Nuclear attack on the frigate Storozhevoy?

[PMN1]

Story that has popped up on the HP@CA board

http://www.tboverse.us/HPCAFORUM/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=25606

In 1975 a Soviet Krivak class frigate named Storozhevoy and belonging to the Baltic fleet mutinied.

The political officer wanted to have another Marxist-Leninistic revolution and took control of the ship and sailed off into the sea.

The Soviet command structure got wind of what was going on, though they appear to have thought that the ship was trying to reach Sweden in order to defect.

The matter was pushed up the chain of command and Brezhnev ordered it bombed and sunk when he was informed.

In a lecture with a retired senior SIGINT guy, it seem three interesting aspects was retrieved by SIGINT means.

1. When the airborne Tu-16 Badgers got the go ahead to bomb the frigate, the Badgers couldn’t drop immediately, as the pursuing Soviet ships had to clear a substantial safety distance, and it appears to have taken quite a bit of time for them to do this after being ordered to.

2. The Badgers positioned themselves at an altitude of 4,000 meters and at a drop distance from the frigate of 110 kilometers, despite having done passes over it to confirm the target.

3. When the final bombing order came the Badger leader requested codeword confirmation before proceeding which took nine minutes to get.

As the Badgers in question were alert birds who were on standby for quick strikes towards the North Sea, and these usually carried nuclear tipped AShMs and taken with the other factors the author suggests that the Soviets may have been about to initiate a nuclear strike on their mutinous frigate.

Seventeen minutes after the codeword was received, and just before launch was to happen an abort order came through.

This had to be repeated once as the lead Badger flight, commanded by a Colonel Savinkov, seemingly didn’t receive the message but at first proceeded with launch preparations.


So, if this has some truth to it, what would result from a Soviet nuclear attack on one of their own ships in the Baltic?

 

[Cryhavoc101]

Story that has popped up on the HP@CA board

http://www.tboverse.us/HPCAFORUM/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=25606

In 1975 a Soviet Krivak class frigate named Storozhevoy and belonging to the Baltic fleet mutinied.

The political officer wanted to have another Marxist-Leninistic revolution and took control of the ship and sailed off into the sea.

The Soviet command structure got wind of what was going on, though they appear to have thought that the ship was trying to reach Sweden in order to defect.

The matter was pushed up the chain of command and Brezhnev ordered it bombed and sunk when he was informed.

In a lecture with a retired senior SIGINT guy, it seem three interesting aspects was retrieved by SIGINT means.

1. When the airborne Tu-16 Badgers got the go ahead to bomb the frigate, the Badgers couldn’t drop immediately, as the pursuing Soviet ships had to clear a substantial safety distance, and it appears to have taken quite a bit of time for them to do this after being ordered to.

2. The Badgers positioned themselves at an altitude of 4,000 meters and at a drop distance from the frigate of 110 kilometers, despite having done passes over it to confirm the target.

3. When the final bombing order came the Badger leader requested codeword confirmation before proceeding which took nine minutes to get.

As the Badgers in question were alert birds who were on standby for quick strikes towards the North Sea, and these usually carried nuclear tipped AShMs and taken with the other factors the author suggests that the Soviets may have been about to initiate a nuclear strike on their mutinous frigate.

Seventeen minutes after the codeword was received, and just before launch was to happen an abort order came through.

This had to be repeated once as the lead Badger flight, commanded by a Colonel Savinkov, seemingly didn’t receive the message but at first proceeded with launch preparations.


So, if this has some truth to it, what would result from a Soviet nuclear attack on one of their own ships in the Baltic?

They would deny it - at best claim an accidental explosion or a deliberate detonation by the crew or some other lie and the full truth is unlikely to come out until after the fall of the warsaw pact.

Ultimately though the whole thing would be incredibly damaging for the old order.

Just look at the 'damage' one deluded fool landing his Cessna in Red Square did (basically allowing the more progressive politburo members to side line the hard liners).

And it may focus the Western nations far earlier in their late 70s and 80s rearmament efforts.

 

[Khanzeer]

Why can they not use conventional AshM to sink it ?

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

Did they have any loaded?

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

Why can they not use conventional AshM to sink it ?

Did they have any loaded?

The mind boggles that the Soviets would even have considered for an instant using a nuke IN THE MIDDLE of the BALTIC!!!
I mean, it's an open invitation for Sweden and Finland to flee into NATO. AND they'd become an international pariah.

If this were a novel by Tom Clancy or Clive Cussler, the defecting ship would have ultra top secret stuff on board (an alien corpse, proof that Moscow was behind Kennedy's assassination, etc.).
In reality??
Again, Tom Clancy ish, but if the defecting ship was planning on firing nukes at Stockholm or Copenhagen, that might call for a nuke. After explaining to NATO and the affected nations what was going on.

Could the planes have launched without conventional weapons, and by the time anyone realized that, it was too late? Maybe.

Seems more likely that whatever missiles they had had a built-in standoff distance, they wouldn't arm before a certain distance out.

Them planning on using nukes really sounds like a History Channel piece of sensationalism.

What actually ended up happening?

 

[Carl Schwamberger]

What actually ended up happening?

Other crew recovered control of the ship.

I've heard stories about GRU or some other Dept having a counter mutiny team planted in the crew of each. No clue if that's true, but it fits the Soviet era paranoia perception.

Re:. Clancy. This event was the inspiration for the Red October novel.

 

[Khanzeer]

Other crew recovered control of the ship.

I've heard stories about GRU or some other Dept having a counter mutiny team planted in the crew of each. No clue if that's true, but it fits the Soviet era paranoia perception.

Re:. Clancy. This event was the inspiration for the Red October novel.

Why did clancy chose a sub ?

 

[Dathi THorfinnsson]

Why did clancy chose a sub ?

A Boomer can go anywhere in the world without being detected, was the theory. And with that range and its on board ballistic missiles, could hit anywhere in the world.
As opposed to whatever a frigate had, and which would be confined to the Baltic.

 

[Khanzeer]

A Boomer can go anywhere in the world without being detected, was the theory. And with that range and its on board ballistic missiles, could hit anywhere in the world.
As opposed to whatever a frigate had, and which would be confined to the Baltic.

that just sums it up, clancys novels were cheap sensationalism

 

[kmmontandon]

A Boomer can go anywhere in the world without being detected, was the theory. And with that range and its on board ballistic missiles, could hit anywhere in the world.
As opposed to whatever a frigate had, and which would be confined to the Baltic.

It's also easier to keep a sub crew in the dark.

 

[Thoresby]

that just sums it up, clancys novel were cheap sensationalism

Not really, he was making it a plausible scenario. It's much more difficult to get a full length fiction thriller about stealing a frigate and sailing it to the US because the odds are so massively stacked against. A super secret super advanced boomer that could run quietly all that way actually could pull off the scenario.

 

[Cryhavoc101]

that just sums it up, clancys novels were cheap sensationalism

But we all loved it

 

[Simon]

They would deny it – at best claim an accidental explosion or a deliberate detonation by the crew or some other lie and the full truth is unlikely to come out until after the fall of the Warsaw Pact.

Depends, PMN1's original post mentioning signals intelligence does seem to suggest that NATO were following the situation as best they could even if not entirely sure what was happening. I'm sure that the Soviet leadership's initial reaction will be to blame it on something like a malfunctioning/poorly handled nuclear depth charge onboard the Storozhevoy – although that does then raise the awkward questions of shoddy equipment or poor training – or an exercise that inadvertently used a live missile – again giving rise to accusations of incompetence, although after the Goldsboro and Savage Mountain incidents the US would have less freedom to take advantage – but I'm not sure how long they could keep it up internationally.

 

[Geon]

The Soviets were paranoid about letting any of their technology fall into enemy hands. For all they knew the frigate might head toward Copenhagen or Oslo. They needed to be certain nothing remained that would prove useful to the West so a nuclear strike makes a bizarre form of sense.

 

[Cryhavoc101]

Depends, PMN1's original post mentioning signals intelligence does seem to suggest that NATO were following the situation as best they could even if not entirely sure what was happening. I'm sure that the Soviet leadership's initial reaction will be to blame it on something like a malfunctioning/poorly handled nuclear depth charge onboard the Storozhevoy – although that does then raise the awkward questions of shoddy equipment or poor training – or an exercise that inadvertently used a live missile – again giving rise to accusations of incompetence, although after the Goldsboro and Savage Mountain incidents the US would have less freedom to take advantage – but I'm not sure how long they could keep it up internationally.

I was comparing it to how they dealt with the information sharing after Chernobyl

Basically lied their pants off

 

[Simon]

I was comparing it to how they dealt with the information sharing after Chernobyl. Basically lied their pants off.

Ah right, I read it as telling and convincing the West rather than telling them and being disbelieved.

 

[Catsmate]

The mind boggles that the Soviets would even have considered for an instant using a nuke IN THE MIDDLE of the BALTIC!!!
I mean, it's an open invitation for Sweden and Finland to flee into NATO. AND they'd become an international pariah.

Them planning on using nukes really sounds like a History Channel piece of sensationalism.

What actually ended up happening?

This. The story of a potential nuclear strike has no supporting evidence, no plausibility and a very dubious source.
There was absolutely no need for a nuclear strike and no evidence that Brezhnev authorised one. The Yak-28s used unguided 250kg free fall bombs and 23mm cannon-fire to disable the ship, before its captain regained control and Naval Infantry boarded the ship.

Other crew recovered control of the ship.

I've heard stories about GRU or some other Dept having a counter mutiny team planted in the crew of each. No clue if that's true, but it fits the Soviet era paranoia perception.

The USN has chemical agent security systems on missile boats, that can be triggered by certain crew. I'm sure the Soviets had similar precautions.

The Soviets were paranoid about letting any of their technology fall into enemy hands. For all they knew the frigate might head toward Copenhagen or Oslo. They needed to be certain nothing remained that would prove useful to the West so a nuclear strike makes a bizarre form of sense.

This. Defection was the risk. It had happened before.

 

[gatordad699]

This. The story of a potential nuclear strike has no supporting evidence, no plausibility and a very dubious source.
There was absolutely no need for a nuclear strike and no evidence that Brezhnev authorised one. The Yak-28s used unguided 250kg free fall bombs and 23mm cannon-fire to disable the ship, before its captain regained control and Naval Infantry boarded the ship.



The USN has chemical agent security systems on missile boats, that can be triggered by certain crew. I'm sure the Soviets had similar precautions.


This. Defection was the risk. It had happened before.

You talking about United States SSBNs? What was this “chemical agent security system” for? Who were the “certain crew” who could trigger it?

 

[Khanzeer]

But we all loved it

Michael Palmers book on ww3 was much better but I've only read 4 of clancys book to be fair
Worst one was red storm rising by far

 

[Khanzeer]

Not really, he was making it a plausible scenario. It's much more difficult to get a full length fiction thriller about stealing a frigate and sailing it to the US because the odds are so massively stacked against. A super secret super advanced boomer that could run quietly all that way actually could pull off the scenario.

This. The story of a potential nuclear strike has no supporting evidence, no plausibility and a very dubious source.
There was absolutely no need for a nuclear strike and no evidence that Brezhnev authorised one. The Yak-28s used unguided 250kg free fall bombs and 23mm cannon-fire to disable the ship, before its captain regained control and Naval Infantry boarded the ship.



The USN has chemical agent security systems on missile boats, that can be triggered by certain crew. I'm sure the Soviets had similar precautions.


This. Defection was the risk. It had happened before.

Did the brewer miss the ship deliberately ?
Dropping the bomb was just to scare the crew ?