Submarine incident off Kildin Island
Part of Operation Holy Stone
USSBaton Rouge awaiting disposal atMare Island (1995)
Date 11 February 1992 Location North ofMurmansk, Russia 69°38′42″N33°46′54″E / 69.64500°N 33.78167°E /69.64500; 33.78167 Result USSBaton Rougewritten off[1][2]
Belligerents
United States	Russia
Commanders and leaders
Captain Gordon D. Cremer	Cdr. Igor Lokot[3]
Strength
1Los Angeles-class submarine	1Sierra-class submarine
Casualties and losses
1 nuclear submarine heavily damaged	1 nuclear submarine damaged
class=notpageimage| Location within Russia

Thesubmarine incident offKildin Island was a collision between theUS Navynuclear submarineUSS Baton Rouge and theRussian Navy nuclear submarineB-276Kostroma near the Russian naval base ofSeveromorsk on 11 February 1992. The incident occurred while the US unit was engaged in a covert mission, apparently aimed at intercepting Russian military communications. Although most sources claim that the American submarine was trailing her Russian counterpart, some authors believe that neitherKostroma norBaton Rouge had been able to locate each other before the collision.

Following thefall of the Soviet Union in 1991, uncertainty prevailed among the US intelligence community about the attitude of the former Soviet forces, especially the strategic assets that remained under Russian control. The American government tasked the Navy to continue keeping a close watch on the main bases of Russian nuclear submarines to monitor developments.^[4] During theCold War, this type of submarine surveillance was known as "Operation Holy Stone;" submariners nicknamed the program "Operation Pinnacle" or "Bollard".^[5] AuthorJeffrey T. Richelson maintains that "Holy Stone" continued unabated and that the 1992 incident was part of the operation.^[6] This intelligence-gathering includedtapping Soviet submarine communication cables, recording the pattern of noises from Soviet submarines, and observingsubmarine-launched ballistic missile tests.^[7]

The collision occurred at 8:16 pm local time,^[8] at a point slightly over 12 miles from the shoreline, in waters that the United States regarded asinternational, and that Russia considered as five miles inside the Russianterritorial sea (due to the Russian use of astraight baseline). The mission ofBaton Rouge off Severomorsk was reportedly the recovery or delivery of intelligence-monitoring devices on the seabed.^[7] The American press claimed that the submarine had been checking wireless traffic between Russian bases,^[9] but the Russian counterpart asserted that the two boats were engaged in a 'cat-and-mouse game',^[10] an opinion also supported by several Western sources.^[11][12] According to naval analyst Eugene Miasnikov, the amount of antisubmarine surveillance deployed by the Russians along their shores makes the first possibility implausible. He asserts that the second argument also seems to be weak given the circumstances and that the collision itself seemed to have happened by chance. The breaking waves and the shallow waters of that area of theBarents Sea prevented early enemy detection by either submarine. At the time of the incident, both vessels were using onlypassive sonars.^[13] Miasnikov maintains that the submarines of theLos Angeles class are unable to detect acoustic signals from targets located within a cone of 60 degrees astern, thus the most probable scenario was thatKostroma approachedBaton Rouge from behind. Indeed, the collision took place when theKostroma was surfacing, hitting the US submarine underneath on her aft section. The Sierra class sonar is also ‘deaf’ to the aft direction; her usual pattern of acoustic search is moving along a loop course. The incident, however, implied that Russian attack submarines are capable of avoiding passive acoustic detection, at least under certain conditions.^[7]

Both submarines sustained damage, but no casualties were reported. Russian reports and American aerial surveillance agree thatKostroma'ssail was dented on her front section. Russian navy sources reportedly found pieces ofcomposite material fromBaton Rouge's anti-sonar tiles.^[7][14] The US Navy claimed that besides some scratches, dents, and two minor cuts on her port ballast tank,^[15]Baton Rouge did not suffer major damage. But in any case, it was serious since any rupture on the single hull ofBaton Rouge would have compromised her pressure resistance.^[14] The deactivation ofBaton Rouge was announced on 17 September 1993,^[16] although some sources claim that the American submarine had already been taken out of service less than a year after the incident,^[17] in January 1993.^[18] According to Gregory Stitz, curator ofArkansas Inland Maritime Museum,^[2] and some European sources,^[1] the costs of repairing the damagedpressure hull, along with aprogrammed refueling, were well beyond the planned budget. Therefore, the US Navy chose to decommission the submarine. Russian naval officers alleged that the US submarine had become a constructive total loss right after the collision.^[19]Baton Rouge was deactivated at Mare Island shipyard on 1 November 1993 and eventually scrapped at thePuget Sound Naval Shipyard inBremerton, Washington.^[20] As forKostroma, she was laid up on 28 March 1992 and had been fully repaired at Nerpa shipyards inSnezhnogorsk by 29 June 1992. The Russian submarine was temporarily renamedKrab, before recovering her original name in November 1996. After a huge overhaul, again at Nerpa, she returned to service in 2005.^[21]

The incident produced intense embarrassment in Washington.^[13] Russia complained via diplomatic channels, and the Pentagon quickly acknowledged that a collision had occurred, contrary to an official policy at the time. A meeting betweenSecretary of StateJames Baker andRussian presidentBoris Yeltsin was arranged immediately. TheRussian Navy accused the United States of continuing intelligence operations around Russia's home waters despite the end of the cold war. All of this prompted the US Navy to stop some specific submarine activities off Russian bases, such as tapping underwater cables or intercepting wireless communications.^[23] This measure, however, did not prevent alater incident in March 1993, when theSturgeon-class submarineUSS Grayling collided with aDelta-class submarine,K-407Novomoskovsk offKola peninsula.^[24]

• Submarine incident off Kola Peninsula (1968)
• Submarine incident off Kola Peninsula (1993)
• Strait of Juan de Fuca laser incident
• Incident at Pristina airport
• 2021 Black Sea incident
• 2023 Black Sea drone incident

• Sontag, Sherry; and Drew, Christopher (1998).Blind Man's Bluff: The untold story of American submarine espionage. Thorndyke press.ISBN 0786218762
• Stern, Robert (2007).The hunter hunted: submarine versus submarine encounters from World War I to the present. Naval Institute Press.ISBN 1591143799
• Reed, Williams (2003).Crazy Ivan: Based on a True Story of Submarine Espionage. IUniverse.ISBN 0595265065

69°38′42″N33°46′54″E / 69.64500°N 33.78167°E /69.64500; 33.78167

• 1992 disasters in Russia
• Battles and conflicts without fatalities
• Conflicts in 1992
• International maritime incidents
• Maritime incidents in 1992
• Maritime incidents in Russia
• Russian submarine accidents
• United States submarine accidents
• Russia–United States military relations

• CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown
• Pages using gadget WikiMiniAtlas
• Articles with short description
• Short description is different from Wikidata
• Use dmy dates from July 2014
• Coordinates on Wikidata