Problems of rescue means of the Russian Navy

Newspaper"Military Industrial Courier"published an interesting articleMaxim Klimov "Rescue lottery. Lack of space in the pressure chambers dooms submariners to death", which says that on September 19, the Department for the State Defense Order [of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation] scheduled consideration of proposals for the contest "Implementation of the experimental design work" Development of a modular rescue crew for emergency submarines lying on the ground (code "Luchina") ". Doing this work opens up the prospect of a way out of the protracted crisis of the Navy’s rescue equipment.
Problems of rescue equipment of the Russian Navy man, rescue, project, crew, 02981, rescue, “Igor, boats, Belousov”, decompression, underwater, pressure chambers, pressure chamber, table ”, vessel, accounting,“ round, underwater, complex, possibility

Perspective rescue vessel of project 02981, proposed by JSC “Leningrad Shipbuilding Plant“ Pella ”(c) OJSC“ Leningrad Shipbuilding Plant “Pella”
During the forum "Army-2018", a round table was held between industry and the Navy on the problems of rescue equipment and special underwater vehicles.Today, despite significant financial investments, in fact, the possibility of streaming (simultaneously for a large number of saved) decompression of the crew of a sunken submarine is not ensured, and there are absolutely no such means in the Northern, Baltic and Black Sea fleets, and the newest rescuer "Igor Belousov" is not enough to save the crews of nuclear submarines of the Navy.
The question arises: where did the money spent on this topic go after the death of the Kursk AUCR? And they left a significant part of the mass purchase of imported remote-controlled uninhabited underwater vehicles (TNLA) and the construction of the rescue ship "Igor Belousov." From the report of JSC "Tetis-Pro" at the "round table": "Of the 155 NPA supplied by them to the Navy, only 27 are domestic." But at the same “round table” a report was made on Russian remote-controlled uninhabited underwater vehicles (TNPA) by representatives of Tomsk University of TUSUR. Among others, the long work of domestic TNLA at great depths to search for the Argentine submarine San Juan was mentioned (these TNLA were purchased by a different structure of the RF Ministry of Defense, and not the Navy).Representatives of the 40th Central Research Institute at the "round table" gave a high assessment to the TNPA RTM-500 on the results of work on the AICR "Kursk". However, not a single RTM-500 was purchased by the Navy after that, all the money was spent on imports.
There were a lot of scandals around the rescue ship “Igor Belousov” and its deep-sea diving complex GVK-450, during which the main thing went into the shadow - in fact, the deep-sea diving complex “threw out” the rescue submariners, who remained enough for only 60 people, from a fairly small ship. It turns out that the newest rescue ship of the Navy is unable to provide a single nuclear submarine with the on-line decompression of the crew, and this is the key problem and mistake of this project.
That is, we deliberately lay still living people, raised to the surface from the submarine that had crashed, into “planned losses” - some of the rescued will either die or become disabled without timely decompression. And the opinion that during a submarine accident the majority of the crew “still perishes”, not only blasphemous, but simply wrong - both from the experience of past accidents and due to the peculiarities of the design of our latest-generation submarines (“small food”).
Something incomprehensible is happening with pressure chambers: the newer the project of a rescue ship of the Navy, the worse the situation with them. Let's compare (taking into account the size of the crew, for example, APKR of the project 667BDRM - about 140 people) of the Navy rescue ships:
Alaguez (built by the USSR) - pressure chambers for 100 people;
“Igor Belousov” - pressure chambers for 60 people;
A promising lifeguard of the project 02981 - pressure chambers for 40 people.
It turns out that at the “prospective rescuer” more than two thirds of the submarine’s crew are doomed to be among the planned losses, and even for the personnel of a diesel submarine this is not enough.
There is no doubt that the plant is capable of constructing a series of project 02981 rescuers in a short time, but are such ships really necessary for the Navy? Rescuers are certainly needed, but obviously with a different composition and with other capabilities of the rescue complex.
There was a tough discussion at the round table on this issue. The position of the organization, whose complex is planned to be used, was reduced to the fact that, taking into account the installation of the deep-sea diving complex GVK-300, there is supposedly no room for additional pressure chambers. The question arises: why do we need the GVK itself,if its capabilities are completely overlapped by modern TNPA, and normobaric spacesuits? These questions have been repeatedly put before by experts. So who and from what motives, contrary to professional appraisal, stubbornly pushes the mass supply of the Navy of the GVK not needed by it? In fact, instead of rescuers for the Navy, the supply of ships, carriers of expensive and unnecessary GVK, is lobbied.
Are there any other solutions? Yes, there are proposals for a modular system of assistance and rescue for the crew of a submarine (IOPSE PL) sounded at the Naval Salon in 2017 - a kind of cascade of pressure chambers, providing the required number even on unsuitable vessels. In the basic configuration was declared a complex for 60 people with the possibility of extreme overload up to 120 people. This approach should be considered fundamentally correct: the modular design allows you to increase the capacity of the barocomplex, taking into account the conditions and peculiarities of the rescue team for specific projects.
The obvious solution in our situation is to place on a promising rescue ship of the project 02981 a cascade of pressure chambers of the ISOPS PL withproviding continuous decompression of at least 60 people for the Baltic and Black Sea fleets and at least 140 people for the Northern and Pacific.
In addition, the autonomous underwater rescue vehicles that are commonly used in our country are extremely expensive, have a number of limitations in stormy conditions, and insufficient performance of rescue operations. Taking into account the limited displacement of the rescue vessel of project 02981 and the presence of a dynamic positioning system, it is advisable to install it as the main rescue tool of the modern controlled tethered self-propelled rescue bell (“hybrid of a heavy technical vacuum pump and rescue bell”).
The possibility of creating such a domestic apparatus ("bells") in a short time and for reasonable money is beyond doubt. The creation of such a device provides an opportunity in the conditions of really limited funding to actually create a viable system of rescue for all theaters of the Navy (the need is about six rescue vessels). At the same time, the possibility of accepting the rescuer and using an autonomous underwater projectile should be preserved.

Related news

Problems of rescue means of the Russian Navy image, picture
Problems of rescue means of the Russian Navy 7


Problems of rescue means of the Russian Navy 28


Problems of rescue means of the Russian Navy 12


Problems of rescue means of the Russian Navy 27


Problems of rescue means of the Russian Navy 9


Problems of rescue means of the Russian Navy 8


Problems of rescue means of the Russian Navy 69