in a collision was the hull being punctured and the vessel sinking, rather than a nuclear explosion,” Ayres explained.

Submarine collisions are uncommon, but not unheard of: in 1992, the USS Baton Rouge, a submarine belonging to the United States, under command of Gordon Kremer, collided with the Russian Sierra-class attack submarine K-276 that was surfacing in the Barents Sea.

In 2001, the US submarine USS Greeneville surfaced and collided with Japanese fishing training ship Ehime Maru (えひめ丸), off the coast of Hawaii. The Navy determined the commanding officer of Greeneville to be in “dereliction of duty.”

The tenth HMS Vanguard (S28) of the British Royal Navy is the lead boat of her class of Trident ballistic missile-capable submarines and is based at HMNB Clyde, Faslane. The 150m long, V-class submarine under the Trident programme, has a crew of 135, weighs nearly 16,000 tonnes and is armed with 16 Trident 2 D5 ballistic missiles carrying three warheads each.

It is now believed to have been towed Monday to its naval base Faslane in the Firth of Clyde, with dents and scrapes to its hull. Faslane lies on the eastern shore of Gare Loch in Argyll and Bute, Scotland, to the north of the Firth of Clyde and 25 miles west of the city of Glasgow.

Vanguard is one of the deadliest vessels on the planet. It was built at Barrow-in-Furness by Vickers Shipbuilding and Engineering Ltd (now BAE Systems Submarine Solutions), was launched on 4 March, 1992, and commissioned on 14 August, 1993. The submarine’s first captain was Captain David Russell. In February 2002, Vanguard began a two-year refit at HMNB Devonport. The refit was completed in June 2004 and in October 2005 Vanguard completed her return to service trials (Demonstration and Shakedown Operations) with the firing of an unarmed Trident missile.

“The Vanguard has two periscopes, a CK51 search model and a CH91 attack model, both of which have a TV camera and thermal imager as well as conventional optics,” said John E. Pike, director and a national security analyst for http://www.globalsecurity.org/, an easily accessible pundit, and active in opposing the SDI, and ITAR, and consulting on NEO’s.

File:Triomphant img 0394.jpg

Scale model of the Triomphant (S 616), on display at the Musée de la Marine in Paris
(Image missing from commons: image; log)

“But the periscopes are useless at that depth. It’s pitch black after a couple of hundred feet. In the movies like ‘Hunt for Red October,’ you can see the subs in the water, but in reality it’s blindman’s bluff down there. The crash could have been a coincidence — some people win the lottery — but it’s much more possible that one vessel was chasing the other, trying to figure out what it was,” Pike explained.

Captain of HMS Vanguard, Commander Richard Lindsey said his men would not be there if they couldn’t go through with it. “I’m sure that if somebody was on board who did not want to be here, they would have followed a process of leaving the submarine service or finding something else to do in the Navy,” he noted.

The Triomphant is a strategic nuclear submarine, lead ship of her class (SNLE-NG). It was laid down on June 9, 1989, launched on March 26, 1994 and commissioned on March 21, 1997 with homeport at Île Longue. Equipped with 16 M45 ballistic missiles with six warheads each, it has 130 crew on board. It was completing a 70-day tour of duty at the time of the underwater crash. Its fibreglass sonar dome was damaged requiring three or four months in Drydock repair. “It has returned to its base on L’Ile Longue in Brittany on Saturday under its own power, escorted as usual by a frigate,” the ministry said.

A Ballistic missile submarine is a submarine equipped to launch ballistic missiles (SLBMs). Ballistic missile submarines are larger than any other type of submarine, in order to accommodate SLBMs such as the Russian R-29 or the American Trident.

The Triomphant class of strategic missile submarines of the French Navy are currently being introduced into service to provide the sea based component (the Force Océanique Stratégique) of the French nuclear deterrent or Force de frappe, with the M45 SLBM. They are replacing the Redoutable-class boats. In French, they are called Sous-Marin Nucléaire Lanceur d’Engins de Nouvelle Génération (“SNLE-NG, literally “Device-launching nuclear submarine of the new generation”).

They are roughly one thousand times quieter than the Redoutable-class vessels, and ten times more sensitive in detecting other submarines [1]. They are designed to carry the M51 nuclear missile, which should enter active service around 2010.

Repairs for both heavily scraped and dented, missile-laden vessels were “conservatively” estimated to cost as much as 55m, with intricate missile guidance systems and navigation controls having to be replaced, and would be met by the French and British taxpayer, the Irish Independent reported.

Many observers are shocked by the deep sea disaster, as well as the amount of time it took for the news to reach the public. ”Two US and five Soviet submarine accidents in the past prove that the reactor protection system makes an explosion avoidable. But if the collision had been more powerful the submarines could have sunk very quickly and the fate of the 250 crew members would have been very serious indeed,” said Andrey Frolov, from Moscow’s Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies.

“I think this accident will force countries that possess nuclear submarines to sit down at the negotiating table and devise safety precautions that might avert such accidents in the future… But because submarines must be concealed and invisible, safety and navigation laws are hard to define,” Frolov said, noting further that there are no safety standards for submarines.

Map showing the location of the Bay of Biscay in the North Atlantic Ocean bordered on France and Spain.

The unthinkable disaster – in the Atlantic’s 41 million square miles – has raised concern among nuclear activists. “This is a nuclear nightmare of the highest order. The collision of two submarines, both with nuclear reactors and nuclear weapons onboard, could have released vast amounts of radiation and scattered scores of nuclear warheads across the seabed,” said Kate Hudson, chair of Britain’s Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament.

“This is the most severe incident involving a nuclear submarine since the Russian submarine RFS Kursk K-141 explosion and sinking in 2000 and the first time since the Cold War that two nuclear-armed subs are known to have collided. Gordon Brown should seize this opportunity to end continuous patrols,” Hudson added. Despite a rescue attempt by British and Norwegian teams, all 118 sailors and officers aboard Kursk died.

“This reminds us that we could have a new catastrophe with a nuclear submarine at any moment. It is a risk that exists during missions but also in port. These are mobile nuclear reactors,” said Stephane Lhomme, a spokesman for the French anti-nuclear group Sortir du Nucleaire.

Nicholas Barton “Nick” Harvey, British Liberal Democrat Member of Parliament for North Devon has called for an immediate internal probe. “While the British nuclear fleet has a good safety record, if there were ever to be a bang it would be a mighty big one. Now that this incident is public knowledge, the people of Britain, France and the rest of the world need to be reassured this can never happen again and that lessons are being learned,” he said.

SNP Westminster leader Angus Robertson MP for Moray has demanded for a government statement. “The Ministry of Defence needs to explain how it is possible for a submarine carrying weapons of mass destruction to collide with another submarine carrying weapons of mass destruction in the middle of the world’s second-largest ocean,” he said.

Michael Thomas Hancock, CBE, a Liberal Democrat Member of Parliament for Portsmouth South and a City councillor for Fratton ward, and who sits on the Commons defence committee, has called on the Ministry of Defence Secretary of State John Hutton to make a statement when parliament sits next week.

“While I appreciate there are sensitive issues involved here, it is important that this is subject to parliamentary scrutiny. It’s fairly unbelievable that this has happened in the first place but we now need to know that lessons have been learnt. We need to know for everyone’s sakes that everything possible is now done to ensure that there is not a repeat of the incident. There are serious issues as to how some of the most sophisticated naval vessels in the seas today can collide in this way,” Mr. Hancock said.

Tory defence spokesman Liam Fox, a British Conservative politician, currently Shadow Defence Secretary and Member of Parliament for Woodspring, said: “For two submarines to collide while apparently unaware of each other’s presence is extremely worrying.”

Meanwhile, Hervé Morin, the French Minister of Defence, has denied allegations the nuclear submarines, which are hard to detect, had been shadowing each other deliberately when they collided, saying their mission was to sit at the bottom of the sea and act as a nuclear deterrent.

“There’s no story to this — the British aren’t hunting French submarines, and the French submarines don’t hunt British submarines. We face an extremely simple technological problem, which is that these submarines are not detectable. They make less noise than a shrimp. Between France and Britain, there are things we can do together….one of the solutions would be to think about the patrol zones,” Morin noted, and further denying any attempt at a cover-up.

France’s Atlantic coast is known as a submarine graveyard because of the number of German U-boats and underwater craft sunk there during the Second World War.



Related news

  • “U.S. Nuclear submarine collides with Japanese tanker” — Wikinews, January 9, 2007

Sister links

  • Wikipedia-logo-v2.svg HMS Vanguard and Le Triomphant submarine collision
  • Wikipedia-logo-v2.svg Major submarine incidents since 2000
  • Wikipedia-logo-v2.svg HMS Vanguard (S28)
  • Wikipedia-logo-v2.svg Triomphant (S 616)

Sources

Bookmark-new.svg


This text comes from Wikinews. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 licence. For a complete list of contributors for this article, visit the corresponding history entry on Wikinews.

November 11, 2008

Investigation continues into Russian submarine accident that killed 20

Investigation continues into Russian submarine accident that killed 20

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to: navigation, search

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Library picture of an Akula class submarine
Image: US Dept. of Defense.

On Saturday, twenty people were killed and twenty-one injured by the fire fighting system aboard a submarine of the Russian Pacific Fleet. Further details about the incident were confirmed by Russian officials yesterday, as a formal investigation continued. The incident occurred aboard K-152 Nerpa, a newly built Akula class nuclear submarine, during sea trials in the Sea of Japan. The victims include both sailors and shipyard workers.

The submarine had 208 people aboard—three times the normal crew—when the fire fighting system was triggered by an unknown cause, flooding a forward compartment with Freon gas which is used to extinguish fires by removing oxygen from the atmosphere. Seventeen of the dead are reported to be employees of the Amur Shipbuilding Enterprise, the constructor of the vessel, and three Russian Navy sailors.

The vessel returned to port undamaged, with the injured being conveyed to Vladivostok by destroyer. Russia planned to lease the Nerpa to the Indian Navy in 2009, according to unconfirmed Russian and Indian press reports.



Sources

Wikipedia
Wikipedia has more about this subject:
Russian submarine K-152 Nerpa
Bookmark-new.svg


This text comes from Wikinews. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 licence. For a complete list of contributors for this article, visit the corresponding history entry on Wikinews.

May 28, 2008

UK submarine hits rocks in Red Sea

UK submarine hits rocks in Red Sea – Wikinews, the free news source

UK submarine hits rocks in Red Sea

From Wikinews, the free news source you can write!
Jump to: navigation, search

Wednesday, May 28, 2008

The incident occurred at the Red sea

HMS Superb, a navy submarine from the United Kingdom, crashed into rocks in the northern half of the Red Sea on May 26. The UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) released a statement saying, “there were no casualties and the submarine remains watertight, is safe on the surface and able to operate under its own power.”

The MoD also said that “the submarine’s nuclear reactor is completely unaffected, and there is no environmental impact.”

BBC News has reported that an investigation will be launched to discover the cause of the incident.

According to the MoD, “no other vessel, military or civil, was involved in the incident.” The MoD has stated that the process of informing the relatives of the crew is underway.


Sources

Wikipedia
Wikipedia has more about this subject:
HMS Superb (S109)
Bookmark-new.svg


This text comes from Wikinews. Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 2.5 licence. For a complete list of contributors for this article, visit the corresponding history entry on Wikinews.
Older Posts »

Powered by WordPress