After a gruelling three-day operation, the Russian mini-submarine was brought to the surface early Sunday morning, with all seven crew members alive. The vessel became stranded in fishing nets off the far eastern Russian coast of Kamchatka during a training exercise and was released with the help of British and American rescue workers.
However, this latest accident brought a chilling sense of déjà vu. Almost exactly five years ago the Kursk nuclear submarine sank, killing all 118 sailors on board as oxygen slowly ran out, while the rescue operation proved to be a total disaster. This was the worst known naval accident in Russia’s history.
Following the Kursk tragedy, the Russian Navy faced a further string of mishaps and many believe poor training and insufficient equipment are to blame. In 2003 nine men died when another submarine, K-159, sank as it was being towed to a scrapyard. A year later a failed ballistic missile exercise could have been deadly.. Luckily no lives were lost, but the traditional “Russian habit of relying on mere chance and hoping that everything will work” showed itself again, said Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov.
As it stands the Russian Navy is facing a crisis. Hundreds of submarines and ships are left to “rust away”, with hundreds more decommissioned. In 2003 the Russian navy’s chief of staff, Admiral Vladimir Kuroyedov, announced that a fifth of the fleet would be scrapped because the navy received just 12 per cent of the budget it needed to keep the ships seaworthy.
Negligence possible cause
Lack of funding as well as insufficient training are just a few of the problems facing the once mighty flot, or navy. Often, the ships are sent into operation with faulty equipment or even missing vital machines. Such is the case believed to be in the accident last week.
Alexandra Konstantinovna, a spokeswoman for the shipyard where the submarine was built in 1989, suggested that the accident may have been caused by negligence and poor maintenance.
“The AS-28 submarine that sank off Kamchatka needed repairs. The military knew about this,” she said, reported Timesonline.
Furthermore, the mini-sub was apparently designed to carry only three crew members, not seven. Questions were also raised as to why the ship that delivered the submarine out to sea did not have a second AS-28 vessel, which could have immediately engaged in rescue efforts.
As a result the first rescue ships arrived more than 24 hours later, but again failed to have adequate equipment to carry out the mission. The first British “Scorpio” machines arrived at the scene only on Saturday, more than two days after the submarine sank. In the meantime oxygen levels in the sub were rapidly depleting and temperatures dropped to 6C.
Bad track record
Unfortunately, Russia leaves a bad track record of conducting timely rescue operations. In 1979 dozens died when Soviet authorities banned any information on a deadly germ that leaked from a military facility near Sverdlovsk.
In 1986 the Chernobyl nuclear plant disaster was not revealed until days after the explosion. People continued to live in areas where radiation exceeded many times lifetime dozes, while thousands more suffered diseases or died in later years.
During the 2000 Kursk operation officials again maintained the popular Soviet-style attitude of secrecy and did not reveal the scope of the disaster until two days after the accident. As a result vital time was lost in getting international help to the scene.
As a matter of fact this is the Russian authorities’ usual pattern when treating such crises, left over from the Communist times. They seem to be preoccupied more with preserving media image.
However, last week’s submarine accident did give some hope. Unlike in the Kursk tragedy, officials did not decline international help outright and allowed British, American and Japanese teams to assist. Perhaps they were not prepared to justify yet another fatal operation.
Feeds