“A US military source in the documentary declares the hole to be the trademark evidence of an American MK-48 torpedo, which is made to melt cleanly through steel sheet due to a mechanism at its tip that combusts copper. “
The MK-48 has been operational in the U.S. Navy since 1972. The MK-48 is designed to combat fast, deep-diving nuclear submarines and high performance surface ships. It is propelled by a piston engine with twin, contra-rotating propellers in a pump jet or shrouded configuration. The engine uses a liquid monopropellant fuel, and the torpedo has a conventional, high-explosive warhead weighing 650 lbs (292.5 kg). The ADCAP version, in comparison with earlier MK 48 torpedoes, has improved target acquisition range, reduced vulnerability to enemy countermeasures, reduced shipboard constraints such as warmup and reactivation time, and enhanced effectiveness against surface ships. The MK 48 Mod 5 ADCAP torpedo is an improvement to the MK 48 submarine launched torpedo. It is a heavyweight acoustic homing torpedo with sophisticated sonar and a fuzed warhead.
Unless I’m missing something, a high explosive warhead as found on Mk48 would generally not make a nice neat round hole in a sub’s hull. For that you’ld need a torpedo with a directed energy shaped charge warhead such as found on the Mk50 and the MU90 advanced multirole lightweight torpedos. So much for that military source’s credibility (assuming he said it was a Mk48, which may not be the case: others could have misinterpreted him)
A sublaunched Mk48 torpedo sinking a frigate (illustrative image sequence)
Illustrated explanation of the sinking process
Besides, the article shows limited knowledge about the hull of the Kursk. Here’s an exerpt from a BBC program on what sank the Kursk
NARRATOR: The Kursk was not just powerful. She was also built to be invulnerable. She was as tall as a six-storey building and 150 metres long, more than the length of two Jumbo jets. Her size alone made her hard to destroy, but to make her unsinkable she had been given a double hull. She had an outer hull made of solid steel, but inside this was another steel hull over 5 centimetres thick containing the crew. Western submarines do not have this double protection. Within this cocoon she was also divided into nine separate watertight compartments. The Kursk was built to take a direct hit and yet still survive.
VIKTOR ROZHKOV: You can’t take the Kursk out even with a torpedo. Yes, there may be some damage, but she’ll always be always to come to the surface.
… of course, this is the exact reason why Mk50 and MU90 were fitted with a shaped charge warhead.
The one on D638 LA GALISSONNIERE is the only one that can be considered periscopic. The hangar on Krivak 3 is a regular fixed hanger: helicopter moves in and out horizontally. The hangar on Udaloy is interesting in that it has two helicopter hangars of which the floor is lower than the flight deck. AFAIK, there is a ramp behind the hangar doors by means of which a helo can reach the flight deck from the hanger. There is no lift and in that sense the Udaloy hangar as not periscopic. Each of these three ships represents a distinct way to house a helicopter on board.
As opposed to the Telescopic hangers that we’ve been talking about, I think these systems are really interesting because not only do they save space, but they also allow for a capability jump on small ships.
Some ships that have this system are:
La Galissonniere (T 56 class DD from France)
Udaloy Class (Russian DDG’s)
Krivak III (Russian FFG’s)
Don’t know about the T556 class but the hangar in Udaloy class is totally different from that in the Krivak 3.
Sign In
