От doctor64
К mina
Дата 14.08.2013 11:07:13
Рубрики Флот;

Re: это больше...

> Командир «Скорпиона» так и поступил, но горячая торпеда взорвалась либо в торпедном аппарате, либо сделала циркуляцию и настигла подводную лодку после выстреливания. Подводная лодка в момент катастрофы имела курс, отличающийся на 180° от предписанного. Об этом мы узнали недавно.
А откуда это известно? Вики по данному вопросу гораздо менее уверенно пишет: "
Accidental activation of torpedo

The US Navy's Court of Inquiry listed as one possibility the inadvertent activation of a battery-powered Mark 37 torpedo. This acoustic homing torpedo, in a fully ready condition and without a propeller guard, is believed by some to have started running within the tube. Released from the tube, the torpedo then somehow became fully armed and successfully engaged its nearest target—Scorpion herself. This is considered highly unlikely due to the fact that Scorpion would have maintained the ability to destroy the weapon before it reengaged. Although much has been made of claims by Dr. Craven that the SOSUS network tracked the submarine moving back onto its original course, which would be consistent with performing a 360° turn in an attempt to activate a torpedo's safety systems, Gordon Hamilton has said that the acoustical data is too garbled to reveal any such details.
Explosion of torpedo

A later theory was that a torpedo may have exploded in the tube, caused by an uncontrollable fire in the torpedo room. The book Blind Man's Bluff documents findings and investigation by Dr. John Craven, who surmised that a likely cause could have been the overheating of a faulty battery.[8] (Dr. Craven later stated in the book Silent Steel that he was misquoted.) The Mark 46 silver-zinc battery used in the Mark 37 torpedo had a tendency to overheat, and in extreme cases could cause a fire that was strong enough to cause a low-order detonation of the warhead. If such a detonation had occurred, it might have opened the boat's large torpedo-loading hatch and caused Scorpion to flood and sink. However, while Mark 46 batteries have been known to generate so much heat that the torpedo casings blistered, none is known to have damaged a boat or caused an explosion.[9]

Dr. John Craven mentions that he did not work on the Mark 37 torpedo's propulsion system and only became aware of the possibility of a battery explosion twenty years after the loss of Scorpion. In his book The Silent War, he recounts running a simulation with former Scorpion Executive officer Lieutenant Commander Robert Fountain, Jr. commanding the simulator. Fountain was told he was headed home at 18 knots (33 km/h) at a depth of his choice, then there was an alarm of "hot running torpedo". Fountain responded with "right full rudder", a quick turn that would activate a safety device and keep the torpedo from arming. Then an explosion in the torpedo room was introduced into the simulation. Fountain ordered emergency procedures to surface the boat, stated Dr. Craven, "but instead she continued to plummet, reaching collapse depth and imploding in ninety seconds—one second shy of the acoustic record of the actual event."

Craven, who was the Chief Scientist of the Navy's Special Projects Office, which had management responsibility for the design, development, construction, operational test and evaluation and maintenance of the UGM-27 Polaris Fleet Missile System had long believed Scorpion was struck by her own torpedo, but revised his views during the mid-1990s when engineers testing Mark 46 batteries at Keyport, Washington, said the batteries leaked electrolyte and sometimes burned while outside of their casings during lifetime shock, heat and cold testing. Although the battery manufacturer was accused of building bad batteries, it was later able to successfully prove its batteries were no more prone to failure than those made by other manufacturers."
Ну и требование американской Ассоциации ветеранов-подводников о повторном расследовании гибели Скорпиона в 2012 намекает.
От badger
К doctor64 (14.08.2013 11:07:13)
Дата 14.08.2013 12:36:22

В вики повыше написано про это чуток...

>А откуда это известно? Вики по данному вопросу гораздо менее уверенно пишет: "


в разделе про повреждения корпуса

Observed damage

The secondary Navy investigation – using extensive photographic, video, and eyewitness inspections of the wreckage in 1969 – offered the opinion that Scorpion's hull was crushed by implosion forces as it sank below crush depth. The Structural Analysis Group, which included Naval Ships Systems Command's Submarine Structures director Peter Palermo, plainly saw that the torpedo room was intact, though it had been pinched from the operations compartment by massive hydrostatic pressure. The operations compartment itself was largely obliterated by sea pressure and the engine room had telescoped 50 ft (15 m) forward into the hull by collapse pressure, when the cone-to-cylinder transition junction failed between the auxiliary machine space and the engine room.

The only damage to the torpedo room compartment appeared to be a hatch missing from the forward escape trunk; Palermo pointed out that this would have occurred when water pressure entered the torpedo room at the moment of implosion. He also pointed out that the aft escape trunk hatch was open and the fairing was slightly dislodged, though it was still on its hinges. This conclusion was drawn by Palermo eighteen years after Scorpion was lost, when he reviewed new and extremely clear images taken by Jason Junior and Alvin as part of a Navy-Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution survey of Scorpion's wreck site.

То есть копус Скорпиона разрушен давлением, вследствии погружения ниже предельной глубины, но вот носовой торпедный отсек практически цел, если не считать поверждений переднего и заднего спасательных люков...
От doctor64
К badger (14.08.2013 12:36:22)
Дата 14.08.2013 15:06:19

Re: В вики

>>А откуда это известно? Вики по данному вопросу гораздо менее уверенно пишет: "
>

>в разделе про повреждения корпуса

>То есть копус Скорпиона разрушен давлением, вследствии погружения ниже предельной глубины, но вот носовой торпедный отсек практически цел, если не считать поверждений переднего и заднего спасательных люков...
Вот-вот. То есть на взрыв торпеды внутри отсека мало похоже, в отличии от того же Курска.
От mina
К doctor64 (14.08.2013 15:06:19)
Дата 14.08.2013 16:21:10

разницу между БЗО Mk37 и 65-76А представляете?

при реальных стрельбах по ПЛ (ВМВ) амы порой вынужденых были добивать их противокорабельными торпедами (т.к. БЧ Mk37 "Гэтоу" было мало)

С уважением, mina
От doctor64
К mina (14.08.2013 16:21:10)
Дата 14.08.2013 17:06:28

Не представляю.

>при реальных стрельбах по ПЛ (ВМВ) амы порой вынужденых были добивать их противокорабельными торпедами (т.к. БЧ Mk37 "Гэтоу" было мало)
Я вообще не специалист в подлодках, потому и спрашиваю, от чего погиб Скорпион
От mina
К doctor64 (14.08.2013 17:06:28)
Дата 14.08.2013 17:19:51

грубо - на порядок (в ТНТ)

>Я вообще не специалист в подлодках, потому и спрашиваю, от чего погиб Скорпион

Дело в том что Гусев писал это опираясь не на литературу типа "Тайны подводного шпионажа", а опираясь на "совсем другую литературу", "вышедшую много раньше" и с "соотв. надписью в правом верхнем углу".

Разумеется за Р=1 - это к Господу богу, но уже факто того что амеры провели экстренную замену (практически до конца 70) всего проежнего торпедного боезапаса (в т.ч. "электричек") на Mk48 говорит о многом

С уважением, mina
От doctor64
К mina (14.08.2013 17:19:51)
Дата 14.08.2013 18:01:39

Re: грубо -...

>>Я вообще не специалист в подлодках, потому и спрашиваю, от чего погиб Скорпион
>
>Дело в том что Гусев писал это опираясь не на литературу типа "Тайны подводного шпионажа", а опираясь на "совсем другую литературу", "вышедшую много раньше" и с "соотв. надписью в правом верхнем углу".
Понятно. "У нас есть такие приборы"

>Разумеется за Р=1 - это к Господу богу, но уже факто того что амеры провели экстренную замену (практически до конца 70) всего проежнего торпедного боезапаса (в т.ч. "электричек") на Mk48 говорит о многом
Нуу, знаете, это сильно косвенное доказательство. Учитывая тот же прогресс электроники - смена поколения торпед, имхо, совсем не удивительна.
От mina
К doctor64 (14.08.2013 18:01:39)
Дата 14.08.2013 18:13:58

в ряде "частных, но актуальных случаев" Mk37 была лучше (например подо льдом) (-)