Excellent and facinating segment on the K129 by Captain Newman, USN, Ret. Growing up I often observed Glomar Explorer in mothball just off the Benicia Bridge, California. Looking forward to more on this topic in Naval History and the podcast. All the best, JP Leonard, Chief Ret. California Highway Patrol, USMC 1980-1984
I took a photo of Glomar Explorer while driving on the bridge with one of those point-and-shoot cameras. I gave a print to an old guy who worked on that ship when they lifted the sub. He was thrilled but somewhat disappointed to see the vessel rusting away at Benicia.
As one of those who saw the GlOMAR EXPLORER sitting near the Benicia, ,Martinez railroad Bridge for many decades. I went aboard her in the mid 1980s to clean her of lead chips and guano. The entire time we were watched by armed guards, even going the the can we had to have an escort. Flash forward to the late 80s just before she was moved too a shipyard. This time there were no guards, just a tired rusting piece of history. Regarding Captain Newman's story. It has way to many instances of False narratives that I can't list them all. But ill give it a try to list some of them. First off, he was never there, the US Navy had a dim view of the operation so much so the CNO put out an order that NO naval assets, including human was to be used in this illegal scam. His whole dissertation is simply the Company (CIA) line. I think this gives you a bit of history to cause you to take whatever he says with a grain of salt. PS: I was interesting when I went in the office or Manager Heavy Lift and my guy almost passed out as there on his desk was an ashtray that held a bunch of buts from his cigarettes. When I wanted a copy of the drawings for the gymball and heave compensater he went straight to were he left thos so many decades ago. At this point I saw the row of design books. They started out with the customer as Global Marine after about half way the name changed to Hughes Industries.
@@andyhastings5950 I do wish he'd either addressed or been questioned on Bruce Rules analysis of the acoustic data that became available in the mid 2010s. The conclusion from Rules analysis was that there were three precursor explosions inside of and contained within the pressure hull of sufficient force to have killed or incapacitated the crew, with the first of two missiles rocket motors starting up seconds later. I can believe Captain Newmans conclusion that the shorting batteries led to a reverse Titanic scenario with the stern flooding and snapping aft of the missile compartment and sinking first, as he is correct that there is a rather clean cut aft of the missile compartment on the wreck.
@@NightHeronProductionIf you look closely you will find the separation point was forward of the forward missile silo. Nor does he address the known fact that K-109 was a submerged launch sub, while it's precedent was only able to launch from the surface. It is still my opinion the good captain is spewing what the CIA and later the USN wants the public to know. He definitely was not aboard the CIA ship during the actual operation. As I said the USN wanted nothing to do with this project until the Soviets sent naval assets to the site. The USN has the primary obligation of protecting US Flag vessels. Nor does he address the very high level radiation levels encountered. This was caused by Plutonium, a man made element. That in high purity is used in nuclear warheads. And as the sub was diesel Electric there was no other source of radiation on board. You see he's a goverment stooge.
I was in eighth grade - 1968 - and a science nut, when I read (in one of the magazines my parents got for) me a story about a project to mine manganese nodules from the ocean floor. Of course I learned much later that the "manganese nodules" story was a cover for the building and sailing of the Glomar Explorer. The actual story, which has slowly trickled out, is so much more remarkable, and intriguing. Even though we and the USSR were mortal enemies, it's impossible not to feel heartbreak and sorrow for the poor sailors of the K-129, who were doing their best under extremely difficult conditions.
This is endlessly fascinating! Captain Newman answered a lot of questions I've had since six year old me found out about Project Azorian (then known incorrectly as Project Jennifer) and K-129 through the first episode of Nuclear Sharks in 2001. It's a shame to learn that he's the last living member of the Project Azorian Hughes Glomar Explorer team. My condolences to the families of the Glomar Explorer crew. Its endlessly surreal to hear that he stepped aboard the raised portion of the sub aboard the Glomar, when he mentioned that at around the 16:00 mark my head literally shot up from what I was doing. This is a very precious testimonial from someone deeply involved in the project, one that I was doubtful we would ever see at this point. Its a bit sad that his experiences and observations of the recovered section wasn't touched on more but I imagine with him being a submariner it would be a hard subject to discuss. I have a few questions for Captain Newman, assuming you have him back in the future and that he'd be willing to take any questions. 1st Question: (This is a long one) The one thing that I don't see addressed either here nor in the article is the acoustic data indicating that the two R21 fired within their closed launch tubes at intervals up to fuel exhaustion beginning at almost exactly midnight. Does Captain Newman have an explanation for this? Are we to assume the acoustic data is false? Is it indication of a dead man switch system for the missile and the consequence of an un-aborted missile drill? Could this be feasibly possible in what Captain Newman speculates is a submerged missile compartment? Sources: www.iusscaa.org/articles/brucerule/acoustic_detctions_of_the_loss_of_the_golf_class_ii.htm www.iusscaa.org/articles/brucerule/advancing_an_understanding_of_why_the__soviet_submarine_k-129_was_lost.htm 2nd Question: One of the bigger questions I have are regarding the testimonies of HGE recovery members account of the sailor recovered in his bunk "one of the bodies was recovered in his bunk, or what remained of his bunk. He was apparently studying a manual that had to do with the missiles" and then the account of John Craven who is quoted as saying that when the Halibut photographed the K-129 wreck "There was a skeleton outside the submarine with boots on as though they were trying to fight a fire of some kind". These two accounts confuse me as assuming we can take them both accounts on each parties word, the latter indicates that the crew were dealing with an emergency and had time to respond, where as the other suggest two things to me. That A: this sailor was one of the additional crew embers and was essentially trying to stay out of the way within the crammed sub during an emergency in which he would only get in the way, or B: that he was killed very suddenly. I'm curious to know what Captain /newman thinks was the timeline of death for the crew was, where some quickly killed from the battery compartment going aft with the crew forward of the command centre surviving longer and even having time to respond? Or was it as Bruce Rule has speculated based on past data that the first of the three precursor events killed or incapacitated the crew outright? 3rd Question: Operation Sand Dollar: Captain Newmans description of the Fish is new to me with the light being forward facing but the camera aft so that's something! If he's ever back on can you ask him to describe the wreck site (assuming he's cleared to). I've heard the late John Craven's description of "a skeleton outside the submarine with boots, as though they were trying to fight a fire of some kind". I genuinely curious to know what the wreck site looked like in 1968, outside of of the intro to the Project Azorian Documentary by Michael White, I've seen no images or descriptions of the stern. And is there anything generally he can reveal about operation Sand Dollar? I've heard from one Halibut crew member who was aboard but had little to do with the information gathering and from John Craven. Thats all that's out there to my knowledge, so he's input would be invaluable. Please bare in mind that I'm going completely off what is available in published source material and what is to be found online, having just read Captain Newmans article I only just found that the K-129 sonarman’s notes where recovered in Project Azorian. In closing thank you to both you and Captain Jack Newman for this fascinating account. If consider taking these question please let know as with more time I'm sure I could refine the questions.
Great comment, you beat me to the punch on a few of these things, I actually just asked some of the same things on the article itself, wasn’t aware of the actual video, this should be a treat when I get an hour to spare! (You should check out my comment on the article page). You sound like a very interested follower of this subject just like me, I want to ask, have you ever come across a French documentary which features the K-129, and seen the interview done with Craven where he clearly says “that was a rogue submarine”. I saw it a little over 10 years ago after having read literally everything I could get my hands on for the subject, and was floored! People say things about the man but I hold Craven in high regard. That, coupled with other things he’s subtly let on make me think there’s much more to this story than what has been allowed to be released. Even though I read and enjoyed Sewells material on it, (which I don’t believe hardly any of), these alternate theories do tickle my interest and seem to have just the slightest of “something to them”, especially when someone who “would know” like Craven, throws little tidbits out there like that gem of a statement. As far as the corpse found outside the boat where it wrecked, I had read theories that maybe the man was on the deck and the sub was surfaced when disaster struck - that he was tethered to the deck and wearing cold-weather gear. I’ve also seen some random (albeit unconfirmed/unverified) comments here and there on the internetz where people have attested interesting claims… one even about the USS Barb “witnessing” the sinking of K-129. From what I recall, it is known that Barb was apparently in the vicinity of K-129s home port when K-129 took off. I have read that Barb trailed K-129 “with orders to sink her if she was poised to attack (launch - which is kind of a given during the Cold War)” - and also that Barb was in the area of the sub base and monitored the “rush out of sea” of the fleet to search for K-129. All very interesting. I think another often dismissed fact is the one that the Russians were searching for her about 300 miles north of where she was sunk, where they expected her to be. I never spent time at sea in the Navy, and I’m sure some times boats don’t take exact courses every time they’re on patrol, but to a layman like myself, 300 miles off course and in the direction of their mortal enemy sounds hugely bad and off… which also lends to the “rogue” theory to me. I’ve also read many who think the front ~200 feet were recovered, not just the front 40. Not sure if I buy it, but if you can substantiate Sewell’s claim about us “returning the ships bell to the Russians” (which was allegedly mounted in the sail), then, well, that’s also interesting - if they’re trying to tell us we didn’t even recover that section. Then you have the additional 14-15 crew members, that’s pretty sus. Lastly, no one ever talks about the stern of the boat. That was something I never even really thought about up until about a year ago (after seeing that “world without oceans” video thing, that showed a bunch of wrecks on the sea floor with daylight hitting them, K-129 being one of them)… no pictures or mention of the stern that I can recall. Obviously all of the “good stuff” was up in the front half of the boat. Still, be interesting to know. What say you?
Great interview & answers all of my questions I've ever had about the project & sub itself, including a lot of questions I didn't think to ask! The amount of experience we're hearing in this video is staggering. Edit: could the missing missile have been expelled somehow before complete destruction; or would've that left noticeable signatures & wreckage?
If I remember correctly the fuels used in Soviet missles would explode if mixed with sea water, so that's a possible explanation for the missing missle. It was expelled by an explosion during sinking.
Very interesting account of a very famous covert operation! My friend had a sailboat slip somewhere around Red Wood City and to get out to the muddy looking waters of the south bay, we would have to motor by a couple of moored ships, one was a really weird looking ship with towering steel structures. I never paid much attention to it but one day as we were coming back in I noticed the name on the stern, it was the Glomar Explorer....wow, I thought......a very famous ship just sitting there all neglected. I wonder if it is still there.
lol, I suppose it makes perfect sense that a CIA front operation would be run out of a nondescript office in Wilmington, Delaware just like ever other US corporation
Outstanding video!! I really enjoyed it! Thank you for the informative lesson. I do have one question though- what was that noise I kept hearing? It sounded like wind chimes. My phone speaker is bad so I listened to it twice. Well worth it! 😃- Doc L. 🫡🇺🇸
Take a look at the pics the navy released of both Scorpion and Thresher. It looks like components/structure of their conning towers have been removed. That is if you compare the older pics to the latest ones. Thanks I’m just curious what you think.
I had the pleasure of meeting with one or the one who was on board at the lift. This guy is full of sheet. Along with several other books one of which was a CIA writer all he did was follow the corporate line. The entire front half was brought aboard. The explosion that doomed her was quite a few seconds before she turned into a squashed can. This shown by where the ships bell was fastened to the rear bulk head of the control center. It was found it came to rest in the aft torpedo room. This to me looks like an explosion shot it backward. These areas had to have been recovered to be able to find the bell. This is one area that's BS. The next thing. Your guest could not have been aboard her during the recovery. The Navy was extreamly up set with the whole project as it is was. You do not ever disturb the resting place of her crew. If the Navy didn't like the idea they sure would not allow an active service member to be involved at all. Thanks
Alternatively isn't it possible for control center and torpedo room bulk heads to have collapsed/imploded near or at collapse depth. Assuming the sinking played out anything close to what this gentlemen is describing, could an implosion of the control rooms aft bulkhead not send everything within that hull section shooting forward (Or vertically up in this scenario) into the aft of the torpedo room? Not trying to be a smart guy just floating an idea out there!
Had long been fascinated by Project Azorian. Captain Newman's work on the K-129 itself is top notch, interesting stuff.
Indeed!
Highly informative, thanks. Looking forward to the next part!
Good to hear this enjoyed the article and the book.I was a SK-2 stationed at NATTC Memphis at this time retired in 1983 as CPO.
Excellent and facinating segment on the K129 by Captain Newman, USN, Ret. Growing up I often observed Glomar Explorer in mothball just off the Benicia Bridge, California. Looking forward to more on this topic in Naval History and the podcast. All the best,
JP Leonard, Chief Ret. California Highway Patrol, USMC 1980-1984
I took a photo of Glomar Explorer while driving on the bridge with one of those point-and-shoot cameras. I gave a print to an old guy who worked on that ship when they lifted the sub. He was thrilled but somewhat disappointed to see the vessel rusting away at Benicia.
As one of those who saw the GlOMAR EXPLORER sitting near the Benicia, ,Martinez railroad Bridge for many decades.
I went aboard her in the mid 1980s to clean her of lead chips and guano. The entire time we were watched by armed guards, even going the the can we had to have an escort. Flash forward to the late 80s just before she was moved too a shipyard. This time there were no guards, just a tired rusting piece of history.
Regarding Captain Newman's story. It has way to many instances of False narratives that I can't list them all. But ill give it a try to list some of them. First off, he was never there, the US Navy had a dim view of the operation so much so the CNO put out an order that NO naval assets, including human was to be used in this illegal scam. His whole dissertation is simply the Company (CIA) line. I think this gives you a bit of history to cause you to take whatever he says with a grain of salt.
PS: I was interesting when I went in the office or Manager Heavy Lift and my guy almost passed out as there on his desk was an ashtray that held a bunch of buts from his cigarettes. When I wanted a copy of the drawings for the gymball and heave compensater he went straight to were he left thos so many decades ago. At this point I saw the row of design books. They started out with the customer as Global Marine after about half way the name changed to Hughes Industries.
@@andyhastings5950 I do wish he'd either addressed or been questioned on Bruce Rules analysis of the acoustic data that became available in the mid 2010s. The conclusion from Rules analysis was that there were three precursor explosions inside of and contained within the pressure hull of sufficient force to have killed or incapacitated the crew, with the first of two missiles rocket motors starting up seconds later.
I can believe Captain Newmans conclusion that the shorting batteries led to a reverse Titanic scenario with the stern flooding and snapping aft of the missile compartment and sinking first, as he is correct that there is a rather clean cut aft of the missile compartment on the wreck.
Ive seen the photos of K-109 as she sat on the bottom north west of Hawaii.@@NightHeronProduction
@@NightHeronProductionIf you look closely you will find the separation point was forward of the forward missile silo.
Nor does he address the known fact that K-109 was a submerged launch sub, while it's precedent was only able to launch from the surface.
It is still my opinion the good captain is spewing what the CIA and later the USN wants the public to know. He definitely was not aboard the CIA ship during the actual operation. As I said the USN wanted nothing to do with this project until the Soviets sent naval assets to the site. The USN has the primary obligation of protecting US Flag vessels.
Nor does he address the very high level radiation levels encountered. This was caused by Plutonium, a man made element. That in high purity is used in nuclear warheads. And as the sub was diesel Electric there was no other source of radiation on board.
You see he's a goverment stooge.
I was in eighth grade - 1968 - and a science nut, when I read (in one of the magazines my parents got for) me a story about a project to mine manganese nodules from the ocean floor. Of course I learned much later that the "manganese nodules" story was a cover for the building and sailing of the Glomar Explorer. The actual story, which has slowly trickled out, is so much more remarkable, and intriguing. Even though we and the USSR were mortal enemies, it's impossible not to feel heartbreak and sorrow for the poor sailors of the K-129, who were doing their best under extremely difficult conditions.
This is endlessly fascinating! Captain Newman answered a lot of questions I've had since six year old me found out about Project Azorian (then known incorrectly as Project Jennifer) and K-129 through the first episode of Nuclear Sharks in 2001. It's a shame to learn that he's the last living member of the Project Azorian Hughes Glomar Explorer team. My condolences to the families of the Glomar Explorer crew.
Its endlessly surreal to hear that he stepped aboard the raised portion of the sub aboard the Glomar, when he mentioned that at around the 16:00 mark my head literally shot up from what I was doing. This is a very precious testimonial from someone deeply involved in the project, one that I was doubtful we would ever see at this point. Its a bit sad that his experiences and observations of the recovered section wasn't touched on more but I imagine with him being a submariner it would be a hard subject to discuss.
I have a few questions for Captain Newman, assuming you have him back in the future and that he'd be willing to take any questions.
1st Question:
(This is a long one)
The one thing that I don't see addressed either here nor in the article is the acoustic data indicating that the two R21 fired within their closed launch tubes at intervals up to fuel exhaustion beginning at almost exactly midnight. Does Captain Newman have an explanation for this? Are we to assume the acoustic data is false? Is it indication of a dead man switch system for the missile and the consequence of an un-aborted missile drill? Could this be feasibly possible in what Captain Newman speculates is a submerged missile compartment?
Sources:
www.iusscaa.org/articles/brucerule/acoustic_detctions_of_the_loss_of_the_golf_class_ii.htm
www.iusscaa.org/articles/brucerule/advancing_an_understanding_of_why_the__soviet_submarine_k-129_was_lost.htm
2nd Question:
One of the bigger questions I have are regarding the testimonies of HGE recovery members account of the sailor recovered in his bunk "one of the bodies was recovered in his bunk, or what remained of his bunk. He was apparently studying a manual that had to do with the missiles" and then the account of John Craven who is quoted as saying that when the Halibut photographed the K-129 wreck "There was a skeleton outside the submarine with boots on as though they were trying to fight a fire of some kind". These two accounts confuse me as assuming we can take them both accounts on each parties word, the latter indicates that the crew were dealing with an emergency and had time to respond, where as the other suggest two things to me. That A: this sailor was one of the additional crew embers and was essentially trying to stay out of the way within the crammed sub during an emergency in which he would only get in the way, or B: that he was killed very suddenly. I'm curious to know what Captain /newman thinks was the timeline of death for the crew was, where some quickly killed from the battery compartment going aft with the crew forward of the command centre surviving longer and even having time to respond? Or was it as Bruce Rule has speculated based on past data that the first of the three precursor events killed or incapacitated the crew outright?
3rd Question:
Operation Sand Dollar:
Captain Newmans description of the Fish is new to me with the light being forward facing but the camera aft so that's something! If he's ever back on can you ask him to describe the wreck site (assuming he's cleared to). I've heard the late John Craven's description of "a skeleton outside the submarine with boots, as though they were trying to fight a fire of some kind". I genuinely curious to know what the wreck site looked like in 1968, outside of of the intro to the Project Azorian Documentary by Michael White, I've seen no images or descriptions of the stern. And is there anything generally he can reveal about operation Sand Dollar? I've heard from one Halibut crew member who was aboard but had little to do with the information gathering and from John Craven. Thats all that's out there to my knowledge, so he's input would be invaluable.
Please bare in mind that I'm going completely off what is available in published source material and what is to be found online, having just read Captain Newmans article I only just found that the K-129 sonarman’s notes where recovered in Project Azorian.
In closing thank you to both you and Captain Jack Newman for this fascinating account. If consider taking these question please let know as with more time I'm sure I could refine the questions.
Great comment, you beat me to the punch on a few of these things, I actually just asked some of the same things on the article itself, wasn’t aware of the actual video, this should be a treat when I get an hour to spare! (You should check out my comment on the article page).
You sound like a very interested follower of this subject just like me, I want to ask, have you ever come across a French documentary which features the K-129, and seen the interview done with Craven where he clearly says “that was a rogue submarine”. I saw it a little over 10 years ago after having read literally everything I could get my hands on for the subject, and was floored! People say things about the man but I hold Craven in high regard. That, coupled with other things he’s subtly let on make me think there’s much more to this story than what has been allowed to be released. Even though I read and enjoyed Sewells material on it, (which I don’t believe hardly any of), these alternate theories do tickle my interest and seem to have just the slightest of “something to them”, especially when someone who “would know” like Craven, throws little tidbits out there like that gem of a statement.
As far as the corpse found outside the boat where it wrecked, I had read theories that maybe the man was on the deck and the sub was surfaced when disaster struck - that he was tethered to the deck and wearing cold-weather gear.
I’ve also seen some random (albeit unconfirmed/unverified) comments here and there on the internetz where people have attested interesting claims… one even about the USS Barb “witnessing” the sinking of K-129. From what I recall, it is known that Barb was apparently in the vicinity of K-129s home port when K-129 took off. I have read that Barb trailed K-129 “with orders to sink her if she was poised to attack (launch - which is kind of a given during the Cold War)” - and also that Barb was in the area of the sub base and monitored the “rush out of sea” of the fleet to search for K-129. All very interesting.
I think another often dismissed fact is the one that the Russians were searching for her about 300 miles north of where she was sunk, where they expected her to be. I never spent time at sea in the Navy, and I’m sure some times boats don’t take exact courses every time they’re on patrol, but to a layman like myself, 300 miles off course and in the direction of their mortal enemy sounds hugely bad and off… which also lends to the “rogue” theory to me.
I’ve also read many who think the front ~200 feet were recovered, not just the front 40. Not sure if I buy it, but if you can substantiate Sewell’s claim about us “returning the ships bell to the Russians” (which was allegedly mounted in the sail), then, well, that’s also interesting - if they’re trying to tell us we didn’t even recover that section.
Then you have the additional 14-15 crew members, that’s pretty sus.
Lastly, no one ever talks about the stern of the boat. That was something I never even really thought about up until about a year ago (after seeing that “world without oceans” video thing, that showed a bunch of wrecks on the sea floor with daylight hitting them, K-129 being one of them)… no pictures or mention of the stern that I can recall. Obviously all of the “good stuff” was up in the front half of the boat. Still, be interesting to know.
What say you?
Fascinating presentation! Thank you!
thank you.
Great info thank you sir for everything ❤
Fascinating episode. Anything you can do about those phone chimes in the future? Pretty distracting.
14 extra ppl in a small diesel electric, they had to offload tube #1 to make room for extra food stores
Great interview & answers all of my questions I've ever had about the project & sub itself, including a lot of questions I didn't think to ask! The amount of experience we're hearing in this video is staggering.
Edit: could the missing missile have been expelled somehow before complete destruction; or would've that left noticeable signatures & wreckage?
If I remember correctly the fuels used in Soviet missles would explode if mixed with sea water, so that's a possible explanation for the missing missle. It was expelled by an explosion during sinking.
Very interesting account of a very famous covert operation! My friend had a sailboat slip somewhere around Red Wood City and to get out to the muddy looking waters of the south bay, we would have to motor by a couple of moored ships, one was a really weird looking ship with towering steel structures. I never paid much attention to it but one day as we were coming back in I noticed the name on the stern, it was the Glomar Explorer....wow, I thought......a very famous ship just sitting there all neglected. I wonder if it is still there.
The Glomar Explorer was registered out of Wilmington,Delaware. But not built in Wilm,Del..
lol, I suppose it makes perfect sense that a CIA front operation would be run out of a nondescript office in Wilmington, Delaware just like ever other US corporation
By far, most US flagged ships are registered in Wilmington. It has to do with low corporate taxes.
turn the phone OFF
All the tech the navy has, and they can't get this man a decent camera?? Shame.
We're going to fix Eric's camera. You're right the image quality was not great.
@@USNavalInstituteto be open I wasn’t criticizing yall! The content of the video was amazing and definitely gained a sub here
Outstanding video!! I really enjoyed it! Thank you for the informative lesson. I do have one question though- what was that noise I kept hearing? It sounded like wind chimes. My phone speaker is bad so I listened to it twice. Well worth it! 😃- Doc L. 🫡🇺🇸
You guys still on dial up?
Magic disappearing headset at 5:10. Hehe. 😂
Ah yes, the magic of Hollywood.
Who is responsible for the missing sections of the scorpion sale and periscope? Did the Russians steel them off the wreck?
Interwting… don’t believe I was aware of this.
Take a look at the pics the navy released of both Scorpion and Thresher. It looks like components/structure of their conning towers have been removed. That is if you compare the older pics to the latest ones. Thanks I’m just curious what you think.
Also thank you for making these videos. They are very much appreciated.
LOL. Cat doesn't rebrand Snap-On. THey both buy from a third party manufacturer.
Sneaky Boys
I had the pleasure of meeting with one or the one who was on board at the lift.
This guy is full of sheet. Along with several other books one of which was a CIA writer all he did was follow the corporate line.
The entire front half was brought aboard. The explosion that doomed her was quite a few seconds before she turned into a squashed can. This shown by where the ships bell was fastened to the rear bulk head of the control center. It was found it came to rest in the aft torpedo room. This to me looks like an explosion shot it backward. These areas had to have been recovered to be able to find the bell. This is one area that's BS.
The next thing. Your guest could not have been aboard her during the recovery. The Navy was extreamly up set with the whole project as it is was. You do not ever disturb the resting place of her crew. If the Navy didn't like the idea they sure would not allow an active service member to be involved at all.
Thanks
Alternatively isn't it possible for control center and torpedo room bulk heads to have collapsed/imploded near or at collapse depth. Assuming the sinking played out anything close to what this gentlemen is describing, could an implosion of the control rooms aft bulkhead not send everything within that hull section shooting forward (Or vertically up in this scenario) into the aft of the torpedo room?
Not trying to be a smart guy just floating an idea out there!
Your thoughts may well be true.
@@NightHeronProduction
The last survivor of Azorian is a submariner?! That can only mean double the saluting 🫡 🫡