What the underwater have. What did Dönitz's "gray wolves" eat? Combat experience

Thanks to the novel by Lothar-Günter Buchheim and the film of the same name by Wolfgang Petersen “Das Boot”, which were released in the 70-80s of the last century, interest in the actions of the German submarine fleet in the Second World War sharply increased. History buffs began to have many questions not only about combat operations, but also about the life of submariners. Of particular interest is the topic of crew nutrition, selection and storage of food on a submarine during long voyages, including those that a person cannot do without for a long time. Why did German submariners take with them fresh bread, which quickly became moldy in high humidity conditions, and not crackers, which were stored longer?

Supply problems

The Germans did an excellent job of supplying their submarines with food. After the establishment of German hegemony in Europe, products for submarine bases were supplied from France, Denmark, Portugal, Spain, Italy, etc. On the boat trip they took fresh and cooked meat, fresh vegetables and fruits, cheese, honey, chocolate, smoked sausages, juices, various canned goods and much more. There was only one problem - on a hike, in conditions of poor ventilation and high humidity, fresh food quickly deteriorated. As a result, the submariners had to sit on a canned-vitamin diet - the longer the trip, the worse the nutritional situation was.

In general, the diet of German submariners was very varied and not lacking in delicacies. In this photo taken in 1944, two crew members of the submarine U 672 pose with lobsters.

The boats were equipped with provisions and refrigeration chambers, but when issuing technical assignments to submarine designers in peacetime, it was difficult for the German Navy command to imagine that medium-sized boats of type VII would operate off the coast of the USA, Africa and the Caribbean, and large boats of type IX - in the Indian Ocean.

During the war, we had to improvise and adapt to the situation, which required increasing the autonomy of the boats. The submarines received provisions at sea from supply ships, called at the ports of Spain to replenish supplies, and then “cash cows” appeared - transport boats of the XIV series. However, this did not completely solve the problem. The provisions spoiled, became saturated with different odors - in general, gourmets with a delicate gastronomic taste had nothing to do on the “seven” or “nine”.

How was the food supply for the crew calculated?

In this matter, the role of two members of the submarine’s crew was very important - the third watch officer (or navigator) and the cook, who were responsible for the preparation of provisions. The cook, or, as the submariners called him, “smutje” (smutje, smut - which can be roughly translated as a mocking “dirty”, “dirty one”), was a person with a special status on the boat. He had to not only cook well, but also have the talent of a restaurateur to create a menu for each day of the voyage.

The cook of the boat U 604 supervises the loading of provisions. In the foreground are jars of canned fruit (left). Numerous sausages and hams hang from the ceiling of the compartment, adjacent to the equipment (right)

Based on the approximate duration of the trip, a calculation was made of the quantity and range of products that the navigator received in the warehouse. After this, the provisions were loaded onto the boat under the control of the navigator and mechanical engineer to the places that were most suitable for storage. The placement of products on a boat has always followed three basic rules:

1. The products had to be placed and secured so as not to fall or fly apart during the maneuvering of the boat and its attack with depth charges.
2. Provisions had to be distributed evenly throughout the boat so as not to create trim or reduce it to a minimum, while food consumption had to be taken into account. The daily food consumed was weighed so that the mechanical engineer could balance the weight with ballast.
3. The placement of products should not have interfered with free access to all hatches and valves.

The main storage areas for provisions were the bow, stern and electric engine compartments, and this was logical. It was impossible to store anything in the diesel compartment, since the food would quickly become saturated with the smell of diesel fuel, which is known to be pervasive. Under no circumstances should the central post be cluttered, since this is the place where the ship is controlled; it would not be possible to accommodate much in the living quarters of officers and petty officers, and all passages had to remain free.

Fruit boxes in the bow compartment of the U 295 boat are adjacent to torpedoes. The inscription “Nantes” is clearly visible - the surroundings of the French Nantes are famous for their apple orchards to this day

This is what the supply of provisions looked like on a type IXC boat with a crew of 55 people, calculating its nutrition for a 12-week period. The boat was loaded with food and drinks weighing more than 12 tons (12,583 kg), including:

• fresh and cooked meat – 224 kg
• sausages – 108 kg
• canned meat – 2180 kg
• canned fish – 150 kg
• fresh potatoes – 1750 kg
• other vegetables – 1555 kg
• lemons – 416 kg
• fresh fruit – 300 kg
• fresh eggs – 270 kg
• butter – 50 kg
• cheese – 50 kg + 65 kg (hard and processed)
• coffee – 60 kg
• tea – 3 kg
• milk – 784 kg
• fresh bread – 456 kg
• canned bread – 660 kg

“Take bread for dinner in moderation...”

Bread on a submarine was a necessary product, and it also presented special storage problems. Undoubtedly, in these conditions, the solution to the problem would be the use of crackers, which are stored much longer, but are inferior to bread in taste and, if consumed for a long time, cause digestive problems, so the Germans approached the issue differently. They used fresh bread, which the submariners received the interesting nickname “rabbit”. Here's how the famous German submarine ace Reinhard Suhren wrote about it:

“The biggest problem was bread. We hung it in nets so as to provide air flow to it, but still after a while it deteriorated, began to mold and became like a white and fluffy rabbit, because it was covered with a lot of mold. We cut it off as much as possible and ate bread. When the trek lasted more than four weeks, nutrition became a problem and keeping the team healthy became difficult.”

A cook works his magic on cooking in the cramped galley of a German submarine (left).
Eating on the upper deck of a German submarine. The photo was taken pre-war (right)

In addition to fresh bread, there was also canned bread, but what quality was it? This question was answered by a very unusual witness. On November 21, 1942, U 163 sank the British merchant ship Empire Starling, taking the ship's captain Eric Monckton on board as a prisoner of war. Subsequently, Monckton left interesting memories of his stay on board U 163, including the food:

« Breakfast was served at seven in the morning and consisted of milk soup, coffee and biscuits or bread with jam. The bread was stored in hermetically sealed cylindrical jars about 10 cm in diameter and 23 cm in length. In this form it was preserved very well and, perhaps, was only a little dry.”

As a result, the supply system seems quite logical. The supply of bread on the submarine was divided into two almost equal parts, consisting of fresh and canned bread. Fresh bread, of course, did not last long, and they tried to eat it as quickly as possible. After the fresh bread was eaten or became unusable, there was still a fairly large supply of canned bread on the boat, the use of which was strictly limited.

Washing dishes on a submarine after eating (left).
Judging by the facial hair of the submariners, the trip lasts for more than a week, and no one is against diversifying the menu with fresh fish. The photo shows a shark being cut on the deck of a German submarine (right)

If you look at the menu of the crew of the boat U 93, compiled by the cook for the fourth week of the voyage (January 12–18, 1942), it becomes clear that bread was served to the “table” twice a day (it is not clear what explains the absence of dinner on Thursday - was it missed? it was on the menu due to an oversight, or it was an official “fast day”):

Monday:

breakfast: coffee, bread, lard

lunch: lentils and sausages, plums

dinner: tea, butter, bread, various sausages and meat

breakfast: coffee, buns, butter, jam

lunch: soup, pork, potatoes, vegetables

dinner: tea, butter, bread, various sausages

breakfast: corn flakes, buns, oil

lunch: poached eggs, spinach, potatoes, apricots

dinner: tea, butter, bread, tongue, sausage, cheese

breakfast: coffee, bread, butter, jam, cheese

lunch: sauerkraut, pork knuckle, stewed apples

breakfast: coffee, butter, bread, eggs

lunch: soup, goulash, potatoes, peaches

dinner: tea, butter, bread, various sausages

breakfast: coffee, butter, bread, jam

lunch: noodle soup, beef, pudding

dinner: tea, butter, bread, cold meat

Sunday:

breakfast: coffee, bread, eggs, butter

lunch: pork, cabbage, strawberries and cream

dinner: tea, butter, ham, bread, sausage

It is worth noting that German submarines had the opportunity to receive freshly baked bread directly at sea, at a rendezvous with “cash cows” - the latter were equipped with electric ovens for baking bread. Thus, the report on the first voyage of the transport U 459, the lead boat of Project XIV, said:

“In about 10 hours of operation on board, about 80 kilogram loaves of fresh bread can be baked. About 800 of these loaves were baked overnight, transferred to the boats and happily received by their crews. In addition, approximately 250 loaves are prepared for in-house use. Baked rye bread is hearty and has great taste and well kept..."

A photograph taken from U 604 in February 1943 shows a rendezvous with the cash cow U 459 in the North Atlantic to replenish supplies, including provisions.

To the above, it is worth adding that each combat boat had its own 300-kilogram supply of dough, as well as biscuits - obviously, Admiral Doenitz’s subordinates did not need crackers.

List of used literature:

1. Paterson L. U-Boat Combat Missions – Chatham Publishing, London 2007
2. Paterson L. U-Boat War Patrol – The Hidden Photographic Diary of U 564 – Chatham Publishing, London 2006
3. Malmann Showell J. Wolfpacks at War – The U-Boat Experience in World War II – Compendium Publishing, 2001
4. Uboat.Net (http://uboat.net)
5. U-boat Archive (http://www.uboatarchive.net)

The menu of sailors on a submarine has always been practically Michelin-starred: in their galleys you can find canned food pig tongues in jelly, duck and turkey meat, ham, red caviar, cod liver, sprats, saury or pink salmon.

The main dinner dishes - meat, stews, vegetables - are made from products in packaging made of lamister material, this kind of lacquered aluminum foil. For breakfasts and dinners there are also special mixtures - dry egg “Omelette”, for pancakes with milk powder. Potatoes, vegetables and fruits, fruit and berry compotes for submarines are pasteurized with the biologically active substance “Super Nisolact”. It brings the production of canned food closer to the life processes occurring in nature and eliminates the use of harmful chemical substances.

Thus, taking care of the healthy nutrition of submariners is an urgent need, and it is not that the naval authorities are particularly philanthropic. Absence natural light and fresh air, a confined space leads to digestive disorders - appetite decreases, and then performance. Limited movement also plays a role: if you do not correctly calculate the calorie content of foods, the personnel can easily approach Shrek’s constitution.

In total, the assortment of submariners' food products includes about 135 items: there are freeze-dried apricots and strawberries, honey and jam - sometimes even pink or walnut jam. During an autonomous voyage, everyone is entitled to 50 grams of dry red wine, like cabernet, because it removes radionuclides from the body.

The sailors are given chocolate and roach as rations. Why roach if it goes with wine? They say that when they were planning how to support the forces of submariners - beer or wine, opinions were divided. We finally settled on wine, but forgot to remove the roach from the ration. The official version says that sailors love vobla, especially when rocking, as it reduces unfavorable well-being due to seasickness.

The bread deserves special mention - it is also canned. Previously, loaves were preserved in alcohol for long-term storage. The cook pierced it with a knife, soaked it in water and placed it in the oven. The alcohol and water were evaporated, resulting in fresh, hot bread. Nowadays bread is preserved by heat - no matter how it sounds, this is a healthier way to preserve it for a long time than alcohol sterilization.

Finally, underwater nutrition has two more outstanding points. Firstly, it is by food that sailors determine whether it is morning, afternoon or evening. Secondly, there are three rotating shifts per day, so the cooks have to endlessly set and clear tables - as if they were serving an endless mad tea party of Alice from Wonderland.

The material is largely consonant with personal feelings about what is happening with the domestic navy, however, at the same time it contains something that has never been heard of before, namely a new way to identify and track submarines:

“...a technology that allows aircraft to carry out a radar search for submarines in a submerged (underwater) position based on disturbances in the surface environment they create while moving (the radar detects, as it were, “traces” on the surface of the water, which are left by a submarine moving in the depths).”

Of course, it became very interesting to figure out what we were talking about, fortunately the author of the article, respected Alexander Timokhin, not only described the phenomenon, but also provided a fairly broad evidence base, with links to sources, including English-language ones.

So we have the thesis:

“Taking all of the above together, we have to admit: the possibility of detecting a submarine using radar and optical-electronic surveillance of the surface of water or ice is a reality. And this reality, unfortunately, is completely denied by modern Russian naval strategy.”

Let us study the sources on the basis of which the respected A. Timokhin formulated this thesis. So, the first is the report “A RADAR METHOD FOR THE DETECTION OF SUBMERGED SUBMARINES”, published in 1975. The author of this article downloaded and diligently translated English text, as far as it was in his power (alas, the level of proficiency English language“reading with a dictionary”, so mistakes are possible). In short, the essence of the report is as follows:

1. Since the Second World War, and especially during 1959-1968. There have been numerous cases of radar detection of submarines traveling underwater. Almost all types of American submarines that existed at that time were discovered at depths of up to 700 feet (213.5 m).

2. Although in some cases it was possible to control the movement of the submarine for quite a long time (up to 2 hours), in general this effect was not permanent. That is, it could be observed at some point, and then not observed: they could detect the submarine, immediately lose it and not be able to restore contact, even knowing the position of the submarine.

3. And now - the strangest, and very unusual. The fact is that it was not a submarine that was detected by the radar - this is impossible, the radar does not work under water. It can be assumed that the radar detects some traces above the submarine on the surface of the sea... nothing like that! Radar detects disturbances in the airspace 1000-2000 feet (300-600 m) above sea level! It sounds completely crazy (which the author of the report himself admits), but, nevertheless, it has been repeatedly confirmed by observations.

To avoid misunderstandings with the translation, I will quote a fragment of the report in English:

“It is hard to imagine how a submerged submarine can give rise to an effect one or two thousand feet above the surface. It is indeed understandable why there might be skepticism. Nevertheless, it is an experimental observation reported on many occasions."

Then the author of the report points out that the United States has not been able to come up with a theory that could justify such a phenomenon and tries to explain what, in his opinion, is still happening. Having considered various “sources” that, at least theoretically, could lead to such a phenomenon (thermal footprint, the influence of magnetic fields, etc.), the author comes to the following conclusion.

The radar sees some kind of “air turbulence”, and this is how it is formed. It is known that the layer of air near sea water is saturated with water vapor and is in constant motion (convection). A large underwater body, such as a submarine, exerts pressure on the water in which it moves, including upward (that is, the boat, as it were, “pushes” the water column, “pushing” the water in different directions). This pressure creates an underwater wave, also directed upward, which, upon reaching the surface layer of water, changes it relative to its natural state (the report calls this effect the “Bernoulli Hump”). And these changes provoke the direction of convective air movement and ultimately create the same air turbulence that is detected by the radar.

The author points out that work in this area in the United States was curtailed, and believes that this was done in vain, because the indicated effect, which makes it possible to observe submarines, although does not occur on an ongoing basis, is still observed quite regularly. And the lack of a theory why this happens is not a reason to stop working in this direction. It’s interesting that the report ends with a classic horror story: Russian BODs are equipped with very powerful radars, stronger than those that the United States used to monitor submarines, which means they probably figured it all out a long time ago and...

Thus, we can summarize: according to American data and in certain circumstances, a submarine located underwater can be detected using radar. But... it must be said that the Americans took the underwater threat very seriously. The memory of the “Dönitz boys” was still fresh, and the Soviet fleet in the 50s and 60s was built primarily underwater.

Diesel submarine of project 613. In the period 1950-1957. 215 boats were built

And yet the Americans are closing the project. This can only mean one thing - despite many precedents at that time, the detection of submarines using radar never reached the level of technology, that is, something that could give stable results when searching for enemy submarines. However, there is no information that the Americans have resumed work in this direction. That is, we have a report in which the author considers it necessary to resume work on this project, but there is no evidence that his opinion was listened to.

The next argument in favor of the fact that the Americans not only resumed work on radar methods for detecting submarines, but also achieved complete success in them, is the story of Lieutenant General V.N. Sokerin, former commander of the Air Force and Air Defense of the Baltic Fleet.

Without quoting it in full, let us briefly recall the essence: in 1988, the Northern Fleet conducted exercises during which 6 nuclear and 4 diesel submarines were deployed at sea. At the same time, each of them received its own sea area where it was supposed to be located, however, within the given area (and they were quite extensive), the commander himself determined where his underwater ship would be located. In other words, until the end of the maneuvers, no one, including the fleet command, could know the exact location of the deployed ships. And then the patrol “Orion” of our “sworn friends” appeared - it passed over the submarine deployment areas along a strange, “broken” route. And when naval officers compared the maneuvering of our submarines, then:
“...by superimposing the “movement” route of “Orion” on the map, I made clear conclusion, all ten “turning” points of his actual route were absolutely exactly above the actual location (for the duration of the flight) of all 10 (!) boats. Those. the first time in 1 hour and 5 minutes, the second - in 1 hour and 7 minutes, one plane “covered” all 10 pl.”

What would you like to say about this? Just a few words about the person who told us this: Viktor Nikolaevich Sokerin, an honored military pilot of Russia, commanded the Air Force and Air Defense of the Baltic Fleet in 2000-2004 and... left this post, like the ranks of our armed forces, writing a report “on his own” , in protest against the collapse of Russian naval (and other) aviation. But he was “in sight”, “in good standing” with our powers that be. I think there is no point in explaining that no matter how bad the state of a particular branch of the military is, its senior officers always have the opportunity to ensure a comfortable and comfortable existence for themselves. That's all there is to do - somewhere to remain diplomatically silent, somewhere to cheerfully report what they are waiting to hear from you... But Viktor Nikolaevich was a person of a completely different type, one of those for whom the work he was doing was above all else. I recommend reading his collection of poems - yes, not Pushkin’s style, but how much love he has for the sky and airplanes... And also V.N. Sokerin served in the north for a long time and was friends with Timur Avtandilovich Apakidze.

Of course, the author of this article wanted to know in more detail what V.N. said. Sokerin on the issues of detecting submarines using radar methods. And this is where things got weird. The fact is that the respected A. Timokhin writes that quotes from V.N. Sokerin was taken from the article “What to ask Yasen” by M. Klimov, but... the problem is that they are not there. The author of the article, Maxim Klimov, mentions the fact of identifying 10 Soviet submarines, but without any reference to the respected V.N. Sokerina. Well, let's look.

Google reported that these lines appear in the article “Anti-submarine warfare. A view from the S.S.S.R.,” which came from the pen of Alexander Sergeevich Semenov.

“There was direct evidence that the US Navy was much further along in developing “unconventional” search methods. I will give the testimony of the commander of naval aviation of the Baltic Fleet..."

.

In confirmation of his words, A.S. Semyonov provides an interesting screenshot

I would like to note the following. The authenticity of this screenshot does not raise the slightest doubt. It is well known that V.N. After retiring, Sokerin did not shy away from the Internet at all; by the way, there is his material on VO), and he was also most likely present on the AVIAFORUM website, where, in fact, this screenshot was taken. Alas, today the discussion thread in which this comment by V.N. Sokerin, is in the archive, so it is impossible to get to it “from the Internet”. However, one of the forum administrators was kind enough to confirm the existence of this comment.

And here the author of this article finds himself in a very ambiguous position. On the one hand, Viktor Nikolaevich’s words do not require any confirmation or evidence - they themselves are evidence. On the other hand... If this had been said in an interview, or stated in an article, there could no longer be any options. But a remark on the Internet, especially taken out of context, is still a little different. When communicating on such forums “for their own people,” people can joke, tell stories, etc., without thinking that someone will then use their words “ scientific dissertation will protect." Let us repeat, much has become clearer; it would be possible to read the entire forum thread, but alas, it is not. And it won’t be possible to ask Viktor Nikolaevich - he left this forum many years ago.

But here’s what else needs to be especially noted - reading the words of V.N. Sokerina, we still do not see direct confirmation that the radar method of detecting enemy submarines was brought to fruition in the United States. Dear V.N. Sokerin only says that “Orion” accurately identified the location of our submarines, and he himself is not the primary source of information (speaks from the words of an unnamed officer) and makes the assumption that perhaps this is a consequence of the “Window” theme, which our abandoned, but the Americans promoted it.

Royal Australian Air Force Orion

But remember that, in addition to hydroacoustic, there are other methods for determining the location of submarines. One of them is magnetometric, aimed at detecting anomalies magnetic field The lands created by such a large object as a submarine. Or, for example, infrared (which, by the way, should in no case be confused with radar) - the fact is that a nuclear submarine uses water as a coolant, which is then dumped overboard, having, of course, a higher temperature than the sea or ocean surrounding the boat. And this can be tracked. Of course, such a method is only suitable for detecting atomic submarines, but over time - who knows? After all, a submarine moves in the water column, “pushing” the water away from itself with a propeller or water cannon, and in any case, this is friction. And friction, as we know, increases body temperature, and, in principle, the wake is probably at least a little warmer than the water surrounding it. The only question is the “sensitivity” of surveillance devices.

That is, strictly speaking, the fact that the Americans detected our submarines (which, in fact, is what V.N. Sokerin is talking about) does not yet indicate the triumph of the radar method of detecting submarines - perhaps the Americans used some other method earlier existing method by improving it.

By the way, what kind of “Window theme” is this? Let’s try to figure this out based on the same article “Anti-submarine warfare. A view from S.S.S.R.” A.S. Semenov, especially since the respected A. Timokhin in his article “presents him as:

“One of the “fathers” of the “Window” theme, an anti-submarine pilot from the Pacific Fleet”

Operating principle of “Window” A.S. Semenov describes it this way:

“...using on-board radar...to find the same zones of disturbances called “Standing Wave.” With some experience and radar settings, they looked like concentric circles, several tens of kilometers in diameter, with a boat in the center of this circle... An attempt to apply this method on the Il-38, Tu-142 special success Did not have. It was clear that for such a purpose it was necessary to develop a radar of the appropriate frequency range.”

Let us immediately note that, in terms of its operating principle, the “Window” is radically different from what the Americans were going to use. They were going to look for the “air trail”, and we were going to look for the sea trail, some kind of concentric waves... or not? The fact is that when describing the work of “Window” A.S. Semenov points out: “ Short description principle. From the story “Non-Tradition”.

What kind of “Non-Tradition” is this? And this is the story of the same A.S. Semenov. So what, the reader will say, can’t the author take the description from his own “early” work? Of course, maybe this is normal, if only not for one “but”. Genre of the story. Simply by opening the page of A.S. Semenov on samizdat, read (specially highlighted in red)

Fantasy. No, it is clear that “The fairy tale is a lie, but there is a hint in it, a lesson for good fellows,” the work itself is based on the fact that the author is caught “into himself,” that is, he returns to his younger self in all the splendor of what he received life experience over the years of service and creates an alternative reality. Often in such works a lot of what really existed is revealed... But the problem is that we can only guess which of what is said in the story is true and which is fiction. And that is to say, the work was not written by the best in simple language, it is, so to speak, intended rather “for our own and for our own,” that is, for those who are familiar with the hardships of naval service firsthand, and who, apparently, are easily able to separate truth from fiction.

In general, A.S. Semyonov is a man who obviously knows, but what he wrote... it turns out that it may be “this way, not quite that way, or even not that way at all.” But in this case, does it make sense to refer to his works?

And also, when reading his “Anti-submarine warfare. A View from S.S.S.R.”, which is positioned by the author precisely as an article, and not as a literary work of fiction, this is what really hurt the eye. A.S. Semenov, describing the state of our submarine forces (in short, according to A.S. Semenov - complete darkness, the Americans controlled us at every step and could take us for soft spots at any moment), refers to Vice Admiral Valery Dmitrievich Ryazantsev, author of the book "In the wake of death." At the same time, A.S. Semenov characterizes Valery Dmitrievich as an extremely competent person.

So the whole point is that V.D. Ryazantsev wrote an article in 2014 with an extremely telling title: “Once again about sea ​​tales and military sailors-storytellers”, in which, among other things, he paid attention to “Window”. In his words, the very beginning of work on this topic was a form of fraud and manipulation of facts, that during the intermediate tests, the commanders of ships and aircraft received the order: ““Nose bleed,” but the results of the research must be positive,” and that all this was done in order to obtain funding, and then:

“I would like to ask today those who have wasted huge amounts of money: “Where is the new technology that would allow us to detect foreign submarines?” Where is the plane or helicopter on which this equipment is installed? There are no planes, no helicopters, no equipment. And there is no money. The "Window" theme turned out to be a soap bubble, a "Potemkin village", a dummy."

However, about all this A.S. Semyonov does not mention, although his article “Anti-submarine warfare. A view from S.S.S.R.” was published on Samizdat much later than the vice admiral’s material. However, the author is not at all going to blame A.S. Semenov in deliberately concealing information - after all, he was not obliged to read all the works of V.D. Ryazantsev and could easily have simply missed this article of his.

And this is what we get. The “alarm” sounds - the submarines of the Fatherland are in danger, the Americans are using a new method of radar detection of underwater submarines, they see everyone! However, when you start to understand all this in detail, it turns out that the justification for the “alarm” is:

1. A report born in 1975, from which it follows that work in this direction was once closed in the United States, and it is completely unclear whether they were resumed as a result of the report;

2. Forum remark from a very respected person;

3. And finally, a work written in the “alternative” fantasy genre.

Here the question arises: is this basis sufficient for declaring an “alarm”? Let everyone reading these lines decide this for themselves.

And one more thing - under-ice detection of submarines. Here, the respected A. Timokhin refers to the words of “another Navy officer, an experienced anti-submarine officer, commander anti-submarine ship, captain first rank A.E. Soldatenkova". All this is true - dear A.E. Soldatenkov actually published his memoirs “Admiral’s Routes (or flashes of memory and information from the outside), but... we have to admit that A. Timokhin quoted A.E. Soldatenkova is not entirely correct.

The bottom line is that friend A.E. Soldatenkova actually observed a certain ellipse around the place where the submarine soon surfaced. Moreover, similar ellipses were detected by radar before (outside the ice), but for a long time no one associated them with submarines, considering them just interference. Then they connected, already using radar reconnaissance satellites: “So, for example, in the area of ​​​​Cuba in the Caribbean Sea, an American submarine was detected by a satellite using the ring effect.”

Generally speaking, all of the above correlates perfectly with the data of the report “A RADAR METHOD FOR THE DETECTION OF SUBMERGED SUBMARINES” - similar formations were observed there. But then A.E. Soldatenkov is trying to explain the nature of this phenomenon... or, rather, he is simply playing a trick on the reader.

“When a submarine moves in a submerged position, the specified immersion depth is maintained by horizontal rudders, which are controlled by the boatswain or autopilot. The accuracy of maintaining the specified depth of travel is within ±5 meters. That is, a gigantic mass of metal (from 6,000 to 33,800 tons) makes vertical oscillations in depth, and along with the mass its gravitational field also oscillates. Part of the gravitational field of the hull of a submarine, with a registered measuring instruments tension, comes to the surface of the water, to the boundary of two media - water and air. This part of the gravitational field, at some identical level of its intensity, enters into resonant interaction with the surface layers of sea water and air.”

For those who, due to the current troubles, have completely forgotten the physics course, let us remind you that the gravitational field is a fundamental physical field through which gravitational interaction between all material bodies. Moreover, the essence of this interaction is that the force of gravitational attraction between two points is directly proportional to their mass and inversely proportional to the square of the distance separating them. That is, all the objects of the world are in the gravitational field - not only the “surface layers of sea water” interact with the same submarine, but also the Sun, Jupiter and Alpha Centauri, it’s just that the force of their interaction is negligible. But “part of the gravitational field sticking out above the surface of the water” is, generally speaking, physical and mathematical nonsense.

Of course, one could assume that the respected E.A. Soldatenkov simply did not formulate his thought quite correctly, and under “ gravitational field boat" is understood as the distance from it at which its gravitational attraction is capable of any noticeable influence on some particles of air and water. But even in this case, his further explanation of this phenomenon does not look entirely scientific, and allows us to suspect the respected author of... let's say, one of his favorite sea sports: “telling tales” to gullible civilians.

But what’s important is A.E. himself. Soldatenkov prefaces his scientific calculations with the words “Regarding all of the above, I dare to assume the following.” That is, he directly writes that his words are nothing more than his personal hypothesis. At the same time, A. Timokhin’s quote looks as if A.E. Soldatenkov is completely confident and does not feel a shadow of doubt in his words.

But that's not even the biggest question. As we said earlier, the respected A. Timokhin in his article “A fleet without ships. The Russian Navy is on the verge of collapse” made two key statements. The first is that modern technologies make it possible to detect submarines underwater and even under ice. And secondly, we completely ignore the existence of such opportunities.

So, to confirm the first thesis, A. Timokhin quotes a fragment of one of the chapters of the book by A.E. Soldatenkova. But for some reason he completely “forgets” to quote another fragment of the same chapter, in which A.E. Soldatenkov suggests... that this method of detecting submarines is widely used by the Russian Navy! We quote:

“But there are indirect signs that the polarization method of detecting submarines has made its way into life. So, for example, the hydroacoustic complex of the heavy nuclear cruiser "Peter the Great" (with all its perfection) could not provide complete coverage of the underwater situation during the tragic events with the Kursk nuclear-powered missile system, nevertheless it had it. Moreover, one of the officers of the press center of the General Staff of the Navy openly said that the underwater situation at the site of the disaster was being monitored by radar. This could have been mistaken for incompetence or a slip of the tongue by a former political worker, but the officer told the truth, it’s just that no one believed it. In addition, nowhere in the open press is there any mention of work in the field of the polarization method for detecting submarines. And this happens in two cases: the first, when no one is working on this problem at all, the second, when significant progress has been made and the topic is classified. Another sign. The ultra-long voyage of the heavy nuclear cruiser "Peter the Great" around the world on Far East to participate in Pacific Fleet exercises without escort ships. It seems like a big negligence for the only ship of this class on the Planet. But no, the BIP (or BIC) of the cruiser knew ALL the situation around the ship: surface, underwater, air, space and would hardly allow himself to be offended. Another indirect sign: when communicating with the media in interviews with high-ranking naval commanders, tragic notes stopped sounding when mentioning the underwater threat from a potential enemy, but before they were already torn from the consciousness of their own powerlessness. Plus the loss of interest in anti-submarine surface ships and the reduction of fire brigades in all fleets. Plus the resumption of aircraft flights Long-Range Aviation around the borders Russian Federation. After all, hundreds of tons of aviation kerosene are burned not only for pilot training.”

It turns out bad: where the words of the respected A.E. Soldatenkov is confirmed by the theses of the author of the article “A fleet without ships. The Russian Navy is on the verge of collapse,” they are not only quoted, but also presented to readers as a given (while A.E. Soldatenkov himself presents only a personal hypothesis). And in those cases when the opinion of A.E. Soldatenkova comes into conflict with the opinion of A. Timokhin, then what happens, let’s replace it for clarity?

Well, what conclusion would you like to draw from all this? But none - the author has no facts at his disposal that would confirm or refute the assumptions of the respected A. Timokhin. And, despite all the criticism expressed above, the evidence base on which the article “A fleet without ships. The Russian Navy is on the verge of collapse,” it may well turn out that its main postulates are absolutely true.

The personal opinion of the author of this article, which he does not impose on anyone, is as follows. Most likely, a method for detecting submarines underwater using radar actually exists. But it, like other methods of detecting submarines (magnetometric, hydroacoustic, thermal, and now, according to some data, some kind of “chemical” has also been patented), is not a guarantee of detecting and destroying submarines, although it may work under certain circumstances - like all the methods listed above. In other words, it is quite possible, and even more than likely, that it will now be even more difficult for submariners, but, nevertheless, submarines as a class of warships have not yet lost their combat significance.

This point of view is indirectly confirmed by the following considerations. Let's say that at the end of the 20th century the United States actually invented a method that allows you to identify submarines with an efficiency close to 100%. But in this case, the very concept of American nuclear submarines, implying the ability to operate independently in conditions of strong enemy anti-aircraft defense, loses its meaning. Why then are the Americans increasing the pace of commissioning their newest Virginias? After all, it is quite obvious that sooner or later potential adversaries of the United States will also learn this method and will be able to identify American nuclear submarines operating near their bases.

In such a case, it would be logical to expect the creation of some completely new type of submarines, and perhaps the abandonment of them altogether, or at least a slowdown in the construction programs for new nuclear submarines - but nothing of the kind is happening. And, most likely, this indicates that with the methods of searching for submarines underwater by radar, everything is not so simple.

But in any case, we need to clearly understand that a submarine is not at all a self-sufficient means of combat at sea. The illusion that by developing one type of naval armed forces can solve the problems of the Navy as a whole should be said goodbye as quickly as possible. A submarine, for all its advantages, is not a wunderwaffe, and submariners will be able to inflict damage on the enemy only in close cooperation with surface ships, land-based and deck-based naval aviation aircraft and in the presence of a developed naval reconnaissance and target designation system - over-the-horizon radars, spy satellites, networks of underwater hydroacoustic stations and so on and so forth.

Ctrl Enter

Noticed osh Y bku Select text and click Ctrl+Enter

Anyone who has read science fiction has probably at least once thought that it would be cool to live in some unusual place, for example, under water. Over the past half century, people have repeatedly tried to make this fantasy a reality, and not without success. For those who are willing to fork over a pretty penny and don't mind living next to a couple of tiger sharks, there are several options for underwater accommodation.

1. Sub-biosphere

One of the most ambitious attempts to create underwater housing is the project of Phil Pauley. The “underwater city” itself consists of several floors located in separate capsules, each of which will accommodate up to 100 residents. The sub-biosphere must be completely self-sufficient and provide its inhabitants with food and electricity. It is unknown whether such a bold project will come to fruition, but Pauly continues to tirelessly seek funding to begin work on it. .

2. Conshelf

The most famous explorer of the world's oceans, Jacques Cousteau, was the first to create underwater research structures in which one could live. It's worth noting that the Conshelf project was not intended for long-term living, although most of the amenities of a regular home existed in this underwater giant metal drum. There were three iterations of the project, and in the last one, Conshelf III, built at a depth of 100 meters, six researchers lived underwater for a month. The idea first came to fruition in 1962, when Conshelf I was created 10 meters below the surface of the Mediterranean Sea off the coast of Marseille. Two scientists lived and worked there for a week. The underwater house was equipped with a library, television and radio.

3. La Chalupa Underwater Laboratory

An underwater research station off the coast of Puerto Rico, La Chalupa Research Lab, which was owned by Taco Bell, was converted into an underwater hotel at the end of its life, which became popular with celebrities. The entire structure is completely submerged and sits on the bottom of the lagoon. At the same time, it is controlled using a control center located on land. The underwater hotel has two air-conditioned bedrooms and a common living area equipped with a TV, DVD player and telephone. The bedrooms also have giant glass portholes that divers love to look into.

4. Galatea Underwater Laboratory

SeaOrbiter is a concept for a fully mobile object designed for underwater research. It's kind of underwater spaceship drifting in the ocean around the world. The project was inspired by the Galatea underwater laboratory, which was discovered by Jacques Rougerie in 1977. Project leaders plan to soon develop underwater vehicles, which would allow them to study the ocean at depths of up to 6000 meters.

5. Silab

One of the earliest attempts to allow humans to live below the surface of the ocean was the Sealab project, a Taco Bell research laboratory. Like Conshelf, the Sealab project also went through three iterations. The first Sealab launched off the coast of Bermuda in 1964, but was quickly shut down due to an approaching storm. Sealab II was launched in 1965 and already had a number of amenities such as hot water and a refrigerator. The 17-meter station could dive to 62 meters. Sealab III was launched in 1969 off the coast of California, but the project ended in tragedy when water began to seep into the facility and a failed repair attempt led to the death of "aquanaut" Berry Cannon.

6. Aquarius

International University Florida owns one of the last remaining operational underwater research facilities, the Aquarius Station. Researchers are studying marine life off the coast of the Florida Keys in this metal cocoon. The station, which can accommodate up to six people, can dive to a depth of 37 meters. Aquarius is a fully equipped underwater apartment that has a refrigerator, air conditioning, shower, toilets, microwave and even internet access.

7. Tektite

In 1969, the United States government funded a project called Tektite, named after meteors that crash into the ocean and sink to the bottom. As part of the project, four aquanauts lived on an underwater station from February to April 1969 and were supposed to train astronauts for long flights in space. The second iteration of the Tektite project was launched in 1970. Within its framework, 11 different missions were carried out, during which 53 aquanauts lived under water for 2-3 weeks.

8. Hydrolab

Over the years, hundreds of researchers have used the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration's Hydrolab to study life in Atlantic Ocean. Located off the coast of the US Virgin Islands, Hydrolab allowed scientists to work for several weeks on the ocean floor, with 4 scientists at the station at a time. The laboratory itself, submerged to a depth of 40 meters, was quite small and cramped - its length was only 5 meters and its height was 2.5 meters.

9. Atlantic

NASA engineer Dennis Chamberland developed the Atlantica project, which is another attempt to create a real underwater city. Chamberland has already built an underwater house for two people, but is going to create a huge city that will allow people to remain on the ocean floor permanently. According to his plans, Atlantica should combine the functions of a residential complex and a research center.

10. H2OME

Most underwater dwellings are only accessible to scientists or have not yet been built. However, there is another option - for “only” $10 million you can buy your own luxurious underwater home - H2OME. The same company that built one of the world's most famous underwater hotels, the Poseidon, is now offering custom underwater homes. These houses have two floors and include a couple of bedrooms, a living room, and literally everything you could want in a home.