Project Azorian

[NERVA]

MODS - my apologies. Please move this topic to the Other/Military thread. Thank you.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thought this might be of interest.

Link:

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nukevault/ebb305/index.htm

 

[sublight]

I'd really like to know how much plutonium was loosed into the ocean as a result...

 

[CFE]

The censored portions of the article certainly draw my attention. Some people involved have hinted that more was recovered from K-129 than admitted, and it's intriguing to think that the event had a major impact on the history of the cold war as a result of something that was discovered. As for the Azorian name, it makes me think of Ken Sewell's conspiracy theories about the Soviets sinking the USS Scorpion in retaliation for the initial loss of K-129.

 

[sublight]

Those three documents read fairly dry, but from a historical nerd point of view they are awesome.... ;D

 

[NERVA]

The censored portions of the article certainly draw my attention. Some people involved have hinted that more was recovered from K-129 than admitted, and it's intriguing to think that the event had a major impact on the history of the cold war as a result of something that was discovered. As for the Azorian name, it makes me think of Ken Sewell's conspiracy theories about the Soviets sinking the USS Scorpion in retaliation for the initial loss of K-129.

I haven't completely reviewed the information on the website, but from memory (I remember seeing a show on this subject on the History Channel in the U.S.)... the mission to recover K-129 failed because the device used to pull the submarine from the ocean floor broke at 8,000 or 9,000 feet up. K-129 then broke apart... only part of the submarine was recovered, the rest of the submarine fell back to the ocean floor. Does that sound right? I've also heard the rumors that more of the submarine was recovered than the "official" story.

 

[RobertWL]

http://www.white.at/projectjennifer/

Though I've not seen it, this new documentary is supposedly pretty in depth and covers a lot of new ground. But I've heard plenty of wink wink, nudge nudge we did better then the official story bits as well, one of which was from a friend who had a connection to all of this.

Fascinating whatever the truth!

 

[JMS]

The declassified narrative and the documentary pretty much match what was known beforehand, only forward portion recovered, not very successful, etc. I think CIA is adamant about declassifying the whole thing because, while a technical success - little of value was recovered. Technology was obsolete and coding material would have been also.

 

[RanulfC]

The declassified narrative and the documentary pretty much match what was known beforehand, only forward portion recovered, not very successful, etc. I think CIA is adamant about declassifying the whole thing because, while a technical success - little of value was recovered. Technology was obsolete and coding material would have been also.

What I wonder, (having read both of the Sewell's books) is that the overall hesitation over fully disclosure had anything to do with possible evidence that (one-wayor-another) explains the K-129s divergence from it's patrol box, position of it's sinking, the fact it was cruising on the surface when it apperantly had a missile malfunction (fire and subsequent explosion) and sank.

Randy

 

[JMS]

I think Cookie Sewell's theories don't make any sense at all. It's an interesting conspiracy theory, but there are many unanswered questions:

- If it was going to strike Hawaii, how comes they were so far off to the North?
- How was the US going to differentiate a USSR nuke from a Chinese nuke?
- How did Sewell know what the patrol box was?
- etc.

If the images of the wreckage at the Azorian documentary are any guide, the cause of the sinking was not a missile exploding, looks more like the after battery to me (but I am no expert). It's also interesting that Glomar Explorer gets a heavily excised section of the History of NSA at the NSA FOIA site, which seems to point to the recovery of crypto material, ergo, the mission would have been a qualified success.

 

[blackstar]

If the images of the wreckage at the Azorian documentary are any guide, the cause of the sinking was not a missile exploding, looks more like the after battery to me (but I am no expert). It's also interesting that Glomar Explorer gets a heavily excised section of the History of NSA at the NSA FOIA site, which seems to point to the recovery of crypto material, ergo, the mission would have been a qualified success.

If you read the declassified history between the lines, one of the things you can figure out is that they got crypto material. The discussion of taking material off the ship before it put into port strongly implies that they found something that was very high value and that they wanted to get back to Washington ASAP really hints at that.

 

[TJDougherty01]

Ken (NOT Cookie!!) Sewell's book was based on a misreading of a mission by the Trieste III bathyscaphe* in 1972. The Trieste did a dive just 300 miles from Hawaii, coincidentally to 16,400 feet, the same depth as the K-129 wreck. The dive was an attempt to recover the film capsule from the first KH-9 satellite, which had a parachute malfunction. You can read about it here: Underwater Ice Station Zebra The K-129 was located at 40.06N by 179.57E.

As far as what was recovered, I have spoken to several people on the mission. The 34 foot bow section recovered did not have any code materials. I have a partial list of the materials (about 15 pages) and it is mostly listing items like electrical switches, valves, and other pieces of equipment. The interior was a mess, with most of the equipment stripped from its installation point and in a 3 foot deep pile on the deck. Human remains were mixed in to the debris. Materials from several compartments aft were found, indicating a massive pressure wave that swept forward, partially blowing off the bow. One bow compartment was collapsed down to a much smaller length and a few crew remains were found that were reasonable intact and allowed for identifications. At least one torpedo with nuclear warhead, badly mangled, were also recovered.

The failure of the CV arms was a result of being fractured when they were rammed through the seabed under the K-129 target to get under the wreck, which caused the failure of at least three arms and davits supporting the aft section. The seabed was much more compacted than calculated. More weight was offloaded from the Glomar Explorer Lift System to ram the arms and davits into the seabed.The davits had water jets to loosen soil at their tips, but this wasn't enough to make the soil penetration significantly easier. The highest value object recovered was probably was the recovered and mangled torpedo with the nuclear warhead.

* I know, the link below says Trieste II but it was really Trieste III. Trieste II was a modification of the original Trieste with a new float, shaped somewhat like a boat. Trieste III was an all new design, and the original Trieste II was disassembled and the all-new Trieste III given the Trieste II designation as a cover story. Trieste III was originally for "Winterwind" a recovery effort of Soviet missile parts and other "interesting" things on the ocean bottom. But other needs led to its "black" existence being revealed. You can read the whole Trieste history here: "Opening the Great Depths.
The Bathyscaph Trieste and Pioneers of Undersea Exploration" by Norman Polmar and Lee J. Mathers

 

[Grey Havoc]

https://flic.kr/p/2nVoRHp

View: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ciagov/52456418661/in/album-72177720303191645/

https://flic.kr/p/2nVqfxP

View: https://www.flickr.com/photos/ciagov/52456690589/in/album-72177720303191645/

 

[TJDougherty01]

The model was employed with a Capture Vehicle (CV) simulator with TV cameras in locations that were replicated on the full scale CV. There were three specific "aim points" for setting the CV down on the K-129 target. The aim points assured the proper engagement of the CV with the K-129 hull to support it during recovery. It also was critical to have the CV net system over the one remaining missile tube to catch any loose pieces. What is not generally appreciated is that the K-129 was on a sloped bottom and the CV not only had to "land" properly but not slide "downhill" on the slope.

The CV simulator was used in multiple rehearsal exercises to prepare the CV control room crew on the Glomar Explorer for engaging the K-129 target with the CV. It was critical to subsequently drive the CV beams and davits underneath the soil and then lifting. More views of the model, along with photos of Golf Its on the surface.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Just going to point out that the identified remains were given burials with full honors. This always seems to be left out of most reporting.

 

[Ravinoff]

Just going to point out that the identified remains were given burials with full honors. This always seems to be left out of most reporting.

And it took a while, but I believe footage of the funeral ceremony was eventually declassified and released to the families of the deceased.

K-129 and Azorian get interesting pretty quick when you start digging beyond the official story, too, but I'm not sure if that's considered a suitable topic here. It gets a bit tinfoil-y. But given the time period and actors involved, I feel like a moderate amount of "outside-the-box" theorizing is honestly appropriate - even the official story has gaps...particularly if that model is correct.

 

[TJDougherty01]

Just going to point out that the identified remains were given burials with full honors. This always seems to be left out of most reporting.

We covered that in the 2010 documentary film, along with the footage of the burial ceremony. Six intact bodies (three were identified) were recovered, along with various partial remains in the 2-3 foot thick debris on the bottom of the recovered hull section. The bodies were largely intact, as they had been tightly compressed between layers of mattresses in the bow area when the violent force pushed water forward. The mattresses were upended and vertical in the collapsed bow. Because they were essentially protected from the various creatures on the sea floor, along with the 29C temperature, they were, according to individuals who were there, surprisingly intact. Those bodies, along with any partial remains and a hull section of the K-129, were buried at sea off of Hawaii. Personal film that was subsequently developed and some images were also recovered. Various other items were recovered, notably some material that was further back in the forward section, and had been swept forward.

K-129 and Azorian get interesting pretty quick when you start digging beyond the official story, too, but I'm not sure if that's considered a suitable topic here. It gets a bit tinfoil-y. But given the time period and actors involved, I feel like a moderate amount of "outside-the-box" theorizing is honestly appropriate - even the official story has gaps...particularly if that model is correct.

If you want to dig beyond the official story, I suggest reading David Sharp's book and viewing the film. The film employed CGI to reconstruct the bottom operations as best as possible from input by crew members and other sources.
Video on Amazon or Amazon Primer viewing: Azorian: The Raising of the K-129 Documentary
The model is consistent with Michael White's reconstruction of a mosaic obtained from the video feed from several CV cameras of the actual target. As I mentioned before, specific "aim" points were stablished on the target (e.g., towing lead on bow) and the cameras had reticles to align the axis of the CV with the target axis. When the CV was set down on the target, the error was roughly 1 foot off target, close enough.

Bottom line is that it was an incredible technological effort and extremely ambitious, but the section recovered was only a part of the target object. The plan was to modify the Capture Vehicle to engage the remainder of the lost target object and return the following 1975 summer season when the waters of the North Pacific were calm enough to operate. They were close to departing when the mission was called off due to newspaper articles, which prompted a Russian response.

What sank the K-129 is still a matter of theorizing. This month's Naval History (Naval Institute) has an article by Capt. Jack Newman on his ideas around the loss. Pay attention, because he was a submariner and a member of the Glomar Explorer crew who actually dealt with the section brought up in 1974. The article has an illustration of the video montage that Michael White made as well.
Newman article on K-129 Loss

 

[TJDougherty01]

More public details:

 

[Ravinoff]

Bottom line is that it was an incredible technological effort and extremely ambitious, but the section recovered was only a part of the target object. The plan was to modify the Capture Vehicle to engage the remainder of the lost target object and return the following 1975 summer season when the waters of the North Pacific were calm enough to operate. They were close to departing when the mission was called off due to newspaper articles, which prompted a Russian response.

What sank the K-129 is still a matter of theorizing. This month's Naval History (Naval Institute) has an article by Capt. Jack Newman on his ideas around the loss. Pay attention, because he was a submariner and a member of the Glomar Explorer crew who actually dealt with the section brought up in 1974. The article has an illustration of the video montage that Michael White made as well.
Newman article on K-129 Loss

The three things that raise some questions for me regarding K-129 and the Azorian retrieval are the unexplained additional crew, the recovery of the ship's bell (allegedly mounted in the conning tower), and the whole bizarre circumstance of four submarines sinking for reasons unknown in the space of six months in 1968. I'll definitely check out the movie, thanks for the recommendation.

I'm a bit surprised at the lack of apparent damage to the sail visible in that model, too. Three SS-N-5/R-21s lighting off inside their launch bays seems like it would do a lot more in terms of shredding the sail and adjacent hull segments.

 

[TJDougherty01]

The "lighting off" of two R-21 missiles is a theory, based on an interpretation of acoustic traces. To my mind, the photographic evidence is inconsistent with this interpretation, and I know I am not alone in that idea. The idea that the Russians would have a missile system that could accidentally ignite missile in their closed silos I find farfetched. I would expect there would be an interlock safety system to inhibit ignition until the silo door is open. Further, I also find it hard to imagine that multiple additional command steps would not be necessary to actually ignite a missile, as distinguished from a missile drill. The consequences of an accidental launch would be too great to risk.

The missiles employed hypergolic liquid propellant, inhibited red fuming nitric acid and nitrogen tetroxide as the oxidizer and 50% triethylamine and 50% xylidine as the fuel. Hence if, for example, there was a battery explosion (as Capt. Newman posits in his article linked above), subsequent sudden rupture of the fuel and oxidizer tanks of the aft most two missiles would lead to an explodion in their silos. In fact, the silos are missing and the surviving silo is twisted out of shape. The "missile firing in their silos to fuel exhaustion" theory would presumably mean the silos would be largely intact during the entire firing time; inrushing water would interfere with continued operation. It is important to note that during an actual launch, the missiles did NOT ignite underwater; a small solid fuel platform lofted the missile from the silo into the air. Also, where are the remaining missiles?

The aft section of the sail is obliterated, but as you state, the forward section is relatively intact. And in the close ups, sections of the sail are "peeled back" from the area around the former missile tube locations. This seems to me, at least, more consistent with a missile explosion, perhaps secondary to some other event.

In the end, we will probably never know for certain what caused the loss of the submarine and the 98 souls on board.

 

[publiusr]

I wish the Glomar with the moon pool had been kept---useful during the Deepwater Horizon disaster perhaps?

 

[Nik]

Beyond the realms of probables and possibles, may I mention that K-129 tragedy and recovery efforts feature in...
'The Jennifer Morgue' by Charles Stross (Laundry #2)
'Three Miles Down' by Harry Turtledove.

Former is wry riff on usual 'Laundry' topics: IMHO, "Wicked Fun !!"
Latter manages to feature numerous, well-described 'period' characters, convincingly evoke the utter paranoia of that era.
But then IMHO, goes off the rails. YMMV...

 

[TJDougherty01]

One aspect that is often lost is that the very large moon pool, which had to accommodate the 200 foot long Capture Vehicle, had drawbacks. It was a very large area in the center of the ship (see photo and note the forklift for scale). It was found that operation in as increased sea state could be very dangerous. This is best described on pages 111-113 in Dave Sharp's book (David Sharp CIA Book).

Briefly, during a test run in an increased sea state the bottom doors banged around in an uncontrolled fashions when opened, causing major vibrations throughout the entire ship structure. The bottom doors were 9 feet thick, with internal ballast tanks, almost built like barges. To open the doors, the ballast tanks were flooded and a gear system cranked the two doors along rails to fore and aft positions. To close, the doors were normally cranked shut, then the internal ballast tanks emptied so that the doors, which latched together, formed a tight seal around the perimeter. During the above incident, the doors banged around independent of each other and when finally closed, the seal and gear system was damaged. You also need to appreciate that the Glomar Explorer, having a large moon pool, did not have a standard keel support structure, and the two "wing walls" on either side of the moon pool had to act as structural elements. Also, because of the doors, the bottom had a huge flat structure, more like a barge than an ocean going vessel. This added to the difficulty in operating the ship safely. At one point, Dave also describes internal waves building in the moon pool. So there were significant limits imposed by sea conditions to operate the systems safely.

All this to say that it was a challenging ship to use, and considerable hard won experience was necessary. The ship was designed and built with a single mission in mind: to recover the K-129 forward section for intelligence purposes. Same concept goes for the Capture Vehicle: it was specifically designed to engage in an exact fashion the K-129 target. These were NOT general purpose designs with an eye toward future uses.

In 1978,the Glomar Explorer was employed briefly (and ironically) in an ocean mining effort by a private company. They had a mining machine that occupied a small portion of the moon pool. Other than that, it sat for years in Suisan Bay, with the center derrick and docking legs largely removed (see photos). In 1996, an ocean oil drilling firm bough the Glomar Explorer and converted it to deep sea oil drilling. This entailed a major conversion and the moon pool was eliminated and the bottom doors replaced with permanent steel. A small, central opening remained for the drill system. See photos of the now renamed Global Santa Fe Explorer (GSF Explorer). It's career ended in 2015 when it was broken up for scrap in China.

 

[Scott Kenny]

The "lighting off" of two R-21 missiles is a theory, based on an interpretation of acoustic traces. To my mind, the photographic evidence is inconsistent with this interpretation, and I know I am not alone in that idea. The idea that the Russians would have a missile system that could accidentally ignite missile in their closed silos I find farfetched. I would expect there would be an interlock safety system to inhibit ignition until the silo door is open. Further, I also find it hard to imagine that multiple additional command steps would not be necessary to actually ignite a missile, as distinguished from a missile drill. The consequences of an accidental launch would be too great to risk.

The missiles employed hypergolic liquid propellant, inhibited red fuming nitric acid and nitrogen tetroxide as the oxidizer and 50% triethylamine and 50% xylidine as the fuel. Hence if, for example, there was a battery explosion (as Capt. Newman posits in his article linked above), subsequent sudden rupture of the fuel and oxidizer tanks of the aft most two missiles would lead to an explodion in their silos. In fact, the silos are missing and the surviving silo is twisted out of shape. The "missile firing in their silos to fuel exhaustion" theory would presumably mean the silos would be largely intact during the entire firing time; inrushing water would interfere with continued operation. It is important to note that during an actual launch, the missiles did NOT ignite underwater; a small solid fuel platform lofted the missile from the silo into the air. Also, where are the remaining missiles?

The aft section of the sail is obliterated, but as you state, the forward section is relatively intact. And in the close ups, sections of the sail are "peeled back" from the area around the former missile tube locations. This seems to me, at least, more consistent with a missile explosion, perhaps secondary to some other event.

In the end, we will probably never know for certain what caused the loss of the submarine and the 98 souls on board.

Missiles firing in their tubes would have burned a hole through the tube and then the hull within a few seconds.

The missiles rupturing and then their hypergolics detonating is a much more likely idea. See also the Titan Missile explosion for another example of hypergolic ruptures resulting in a detonation.

Also, damage to the sail is much more consistent with a detonation in one or more of the missile tubes than a "hot run" (missile ignition).

I'm not sure how much of the good Captain's timeline is based on SOSUS data. Yes, the US has SOSUS arrays in the Pacific. Where is not important to this discussion, courtesy of the Deep Sound Channels that SOSUS arrays live in. Pacific SOSUS arrays would have heard the events of K129, just like the Atlantic arrays heard Thresher and Scorpion go down from thousands of miles away.

 

[TJDougherty01]

I totally agree; missiles in the silo tubes would have burned through quickly. That interpretation was made from the Sanborn traces by a person with deep experience in acoustics (NOT Captain Newman). I greatly respect this person and his expertise, but at the end of the day, it's an interpretation. The interpretation includes the idea that two of the missiles burned for 96 seconds to fuel exhaustion. Which would mean that each missile survived the intense heat, silo rupture, and continued to run in sea water. And since missiles are built for maximum range, the structures are relatively light, which mean sea pressure might have crushed the partial empty fuel tanks. So I personally had problems with that aspect, particularly in light of the actual photographic evidence from the wreck itself. I cannot totally dismiss it, and simply look upon it as one possibility for the loss

The SOSUS arrays in Hawaii, Adak, Midway, Eniwetok, and Wake islands detected the signal, as well as a towed array on a surface ship. However, because it was a transient, it was not marked as noteworthy by the NavFac. Transients such as sea quakes and other underwater events were often observed; submarine signals propagated in the Deep Sound Channel were at certain frequencies and longer durations. When it subsequently became apparent that the Russians were looking for a missing submarine by their searches, then the traces from that time were reanalyzed (by AFTAC) and the multiple axis directions and times of arrival at the various stations were employed to plot a search area.

This information was used to deploy Halibut with her towed camera system to a relatively small search area. The towed body had sonar, strobes and 35 mm cameras. It was slowly towed adjusting constantly to a height above the bottom at 20-30 feet, so numerous passes were made to scan the area. The towed body was at the end of a 30,000 foot cable from Halibut, so adjusting its direction was a long, slow process. Periodically, the towed body was hauled in and 35 mm film reels with thousands of exposures removed, developed, and fresh film loaded. It looks weeks to locate the K-129, and several more days to throughly photograph the area. The aft section, in two pieces, was roughly a hundred feet or so from the forward section on the ocean floor, with the forward section being of interest to the CIA.

Captain Newman's interpretation is derived from his experience as a submarine officer and as a member of the Glomar Explorer crew who examined first hand the recovered portion of the submarine. As the sole submarine qualified officer on the ship, he could make determinations of the various pieces recovered. The hull itself had low levels of plutonium contamination, and any cutting operations required a closely flexible exhaust duct to remove air borne plutonium particles, as plutonium is both a toxic heavy metal and alpha emitter. So from his observations, Captain Newman believes that the initial event was a battery fire and explosion in the aft battery compartment, which is immediately adjacent to the missile compartment (see above internal diagram of the Project 629A submarine). His timing is based on the recovery of a clock onboard the submarine which stopped at 22:10.

So there is the acoustic evidence, the photographic evidence of the K-129 forward section, and the examination of the remains of the submarine. Whatever occurred to sink the K-129, it was a violent event.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Whatever occurred to sink the K-129, it was a violent event.

Enough to blow a submarine in half.

I'm just noting that the theory about the missiles rockets running does not match the observed damage to the forward hull, while one or more missiles exploding is much closer to the observed damage.

 

[TJDougherty01]

Scott- Forgot to mention. The ship's bell would be mounted in the sail (it's on diagrams) when the submarine was on the surface. But it was taken below when submerged, so it didn't make noise when running submerged. We were not able to ascertain where it was stored while submerged, and as I previously mentioned, items from compartments further aft were recovered in the bow section. Debris was piled up 2-3 feet deep in the recovered section; whatever violent event split the submarine, items were swept forward toward the bow section.

 

[blackstar]

Hence if, for example, there was a battery explosion (as Capt. Newman posits in his article linked above), subsequent sudden rupture of the fuel and oxidizer tanks of the aft most two missiles would lead to an explodion in their silos.

That is not what Newman wrote in his article.

Newman wrote: "My assessment is that mechanical failure of the snorkel headvalve or system piping, plus human error, allowed seawater to enter the engine room, dooming the boat."

 

[blackstar]

So from his observations, Captain Newman believes that the initial event was a battery fire and explosion in the aft battery compartment, which is immediately adjacent to the missile compartment (see above internal diagram of the Project 629A submarine). His timing is based on the recovery of a clock onboard the submarine which stopped at 22:10.

So there is the acoustic evidence, the photographic evidence of the K-129 forward section, and the examination of the remains of the submarine. Whatever occurred to sink the K-129, it was a violent event.

A battery fire and explosion is not what what Newman claims was the "initial event." In his article, he wrote:

"The torpedo room destruction followed the flooding of the after half of the K-129, which occurred due to a mishap that allowed seawater to enter the pressure hull through the snorkel intake system with such velocity that it took only seconds to dump tons of water into each compartment through the ventilation lines, with immediate loss of propulsion, resulting in the boat’s demise."

And:

"I estimate that seawater entered the snorkel and submarine about ten minutes prior to the three acoustic precursor events when the after battery had been shorted, dumping its 7,500 amp hours to ground as fast as possible, producing vast quantities of gas plasma, plus red-hot battery terminals. The tragedy ended when the clock stopped in the forward torpedo room at 2210."

And:

"My assessment is that mechanical failure of the snorkel headvalve or system piping, plus human error, allowed seawater to enter the engine room, dooming the boat."

 

[Foo Fighter]

The 'model' appears to show a pressure wave moving towards the bow, where from I have no idea but it seems unlikely that impolosion could replicate what we see there.

 

[TJDougherty01]

From the article:

2150: Seawater enters snorkel or piping system, salts the after battery; hydrogen (gas plasma generation)
and chlorine gas produced. The battery is dumping energy directly to ground; terminals are “red hot” and the pressure hull is heating.

2158: First of the three precursor events; battery cells explode—the likely culprit. The K-129 begins to break into two pieces; after half of boat is flooding heavily.

 

[pasho]

I recently came across secret projects and two discussions about Project Azorian and the loss of the K-129. As I posted on one, they are without doubt the best exchange of ideas I have come across but I mentioned one minor quibble Captain Newman’s background says he is the last living member of the CIA’s Project Azorian Hughes Glomar Explorer team.​

From 1970 to 1975 I was the Chief Marine Geologist on the Project. Most of what I did was helping to create and maintain the seabed mining cover, but I was also the photographer with Team B that continued to exploit the K-129 while the Explorer was anchored off Lahaina. In 1972 during one leg of the Sea Scope cruises to dredge nodules for our cover the captain and crew made a valiant attempt to get me a core sample in the region of the wreckage for geotechnical analysis. Judging by the nose of the the core it "bounced "off something hard and the weather was really bad so we didn't make a second attempt. I also photographed the surface of the failed tine on a lift with a very unhappy Lockheed engineer. ​

​

 

[Scott Kenny]

I recently came across secret projects and two discussions about Project Azorian and the loss of the K-129. As I posted on one, they are without doubt the best exchange of ideas I have come across but I mentioned one minor quibble Captain Newman’s background says he is the last living member of the CIA’s Project Azorian Hughes Glomar Explorer team.​

From 1970 to 1975 I was the Chief Marine Geologist on the Project. Most of what I did was helping to create and maintain the seabed mining cover, but I was also the photographer with Team B that continued to exploit the K-129 while the Explorer was anchored off Lahaina. In 1972 during one leg of the Sea Scope cruises to dredge nodules for our cover the captain and crew made a valiant attempt to get me a core sample in the region of the wreckage for geotechnical analysis. Judging by the nose of the the core it "bounced "off something hard and the weather was really bad so we didn't make a second attempt. I also photographed the surface of the failed tine on a lift with a very unhappy Lockheed engineer. ​

​

Welcome, pasho!

Any other stories you can tell us about Azorian? Even just about issues dredging for nodules would be nice to hear.

 

[pasho]

For more you might check out Josh Deans book The Taking of the K-129 is a good narrative of the Azorian story and has more on the cover, the Sea Scope, manganese nodules and a few photographs

 

[TJDougherty01]

I also photographed the surface of the failed tine on a lift with a very unhappy Lockheed engineer.​

Those are nice photos; I figured they were taken by a professional.

As far as the Dean book, I think Dave Sharp's book is a more complete account. Dean wrote his book after both Michael White's Azorian film and Dave's book were published. He leaned rather heavily on those sources, To his credit, he does mention that at the end of the book.

Pasho- As far as your message to me (it seems to have disappeared after I read it), a small group has been working on possible alternative causes for the K-129 loss. Several scenarios are possible; some more likely than others. But trying to reconstruct exactly what happened to cause the sinking is an exercise with no clear conclusion. There are even conflicting reports as to whether it was to patrol off of Hawaii or the US West Coast. We do know that at that point in time, the Russians were having issues with the RDP (snorkel) system, and since the K-129 was a diesel-electric, there would have been several snorkel sessions in the transit of the rough waters of the North Pacific.