• Nuclear sub on fire in Murmansk
    32 replies, posted
This is just in, Norwegian papers have reported more then RT, but this was the only English source I could find: [url]http://rt.com/news/nuclear-submarine-fire-russia-929/[/url] [QUOTE]A dockyard is on fire in northern Russia with a nuclear submarine based at the dock ablaze. Eleven fire crews, a helicopter and a boat are working to put the fire out.Authorities say that the wooden scaffold around the submarine caught fire, which then spread to the outer skin of the vessel. However they rule out the possibility of the fire getting inside the submarine. Russia’s Emergency Ministry confirmed that the scaffold caught fire as a result of procedural violations during repair works. They also say that radiation levels are normal at the moment and there is no threat of radioactive contamination in the area. “Ahead of putting the submarine in for scheduled repairs, the reactor was shut down, and right now is in a secure condition,” a spokesperson for Russia’s Ministry of Defense said. The nuclear submarine “Yekaterinburg,” built in 1984, was undergoing repairs at a dock in Murmansk Region and was raised from the water in a dry dock at the moment that the fire broke out.[/QUOTE] Red part is Murmansk, up there by the Scandinavian schlong. Supposedly they've shut down the nuclear reactors on the sub. We're cool.
If only the outside is on fire then why don't they just get it out of the harbor and dive to periscope depth? Ah, I just read the part about the dry dock.
A submarine catching fire. You can't make this shit up.
[QUOTE=Clavus;33952265]A submarine catching fire. You can't make this shit up.[/QUOTE] dry dock, also the scaffolding around it caught on fire, also enveloping the sub itself though I first thought that the sub was submerged/afloat, and the fire was inside, in which case it'd be much worse
Watch the general public freak out thinking it's going to explode
i thought it said nuclear sub fires on murmansk and for a second i was like OH SHIT SON
God for a second I thought this was a rerun of that one sub that sank after catching on fire in 2001. Hopefully everyone is alright, they lost all crew on that one ten years ago, I don't think they want a repeat performance.
It's actually only a cover story for a new secret procedure during which they temper the whole hull of the sub and make it completely invincible.
[QUOTE=Awesomecaek;33952832]It's actually only a cover story for a new secret procedure during they temper the whole hull of the sub and make it completely invincible.[/QUOTE] [thumb]http://media.moddb.com/cache/images/mods/1/10/9108/thumb_620x2000/Soviet-IronCurtain.2.png[/thumb] first thing that came to mind, even though they're not the same :v:
[QUOTE=GameDev;33952456]Watch the general public freak out thinking it's going to explode[/QUOTE] You should see vg.no, Norways most sensationalistic (and popular) tabloid. "NUCLEAR FIRE NEAR NORWAY, WINDS BLOWING TOWARDS NORWAY, RADIATION POSSIBLE?" "ARE YOU IN MURMANSK? EVACTUATION NUCLEAR EXPLOSION AAAAAAAAA" I mean Jesus Christ. I saw the headlines and got a heart attack until I actually read it. Why the hell would they even include "winds blowing towards Norway" in an article where there was NO radiation leak. But then again that's what VG does best. Bullshit to sell papers.
Isn't murmansk full of sunken nuclear subs anyway
Wonder why they're using wooden scaffolding? If you can afford a nuclear submarine. . . You would at the least think they would invest in some sturdier non-flammable metal scaffolding.
[QUOTE=Dysgalt;33955687]Wonder why they're using wooden scaffolding? If you can afford a nuclear submarine. . . You would at the least think they would invest in some sturdier non-flammable metal scaffolding.[/QUOTE] they spent all their money on the sub obviously
[QUOTE=mankind_me;33953007][thumb]http://media.moddb.com/cache/images/mods/1/10/9108/thumb_620x2000/Soviet-IronCurtain.2.png[/thumb] first thing that came to mind, even though they're not the same :v:[/QUOTE] fuck yeah red alert 2
As huge a supporter of nuclear power as I am, maybe we should just give the fuck up on fission power. If we're not competent enough to take care of nuclear reactors, or the areas around them, then we really shouldn't be using them. I mean, communism looks great on paper before you factor in fucking humans themselves, and then the whole thing goes to hell. Fission power seems to be the same recently. It's an awesome thing in theory, but it seems to be going to hell in practice because we're stupid enough to put reactors in silly places (like on fucking fault lines), and apparently we suck at maintaining them correctly. We should get our fucking act together or we should stop toying with potentially dangerous technologies. Hell, build thorium reactors or work on fusion reactors - that'd be a better idea.
Why is it always Russian nuclear submarines that have these problems.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;33964297]Why is it always Russian nuclear submarines that have these problems.[/QUOTE] It's Russians in fucking general (well, anyone who was a part of the former USSR, I suppose). I mean whoever designed the fucking reactor at Chernobyl must have been mentally deficient, or on some seriously hard drugs. "Oh, guys, guys, I have a brilliant idea!... Let's stick a neutron moderator onto the tips of the control rods!"
[QUOTE=sltungle;33964316]It's Russians in fucking general (well, anyone who was a part of the former USSR, I suppose). I mean whoever designed the fucking reactor at Chernobyl must have been mentally deficient, or on some seriously hard drugs. "Oh, guys, guys, I have a brilliant idea!... Let's stick a neutron moderator onto the tips of the control rods!"[/QUOTE] To be honest the chernobyl disaster was more because of bureaucracy and certain politicians wanting it finished at a certain time meaning the people building it had to cut corners.
[QUOTE=carcarcargo;33964337]To be honest the chernobyl disaster was more because of bureaucracy and certain politicians wanting it finished at a certain time meaning the people building it had to cut corners.[/QUOTE] I know, I know. The guy in charge of the politics at the time was a corrupt cunt. But honestly... why the fuck did anybody decide to do that at any point in the design? You don't ACCIDENTALLY cap a control rod with fucking graphite (let alone ALL of them), that's an intentional design choice and I can't for the life of me understand why you'd make a decision as stupid as that.
Chernobyl v2 - mutant fish.
[QUOTE=GameDev;33952456]Watch the general public freak out thinking it's going to explode[/QUOTE] they see "Nuclear sub" think "Nuclear bomb". [editline]30th December 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Xperia;33964934]Chernobyl v2 - mutant fish.[/QUOTE] Except "CHERNOBYL" takes please in, yes, you guessed it, Chernobyl! Seriously this joke is funny every 1000 times some one makes it keep it up
[QUOTE=sltungle;33964266]As huge a supporter of nuclear power as I am, maybe we should just give the fuck up on fission power. If we're not competent enough to take care of nuclear reactors, or the areas around them, then we really shouldn't be using them. I mean, communism looks great on paper before you factor in fucking humans themselves, and then the whole thing goes to hell. Fission power seems to be the same recently. It's an awesome thing in theory, but it seems to be going to hell in practice because we're stupid enough to put reactors in silly places (like on fucking fault lines), and apparently we suck at maintaining them correctly. We should get our fucking act together or we should stop toying with potentially dangerous technologies. Hell, build thorium reactors or work on fusion reactors - that'd be a better idea.[/QUOTE] But this fire had nothing to do with the reactor...
[QUOTE=ExplodingGuy;33965097]But this fire had nothing to do with the reactor...[/QUOTE] That's not the point. The point is the sub should NEVER have been in an environment that could have led to it becoming compromised like that. It's something stupid like that which results in a fucking catastrophe.
[QUOTE=sltungle;33965443]That's not the point. The point is the sub should NEVER have been in an environment that could have led to it becoming compromised like that. It's something stupid like that which results in a fucking catastrophe.[/QUOTE] so you mean a submarine should never be docked to be repaired, so that it wears out then fucks up horribly in the middle of the ocean? nice thinking there, genius
[QUOTE=mankind_me;33966113]so you mean a submarine should never be docked to be repaired, so that it wears out then fucks up horribly in the middle of the ocean? nice thinking there, genius[/QUOTE] I'm thinking he is implying not to dock your sub on-top of a flammable structure. Because if scaffolding collapses then the sub could fall into the dry dock's floor resulting in an even bigger fucking mess possibly even a torpedo detonating knowing the craftsmanship of Russian engineering. Which would end badly.
[QUOTE=Dysgalt;33966953]I'm thinking he is implying not to dock your sub on-top of a flammable structure. Because if scaffolding collapses then the sub could fall into the dry dock's floor resulting in an even bigger fucking mess possibly even a torpedo detonating knowing the craftsmanship of Russian engineering. Which would end badly.[/QUOTE] I don't think they held up the sub only with wooden scaffolding.
[QUOTE=mankind_me;33967121]I don't think they held up the sub only with wooden scaffolding.[/QUOTE] True there could also be separate materials that compose the scaffolding. But the risk of destabilizing the total framework still stands as it could weaken other materials like plastics (PVC tubing), and if the fire is extremely hot it could have weakened metal structures, but since the sub itself seems fine I'd rule out extreme heat.
Glad to hear nothing was seriously damaged. Shit would have hit the fan if the fire spread to the missile tubes.
STALKER 2 Shadow of Murmansk
But. But. I thought submarines are in water?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.