Russia does not have advanced submarine rescue vessels and Russian experts said the crew may be forced to escape by swimming out through the submarine’s torpedo tubes.By last night the US military had not been asked to assist in a rescue of the Russian crew. The American navy has a rescue vessel designed to bring the crew of a US or allied submarine to safety, even at depths lower than that where the disabled Russian submarine lay trapped.As hopes of reaching the stricken vessel faded, the Russian navy insisted there were no nuclear weapons on board. The vessel’s two nuclear reactors had been shut down, a spokesman said.Norway has a scientific vessel in the region, off Russia’s Kola Peninsula, and reported no sign of radiation leaks.The stricken submarine is capable of carrying up to 24 underwater-to-surface guided missiles They can be armed with nuclear or conventional warheads. Western experts said there was a high chance of radioactive leaks if the submarine’s hull is holed or damaged. Starved of funding, the Russian navy has an abysmal record for accidents, the worst previous one involving a nuclear submarine, was in April 1989. In that incident the vessel sank in the Barents Sea after a fire 200 miles north of the coast of Norway Forty-two of the 69 Soviet sailors aboard died. A Russian newspaper, the Izvestia reported recently that, according to the most conservative estimate, 507 submarine crew members have died during the 40-year history of Russian nuclear submarines..

It is a terrible human drama being played out in one of the most inhospitable and – beyond argument – most dangerous places on earth. The Kursk, a modern jewel of Russia’s Northern Fleet, lies trapped on the floor of the Barents Sea, its oxygen levels dwindling, the lives of its 100-plus crew dependent on rescue technology which the impoverished former superpower may be unable to operate, or not possess. It is a terrible human drama being played out in one of the most inhospitable and – beyond argument – most dangerous places on earth. The Kursk, a modern jewel of Russia’s Northern Fleet, lies trapped on the floor of the Barents Sea, its oxygen levels dwindling, the lives of its 100-plus crew dependent on rescue technology which the impoverished former superpower may be unable to operate, or not possess.
Since the first Soviet nuclear submarine, the Leninsky Komsomol, put out into the White Sea in July 1958, accidents have plagued the Northern Fleet – 121 by the count of the anti-nuclear group Greenpeace, in which at least 500 people have died. The Kursk was not carrying nuclear weapons on this voyage, but in human, if not environmental terms, she threatens to be the worst submarine disaster of all.The vessel is apparently lying 100 to 150 metres (330 to 500 ft) down, making unaided escape almost impossible.

The batteries providing its light and heat will last, experts say, a maximum of 72 hours. That is how long the Russian navy has to bring up its men alive. Or, rather, those who are still alive.The normally reliable Interfax news agency says some of the crew may already be dead, and Russian spokesmen appeared to be preparing public opinion for the worst. Admiral Vladimir Luroyedov, commander of the Russian navy, has said the chances of recovering the vessel were “not good”.The Northern Fleet, so far as is known, does not have advanced submarine rescue ships. The crew could be taken off by midget submarine, or via rescue capsules which would enable them to survive the huge change in pressure and reach the surface. As a last desperate resort, they could swim out through the torpedo tubes.No two naval accidents are identical, and the precise nature of the incidenton on Sunday which forced the crippled 14,000-ton vessel to the seafloor may not be clear for months, if ever. An early account blamed water pouring through the Kursk’s torpedo tubes during a firing exercise, flooding the bow of the submarine and causing the crew to lose control, while the navy spoke simply of a “malfunction”.By evening the Northern Fleet high command was peddling a more sinister version – that the Kursk had been badly damaged in a serious collision with a foreign submarine, which itself might have been damaged The theory is not entirely implausible.