Tuesday, December 18, 2007


What's Wrong With This Submarine Story (W3TS2)?

Dec 14, 2007 - Russia completes new experimental "diesel-nuclear" submarine - A new experimental submarine, built in secret, has been completed in Russia, Russia's corporate-owned military news agency Interfax-AVN website (in English) reported on 14 December from Severodvinsk. ... the new sub "is designed to test unique technology in the form of a nuclear reactor installed aboard a diesel submarine as its auxiliary propulsion system". ... the B-90 crew is 52 officers and warrant officers, formed by order of the Northern Fleet commander, its training completed. Capt 1st Rank Sergey Kroshkin is in command.

This submarine has a long life span and can be modernized many times over," AVN notes.
In turn, the Russian navy's information and public relations service told AVN that the new sub is designed for tests of "combat and non-combat unmanned underwater vehicles, as well as other types of sea weapons.

"The construction of the new submarine proceeded amid heightened secrecy, as it - as experts consider - represents a unique experiment by Russian scientists and the military," the report sums up.

The submarine, project number 20120, will be testing a nuclear reactor as a supplementary power generator at a diesel submarine. The submarine was designed by the Rubin engineering company in 1989.

Blatant Contradictions:

1) A diesel - nuclear submarine: The diesel + nuclear combination is not a new concept. The first nuclear submarine SSN-571 Nautilus, laid down in 1952, was also this combination. The Russians have rarely, if ever, been 37 years behind the U.S. in any submarine technology (due to spies and applied research).

2) A nuclear reactor installed as an 'auxiliary propulsion system' would be totally pointless unless it is quieter. If quieter, why would it not be the primary rather than auxilary propulsion? Moreover, nuclear reactors are labor intensive in terms of operation. GOOD ANSWER: To confuse potential listening devices.

3) Despite claims, such as this, that authorities in Nizhny Novgorod Region, accidentally revealed the design for the latest Russian submarine when it posted an account of a meeting with its commander on its website, there has almost certainly been no accidental release of secret submarine information under Vladimir Putin. Give me a break! Intentional advertising (see below) is much more probable than a major security lapse that would embarrass Putin and Russia.

Conforming Conditions:

1) Construction did proceed amid heightened secrecy, as experts consider it represents a unique experiment by Russian scientists and the military. Secrecy is borne out by assignment of the B-90 crew of 52 officers and warrant officers (midshipmen). Basic news advertising is to attract foreign military sales: The spokesman said, This submarine has a long life span and can be modernized many times over, AVN notes. What M.E. believes: If Russia is not serious about foreign military sales, the 'advertising' may only have been to provoke U.S. displeasure, perhaps in retribution for an earlier disagreement between the two powers.

2) Has the U.S. already tried RTG technology? Yes, although it has been discontinued for most non-military uses (like nuclear powered lighthouses), it is still used and planned for space applications. Molten Eagle is unaware of related U.S. submarine tests, except that every feasible advantage would have been explored by our navy, and secrecy is such that unless it were done in crew presence, there is significant likelihood that most other submariners would never have known such trials had even been conducted.

3) AIP (fuel-cell) submarines have tremendous cost and stealth advantages, as related here. The Chesapeake Bay (Baltimore Light) lighthouse M.E. told you about in 2006, had been powered by a 60-watt nuclear STRONTIUM-90 FUEL CELL radioisotope thermoelectric generator (RTG). This was replaced by solar panels for security reasons, we suspect.

4) In the intervening decades, Russians have certainly developed RTGs with higher output efficiencies, longer life and lower cost. Combine this with improvements to storage cells and you might get a great trickle charger for some new submarine batteries that are an excellent energy source for quiet propulsion.

M.E. is not alone in coming to his conclusion. Galrahn at Information Dissemination mentions an RTG application, as well. Submarines are always silent and strange, and their technology will always be linked to space exploration. MSL EDL YouTube:

Submarine technology and space exploration...



Post a Comment

<< Home