This is the full text of our interview with Vice-Admiral Mikhail Barskov.

        - by Roza Tsvetkova

        QUESTION: In accordance with original plans, the entire docking operation should have been finished by now. Now that the preparatory work for Kursk’s docking has been delayed, we have various rumours and stories alleging that there is something wrong with the sub itself.

        ANSWER: Yes, NTV, for example, claimed we had come to Belokamennaya without any submarine at all. In actual fact, we should not have set ourselves any definite deadlines and timeframes. Please, understand this: the case in point is so unique an operation that it is wrong and illogical to say this thing we will do on October 15 and that two days later. Mammoet (the contractors), for example, set aside, at the start, as many as 17 days for the entire preparatory work for the docking. We reduced that timeframe to five days. But the foreigners insist that all work should be pursued only while daylight lasts, as prescribed by their safety standards. They must obey the rules and the Russian side is also forced to comply with these requirements. Everything must be reasonable; in this matter, we cannot rely on our Russian avos’ (off-chance). We had better calculate everything regarding the timetable, the timeframe, and all possible and impossible security measures.

        QUESTION: Earlier, everyone thought the most difficult stage was the lifting. All of us remember the wet eyes of Rubin general director Igor Spassky and Mammoet’s Franz van Seumeren when it became clear that the sub had really been picked from the seabed. But it turns out now that the docking is no less a complicated job?

        ANSWER: Yes, last week saw the end of one of the main stages – the lifting of the submarine itself from the seabed; it was really the most difficult stage in the entire operation. I must say, it took place within the framework of technical solutions that in all respects had been planned in a very high-quality manner. Practically all the deviations were only for the best. For this reason, we were quite satisfied with the work of both the foreign firms and our specialists and research organisations. The fact itself of the lifting confirmed the correctness of the technical solutions that had been chosen. As you may know, many people did not believe in a successful outcome of the lifting operation. There were many different variations on the theme of explosions occurring on board the sub at the moment when it was picked from the seabed, of it capsizing, of cables snapping, and so on. As we saw, nothing of the kind happened. We were asked all the time: Why did you choose Mammoet? Why do you let them have you people under their thumb? and all such things. The brilliant operation to lift the sub from the seabed confirmed once again that we had made the right choice of technology for the operation. Coming on now is a no less crucial point – the docking.

        QUESTION: And still, why was everything so smooth, so ahead of schedule, so technically-unstrained as the submarine was pried from the seabed? As far as we know, the cables were not even given the maximum load.

        ANSWER: When I officially announced on the air on October 8 at 3:55 hours that we had pried it, there was at first dead silence in response and then everybody for some reason started hollering: “It cannot be!” In actual fact, the explanation is simple. While calculating the whole operation in theory, we developed a very correct programme for prying the submarine. It was entered in a computer and followed quite meticulously, both in what concerned the load communicated to the prow, and the leveling out of the loads, and later, the rocking of the submarine. We rocked the vessel “by degrees” from 00:00 hours to 03:00 hours on the night of the lifting and thus removed the effect of it being sucked into the bottom silt. This took care of almost 15 per cent of the load coefficient that should have been transmitted to the strands for prying the sub from the seabed. That is why it went up so easily.

        QUESTION: But let us go back to the present stage of the operation, the docking. Do you have any problems?

        ANSWER: There are no technical problems – that I may state on my responsibility. At this stage in the operation, there can be just one reason for delays – the weather. Here in the Kola Bay, we unfortunately also depend on weather. If, for example, we have a strong cross-wind blowing at more than five metres a second, we will have to wait for better weather. But so far, the forecasts are encouraging. As far as the technical solution for the docking operation is concerned, there are no problems that would cause a delay. Everything is in accordance with the planned timetable, which has been drawn up and endorsed under the contract, and we are working strictly to the timetable. As I said, we even considerably reduced the preparation timeframe. But, let me repeat it once again, we are no longer in a hurry and had better play safe than bungle the whole thing in haste. It is not important when we do it – three days later or even in a week’s time. The important thing is that everything will be done competently with every security precaution observed.

        QUESTION: Will you pay particular attention security-wise, during the docking operation, to the state of the Granit missiles? There are still some detractors, who hold that the whole thing is being delayed precisely on account of the combat component on board the Kursk.

        ANSWER: I have just closed a meeting on these matters. There is no apprehension concerning the state of the missiles and their demobilisation. Technical problems may arise when it is necessary to take them out. That will depend, in particular, on the state the bow silos are in, the closing and opening of various devices. What I mean is that unloading the system may be both in accordance with the standard routine, if all mechanisms are in a working state, and in accordance with emergency regulations, if we carve out the silo as a whole, complete with the missiles. We always thoroughly develop all possible variants, both standard and emergency; what is needed in each case, what forces, technical assets, I mean; we carefully model all possible situations.

        QUESTION: Speaking about the submarine’s salvaging: Who will cut up Kursk? Will it be domestic specialists or will you again have to invite foreigners? If the latter, what about military secrets?

        ANSWER: The process of salvaging will, at all stages, be performed by Russian specialists. As for the equipment, it will be different. The Nerpa (shipyard salvaging facility), for example, has U.S.-made equipment, but, understandably, it is already ours.

        QUESTION: Please explain the situation in connection with the first compartment. Is it true that it was separated from the rest of the hull with a “tongue” of sorts – part of the bottom of the second compartment? And why, after all, could it not be lifted immediately after Kursk, if not with the submarine itself?

        ANSWER: Yes, we are currently sawing off this protruding part. As far as the general state of the first compartment is concerned, it cannot be lifted in a piece the way it is now. The reason is that it is nonexistent. There are different elements, components of the compartment, but there is no pressure hull as such, nor is there the bow sphere, which has been destroyed. That is why the lifting is possible only piece by piece and we will lift only what is necessary.

        QUESTION: Will we do it on our own without inviting foreign specialists?

        ANSWER: We will wait and see, as the saying goes. At any rate, we will try hard to do it on our own. We have calculated what sort of crane devices we need, what equipment, and so on. We need to lift what we need. For example, it’s no use wasting our breath lifting some pieces of plastic. We have examined closely with video cameras what remains lying on the seabed where the sub sunk and approximately know what is to be lifted. I think all the necessary fragments of the compartment will be hoisted next year.

        QUESTION: One more thing. It worries everyone, particularly people from Murmansk. I mean the radiation danger. What is the state of the reactor and what has the sub’s examination shown after it arrived at Roslyakovo?

        ANSWER: As soon as the barge-plus-sub system came to the dock, we closely examined the submarine with the help of divers, and found out that the radiation background level was considerably lower than the natural level. Radiation monitoring reports were compiled both at the lifting site in the Barents Sea and here at the dock; these have been sent to all levels of authority, including international environmental organisations. Besides, there will be hour-by-hour radiation monitoring during Kursk’s docking, an operation which is going to take about 133 hours.

        QUESTION: Let us specify this: Were the readings taken both on the hull and inside the sub?

        ANSWER: No, no-one has yet been inside the submarine. But I am 99.999% sure that the background is also natural, even within the sixth reactor compartment. As for my one thousandth of one percent doubt (he chuckles – Ed.), we have everything ready to bring, in an emergency, the background back to natural. In stating that radiation-wise everything is okay, we rely not only on readings of our sensors. During the lifting operation we had Norwegian experts on board the Dezhnev, while Mayo (the diving support vessel) was hosting specialists from the Netherlands ecological committee. Russian and Dutch specialists took samples and readings during the entire operation and there were British experts on the foreign commission; besides, samples were sent to the Netherlands. On Dezhnev, the Norwegians took their readings and sent them to Norway. Our Russian specialists also took readings. The surprising thing is that the most precise instruments (this was confirmed by all experts) are Russian-made ones. However, what has been recorded by instruments of all organisations is fully identical and it could not be otherwise.

        QUESTION: Though all participants in the closing stage of the operation ask journalists not to drive them, when do you think the final moment will come when the Mammoet contract is over and you, Spassky and van Seumeren testify that with your signatures?

        ANSWER: I think it will be anywhere after October 21. When it is in black and white – and we document each part of the operation – that the submarine rests on all points in the dock, Mammoet’s necessary equipment will be removed and the barge will leave for its base in Kirkenes, Norway.

        QUESTION: Does the docking operation tally with the financial framework envisaged for this stage?

        ANSWER: Unfortunately, there are problems. As of today, the Defence Minister has asked the government for a certain sum of money for the first stage of the docking and salvaging work; the matter is being dealt with.

        QUESTION: Can you give any figures?

        ANSWER: We need about 200 million rubles (nearly $678,000) this year.

        QUESTION: Does this include the salvaging expenses?

        ANSWER: The standard price of salvaging a nuclear submarine is anywhere between 300 and 400 million rubles, but, let me stress, it is in accordance with the TOE regulations and on average.

        QUESTION: What moment did you see as the most difficult and critical one in the course of the lifting operation?

        ANSWER: When a gale started (which was approximately a week before the lifting) and we already had eight grapples installed. It was a strong gale with long rolling waves higher than three metres, the compensators were failing and we had to pay out the strands, pushing them deeper down. We were scared stiff that they could get entangled. A very unpleasant moment, in general.

        QUESTION: It was said at great length that the Kursk tragedy threw light on the entire range of problems faced by the Navy – financing, equipment, security, the lot. Has anything changed for the better? What do you think?

        ANSWER: What I want to say is this: today the government and the president in person are giving much attention not only to the navy but the armed forces of Russia in general, both in the sphere of arms purchases and in matters of financing. There are definite difficulties, which are on the national scale. You know well that we have obligations and debts, including foreign debts, which thus far prevent the armed forces from being provided with the funds they require. Yet the state of the Navy is much better today than it was in 1999 and even 2000. There will be the flag-hoisting ceremony quite soon on board the new submarine, Gepard. The navy will get the new generation submarine, which is more sophisticated than Kursk. This will happen after Kursk’s docking.

        ends