The 1967 Walker–Besslednyi Collision: When History Got It Wrong
By Bill Streifer and Irek Sabitov
On May 10, 1967, during the heart of the Cold War, two destroyers collided in the Sea of Japan: the USS Walker and a Soviet one, mistakenly referred to as Besslednyi in American (and later in Russian) publications. The truth came to light in 2005 thanks to an article in a Vladivostok newspaper, when the commander of that Soviet ship, Anatoly Sobolev, described the incident in detail. But he was not in fact in command of the Besslednyi but rather another destroyer, the Veskii.
This article was first published in the Australian Naval Review, 2020, Issue 2, in December 2020.
Nevertheless, describing the incident from May 1967, American authors and the website of the US Navy’s Naval History and Heritage Command (NHHC) continue to refer to that Soviet destroyer as Besslednyi.
American publications placed blame on the Russians just as the Soviet press had placed blame squarely on the US. Pravda, the official Soviet newspaper of the Communist Party, wrote, ‘… American ships do not respect existing international norms and grossly violate international rules for preventing collisions at sea …’. Izvestia, the Soviet newspaper of record, wrote, ‘… The collision was committed by an American ship intentionally …’.
The article cites various publications that refer to a ‘Walker–Besslednyi’ collision, from a 1967 US Navy press release to more recent English-language books and articles. Also included is that Soviet commander’s recollections; a likely explanation for how the US Navy could have misidentified the Soviet destroyer from the start; and how the collision in the Sea of Japan almost led to an international crisis. In response to this collision and another the following day, US Senator John G. Tower, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said they ‘indicate either a very stupid Soviet sea captain or a deliberate Soviet attempt to cause an international incident of far-reaching implications’.
The authors recently requested that the National Archive and Records Administration (NARA) in Washington, D.C. revise the caption of a photo that incorrectly identifies the Soviet destroyer involved in that May 1967 collision as ‘Besslednyi’.
History is replete with stories, though partially or entirely untrue, that continue to be retold decades later. Such is the case of a well-publicized Cold War incident at sea—the collision in the Sea of Japan on 10 May 1967 between the American destroyer USS Walker (DD-517) and a Soviet Kotlin-class destroyer, incorrectly identified by the US Navy as Besslednyi (DD-022).
These two naval adversaries had supposedly met up for the first time nine months prior. In April 1966, when the Walkertook part in an operation in which she supplied direct, indirect, harassment, and interdiction support for Operation ‘Osage’, a combined amphibious assault at Chu Lai, South Vietnam. During this operation, the Walker fired over 1,000 rounds. Support was also provided for the South Vietnamese 8th Airborne Battalion. She also escorted a US marine supply and an equipment truck convoy from Da Nang to Phu Bai.[1] Later, Walker conducted a month-long patrol duty in the Taiwan Strait,[2] the 110 mile-wide waterway separating the Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China (aka Communist China).
But instead of returning to her home port at Pearl Harbor upon completion of her Vietnam and China missions,[3]Walker was instead ordered to replace the USS Walke (DD-723), an Allen M Sumner-class destroyer, in anti-submarine exercises in the Sea of Japan on 8 July 1966.[4] During that mission, she was to work in cooperation with the Japanese Maritime Self-Defense Force and naval units of the Republic of Korea (South Korea).
On 24 July 1966, about two weeks after the operation began, a Soviet Kotlin-class destroyer, identified by the US Navy asBesslednyi with pennant (i.e. hull) number 022, was sighted as it began shadowing the allied task group. Besslednyi had recently joined up with the allied task force to assume a tailing role.[5]
Meanwhile, Walker was designated to shoulder the Soviet vessel. The naval term ‘shouldering’ refers to the practice of maneuvering your ship in contact with an opposing vessel in an attempt to cause the opposing vessel to turn away.[6]Ultimately, Walker was successful in preventing the attempted penetration of the screen by Besslednyi and her replacement.[7]
Under orders to screen away the snooping Soviet vessel should she try to charge toward the center of the allied ship formation, Walker kept an eye on Besslednyi. As a Lieutenant (junior grade), on board the Walker later recalled, during this transit, the Soviet warship was hardly persistent in her attempts to break into the formation, but the screening efforts were effective enough to draw a formal Soviet protest issued on 10 August 1966.[8]
Nine months later, in May 1967, Walker and a Soviet destroyer, presumed to be Besslednyi, reportedly met again in the Sea of Japan. Details of the 1967 Walker–Besslednyi collision were provided at the time by John W Finney, a journalist at the Washington Bureau of the New York Times, who wrote widely on foreign policy.[9] In ‘A US Destroyer in Far East Bumped by Soviet Warship’, a front-page story in the New York Times dated 11 May 1967, Finney described the incident as only the most recent in a ‘long period’ of harassment of task groups by Soviet ships. As a result, the US quickly lodged a diplomatic protest. The moment the collision was disclosed to the public, Finney said Charge d’Affaires of the Soviet Embassy, Yuri N Chernyakov, was called to the State Department at midday to receive an oral protest from Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs John M. Leddy.[10]
In that same New York Times article, Finney covered the Government’s various explanations for the collision. One line of speculation at the State Department was that the Captain of the Soviet destroyer, under general orders to harass the task group, had accidently maneuvered too close to the Walker. Another theory was that the Soviet Union was intent on provoking a political incident to demonstrate their hostility over intensification of the American military effort in Vietnam. Some officials thought the incident might have been in retaliation for what the Russians charged was ‘buzzing’ by US planes of its ships headed for North Vietnam.[11]
A former Besslednyi crewman recently appeared confused by the American assertion that his ship had collided with an American destroyer in 1967. When Boris Karasev[12] saw a photo that purported to show Soviet destroyer 022 just moments prior to her collision with the USS Walker,[13] he remarked, ‘I served on the destroyer Besslednyi in 1968, but I did not hear about this collision from my shipmates; it may be secret, but it is unlikely, a case of an incomprehensible fake. Also, I can’t see the RBU 2500 [a jet bomb launcher model] of the BCh3 [mine torpedo department] in the photo.’[14] Karasev said he hadn’t heard from anyone about a Besslednyi collision, let alone twice.[15]
A Well-Publicized Incident
The 10 May 1967 collision at sea between the USS Walker and a Soviet destroyer in the Sea of Japan has been covered in numerous publications. Among these are the 13 May 1967 issue of The Age, an Australian newspaper, in an article titled ‘Russian Ships ‘Harassed US Destroyer’’, and in two of the most popular magazines of the day: TIME and LIFE. Both US magazines, which presumed the name of the Soviet ship involved in the collision was Besslednyi, may have based their faulty information on US Navy and US Defense Department press releases, both of which identified the ship as ‘Besslednyi’.
TIME magazine described the incident as like a ‘game of chicken’ on the sea, with the Besslednyi coming within 50 feet of two US destroyers ‘dispatched to drive it away’.[16] LIFE, known for its award-winning photography, described a photo of the collision this way: ‘Eyeball to eyeball, US seaman on the destroyer Walker looked at Russian sailors on the deck of the destroyer Besslednyi, as the Soviet vessel scraped against her in the Sea of Japan 375 miles off Vladivostok.’[17] Soviet newspaper Izvestia said the ‘clash’ occurred ‘115 miles off the Soviet coast, east of Vladimir Bay’.[18]
An error in identifying the name of the Soviet ship was also made by the US Navy’s Naval History and Heritage Command (NHHC), which described a US Navy photograph, taken one day prior to the collision, as ‘BESSLEDNYI (Soviet Kotlin class destroyer)’,[19] and in the ‘World’s Naval News’ section of Warship International (1967), which described the incident this way: ‘Besslednyi sideswiped US destroyer Walker off Hokkaido causing slight damage 10 May 67’.[20]
Numerous US newspapers also covered this Cold War story. Some, like ‘Red Warship Sideswipes US Vessel’, a front-page story in the Chicago Tribune,[21] or the New York Daily News story with the headline ‘COLD WAR: Soviet Ships Rub Ours the Wrong Way’,[22] referred to this Soviet Project 56 vessel by name. Others simply referred to it by its NATO designation: a Kotlin-class destroyer.
Built in 1954-57, these fast, anti-aircraft and anti-submarine Kotlin-class destroyers, each with a complement of 284 men, including 19 officers, were designed for mass-production. In the end, the Soviet Navy completed 27. Many later had their anti-aircraft and anti-submarine armament extensively modified, several were fitted with a helicopter platform at the rear of the ship, and two were modified with surface-to-air twin missile launchers.[23] Russian Navy historian Alexander Pavlov states that only three vessels were considered for upgrade, only one of which was considered as a potential helicopter carrier: ‘Of great importance for future developments, the tests and the helicopter take-off and landing training were on the destroyers Svetly, Dal’nevostochnyi Komsomolets and Veskii. For use on the first was the Ka-15 (helicopter); an unmanned vehicle on the others.’[24]
The incident, which sparked a diplomatic protest from both sides, was also referenced briefly in authoritative publications including the US Naval Institute’s Proceedings (1969[25] and 1973),[26] and in the Neptune Papers (1989),[27] published by Greenpeace/Institute for Policy Studies. The story also appeared in US News & World Report. The latter remained suspicious, asking, ‘What Are The Russians Up To Now?’[28] Incidentally, all four publications referred to Soviet destroyer Besslednyi by name.
Accidents and incidents at sea during the Cold War were far more common than generally believed. A June 1989 study in Neptune Paper No. 3 by William M Arkin and Joshua Handler, documented 1,276 accidents of the major navies of the world between 1945 and 1988. Of these, nearly half occurred in the Atlantic Ocean (excluding the Mediterranean Sea), while 25% took place in the Pacific. Of these 1,276 accidents, nearly 800 involved US naval ships.[29] Arkin, the lead author of the study, is an award-winning journalist and author of a dozen books on national security issues.
At one point, the authors of the Neptune Paper study offered a word of caution. This preponderance of US naval ship accidents, they pointed out, didn’t mean a higher rate than other navies, particularly the Soviet Navy. Many hundreds of other Soviet naval accidents were known to have occurred, but the authors of the study understood this was due to ‘inadequate data and excessive secrecy’, and therefore they were unable to determine their specific dates or circumstances.[30]
A UPI story, which covered four such accidents, including the 1967 Walker collision, appeared in various US newspapers in early-February 1968, including the Madera Daily Tribune[31] (Madera, CA) and the Pittsburgh Press (Pittsburgh, PA).[32] Incidentally, about ten days prior to publication of the above, that is, on 23 January 1968, North Korea famously seized the USS Pueblo, a lightly-armed US spy ship, and her crew of 83 while in international waters, in what is now known as the Pueblo Incident.
Following the collision on May 10, Soviet harassment continued. A front-page story in the Washington Post, titled ‘2d Day, 2d Scrape’, described how the Walker had reportedly collided with a Soviet warship in the Sea of Japan for the second time in so many days. Following that second collision, the US lodged a second ‘severe’ protest, charging the Soviet vessel, an unidentified destroyer, with harassing naval units conducting exercises on the high seas and with creating ‘dangerous situations’.[33] According to Russian sources, that ‘unidentified’ Soviet ship was the Gordyi (‘Proud’),[34] an older Krupny-class guided-missile destroyer with pennant 025.[35]
Besslednyi was purportedly relieved by Gordyi at the break of dawn on May 11, following Besslednyi’s departure from the area. Shortly after Gordyi’s arrival, she transmitted a flashing light message to the US aircraft carrier Hornet, for the commander of the task force, accusing the USS Taylor (DD-468) and the Walker of ‘systematically and roughly’ violating international rules of the road at sea, by making dangerous manoeuvres that caused the danger of collision with a Soviet naval ship.
As a result of such ‘hooligans action’, the message read, Walker ran down the Soviet destroyer, causing damage to her port (left) side. The message, from the Commander of the Soviet task force, concluded: ‘SUCH ACTIONS OF NAVAL SHIPS CANNOT BE AFFORDED. REQUEST STOP THE VIOLATIONS OF INTERNATIONAL RULES OF SHIPPING AT OPEN SEA IMMEDIATELY’.[36]
As in the case of the May 10 Walker–Besslednyi collision, a Soviet oral and written protest followed. Llewellyn Thompson, the US Ambassador to the Soviet Union, was ordered to follow up the protests in Moscow. Meanwhile, on Capitol Hill, House Republican Leader Gerald R Ford, a Navy veteran (and future President of the United States[37]), said, ‘we certainly can’t tolerate other such incidents’. Ford believed that President Lyndon B Johnson and the Joint Chiefs of Staff should decide what action should be taken to protect American ships.[38]
Sen. John G Tower, a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said the two collisions ‘indicate either a very stupid Soviet sea captain or a deliberate Soviet attempt to cause an international incident of far-reaching implications’, adding that the Pentagon should ‘restudy its contingency plans in case it becomes necessary to use force’.[39]
There Are Two Sides to Every Story
Not long after the May 1967 collisions at sea, three Russian-language newspapers ran stories on the incidents: two Soviet daily broadsheets (Pravda and Izvestia) and one American (Novoe Russkoe Slovo), but the stories, of course, were covered differently in the Soviet Union and in the US. Pravda was an organ of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union; whereas Izvestia was the newspaper of the Councils of Workers’ Deputies, and as such was the organ of government power. The word ‘izvestiya’ is derived from the Russian word meaning ‘to inform’. The following are excerpts from the two major Soviet newspapers:
Pravda, ‘Note from the Soviet Government’, May 14, 1967 on page 4:
The ships participating in the exercise repeatedly approached the Soviet coast at close range. By conducting such exercises in the Sea of Japan, American ships do not take into account existing international norms, grossly violate international rules for preventing collisions at sea and commit a number of illegal actions against Soviet ships located in this sea, approaching them at a dangerously close distance.
As a result, the American destroyer, side number 517, collided first with one and then with another of the Soviet destroyers, causing them a number of damages. [It is not clear from the text exactly when the mentioned collisions occurred; previously it is noted that the US Navy carrier force began exercises in the Sea of Japan on May 8, and on May 13, the Soviet party protested about the dangerous maneuvering of the US destroyer].
There can be no doubt that these actions of American warships were deliberate, provocative and a gross violation of international law, and the very conduct of the US-Japanese exercise near the Soviet coast cannot be regarded as anything other than a deliberately organized provocative military demonstration.
Izvestia, issue 115 (15509), May 17, 1967, article ‘What Happened in the Sea of Japan? Interview with Commander-in-chief of the Navy S G Gorshkov’:
Moreover, at 12 am on the same day [May 10, 1967], the American destroyer 517, with a speed of about 25 knots, came close to the Soviet ship and, leaning on her left side, tore the boat from the davits, and pierced it with her superstructures. The collision occurred 115 miles off the Soviet coast, East of Vladimir Bay.
At 17: 33 on May 11, while overtaking another Soviet ship, the same destroyer hit her in the aft part of the port side. As a result of the strike, the Soviet ship received two holes and damage to the railings.
The fact that the same USS Walker collided with two Soviet ships speaks for itself. It is obvious to anyone who knows anything about the sea that if two collisions occur during an overtaking run in less than one day under favorable meteorological conditions and clear weather, as the commander of the USS 517 McClendon did, then this can only be done with malicious intent. The fact that the collision was committed intentionally by an American ship is also evidenced by the fact that the American destroyer approached the Soviet ships with the fenders already lowered at the side to protect the lower part of her side from impact during the collision.
The incident was also covered at length in Novoe Russkoe Slovo (‘New Russian Word’), an American Russian-language newspaper published in New York City for a readership of Russian émigrés. Unlike Pravda and Izvestia, however, only Novoe Russkoe Slovo (NRS), a pro-democratic daily covering US and Soviet news, as well as Russian cultural topics, mentioned the Soviet destroyer by name; it was also the only Russian-language newspaper that held the Soviet ship responsible for the collision.
According to an article in Novoe Russkoe Slovo (‘A New Clash in the Waters of the Sea of Japan: An Attempt to Provoke a Major Incident?’), ‘No sooner had the Soviet charge d’affaires in Washington, Yuri Chernyakov, returned to the Embassy, where he was protested against the attempts of the Soviet destroyer Besslednyi to interfere with the maneuvers of the American squadron in the Sea of Japan, which led to her collision with the American destroyer Walker […] when news came of a second collision in the Sea of Japan between a Soviet destroyer and the Walker.’[40]
Commander Sobolev Speaks Up
In the minds of American naval historians, the vessel that clashed with the USS Walker in 1967 was Besslednyi(‘Traceless’), a Soviet Kotlin-class destroyer. Russian authors and historians, however, know otherwise. In 2005, nearly 40 years after the collision between Walker and a Soviet destroyer in the Sea of Japan, there was a remarkable turn of events, when Anatoly Sobolev, Captain I rank (Post Capitan) (ret.), the former commander of Veskii (‘Convincing’), told his story for the first time. Veskii is the Project 56 destroyer that actually had collided with Walker. Russian journalist Oleg Kaptsov retold Sobolev’s story in 2012.[41]
According to Sobolev, it was customary in such cases for the Americans to try and create a scandal and blame the Soviet side. ‘When our ‘observers’ [destroyers and spy ships] approached the carrier strike group, [Walker] broke ranks suddenly … maneuvering dangerously.’ But the American destroyer didn’t stop there. According to Sobolev, the next day, on May 11, Walker struck and made a hole in the side of Soviet destroyer Gordyi.[42]
The Americans tried to make a scene following the May 10 collision, Sobolev said, accusing the Soviet side; but seamen of the Soviet Pacific Fleet reacted more discreetly. A documentary film by an operator of a reconnaissance group, staff of the Soviet Pacific Fleet, left no doubt of US guilt. Once the film was shown to US representatives in Moscow, the Americans renounced all claims against the Soviet side; the Commander of US Navy’s 7th Fleet describing the US-Soviet naval encounter as ‘a pleasant event’.[43]
Sobolev’s memoir on the Walker–Veskii collision began as follows: ‘In March 1967 [that’s two months before the collision at sea], I was appointed commander of the destroyer Veskii, which was part of the 201st brigade of the 9th division of ASW (anti-submarine warfare)’.[44]
On 4 February 2005, The Daily News, a Vladivostok newspaper,[45] published Sobolev’s first-hand account. His narration appeared later that year as a chapter in a book by Mikhail Khramtsov, Captain I rank (Post Capitan), a retired Soviet naval officer, titled ‘The Tragedy in the Immediate Vicinity: From the Brigade Commander’s Notebook’. The title of the chapter on Sobolev is a quote from the Commander of the US Navy’s Seventh Fleet in the Pacific: ‘The Voyage Together with Soviet Ships was a Pleasant Event’.[46] Khramtsov had previously written two books on his experience in the Soviet Navy.
Sobolev’s memoir described in detail how Veskii had collided with Walker on 10 May 1967, putting to rest the long-held view by the US Navy, the US Defense Department, and others, that the Soviet ship involved in the collision with Walkerwas Besslednyi. Had Sobolev remembered wrong? Unlikely, since a Soviet Navy commander is more likely to forget his wife’s name than the name of his own ship.
According to Sobolev, on 9 May 1967 (one day prior to the collision), Veskii was ordered to monitor the maneuvers of the aircraft carrier Hornet strike group (Task Group 70.4), which had appeared not far from the Soviet shore. According to the US Navy, Walker joined the USS Taylor and the USS Davidson, a new type of destroyer escort, to provide a screen for the Hornet.[47]
At one point, Sobolev said, a group of intelligence officers from the Staff of the Soviet Pacific Fleet came on board the Veskii. But for Soviet intelligence to photograph the Davidson, he said, would require that his ship approach from a distance of no more than 1-2 cable lengths (or 200–300 meters). ‘The Americans tried to avoid this, but Veskii did the job’, Sobolev said.[48]
Sobolev continued: When Hornet increased her speed to 20 knots, destroyers Taylor and Walker began maneuvering to prevent Veskii from monitoring Hornet’s movements. This continued the whole afternoon of May 9, Sobolev said. But the next day [May 10], Walker began operating even more blatantly, when at 12:20 that afternoon, at a speed of about 28 knots, Walker ran with her starboard side onto the port side of Veskii. In doing so, a 10-meter-long rod antenna bracket, which was attached to her aft superstructure (where the ship’s Radio Room is located), ripped a rowboat aft gig tackle from the Soviet destroyer; and the bracket, together with the antenna, fell onto the deck of Veskii. After the collision, Taylor approached Veskii and Walker, and went toward Hornet at full speed.[49]
That evening, when Gordyi arrived, Veskii went to a Soviet tanker for refuelling. The next morning, however, when Veskiireturned, her crew saw Gordyi and Walker with their engines stopped; As Sobolev explained, the ‘restless Walker’ had rammed her nose through Gordyi’s aft a couple minutes earlier. Fortunately, Gordyi wasn’t damaged seriously.[50]
How the Navy Got it Wrong
What might seem at first to be one of the great mysteries of naval history may have any number of simple explanations. Alexander Rozin, a Russian Cold War history researcher, described the collision between Walker and Veskii this way: ‘On 10 May, at a speed of about 28 knots, [Walker] landed with his starboard [right] side on the port [left] side of the Soviet destroyer Veskii (side number 022)’.[51]
On the other hand, David Winkler, a historian at the Naval Historical Foundation and author of Cold War at Sea (Annapolis: Naval Institute Press, 2000), said Besslednyi displayed pennant number 022 during an incident with the Walker in the summer of 1966, and so assumed that the Soviet destroyer with pennant number 022 in May 1967 was also Besslednyi. If the US Navy was unaware that Besslednyi and Veskii bore the same pennant number (022), but at different times,[52] this could have led to the erroneous conclusion that Besslednyi, and not Veskii, had collided with Walker in 1967.
Another possible cause of confusion was intentional trickery on the part of the Soviet Navy. According to an historian with the Naval History and Heritage Command (NHHC), Soviet Operational Security (OPSEC) included various means of deception—the Russians would change hull or sail numbers, or blacken them out, just to keep the US Navy confused as to the true state of affairs of the Soviet Navy. And on occasion, the Russians would go so far as to rename their ships. In the case of the 10 May 1967 collision between the USS Walker and a Soviet destroyer, the Soviet practice of changing hull numbers to confuse their adversary could easily have led to an error on the part of the US Navy.
Assigning Blame
Now that more than half-a-century has passed since the USS Walker collided with a Soviet destroyer in the Sea of Japan, one key question remains: Who was responsible for identifying the Soviet destroyer as Besslednyi ? It now appears the culprit was likely a Public Affairs Officer (PAO) in Washington or at the US Navy’s 7th Fleet headquarters. Aware of a similar incident involving the Walker and Besslednyi (022) in 1966,[53] the individual responsible for creating that May 1967 press release must have naturally assumed that the Soviet destroyer involved, with ‘022’ painted on her hull, was also Besslednyi, when in fact it was not.
On May 23, Capt. Earl E Buckwalter, USN, Commander of Destroyer Squadron 11 (San Francisco), relayed the results of an investigation into the circumstances surrounding the collision between the USS Walker (DD-517) and Soviet DD-022 on 10 May 1967, and between Walker and Soviet DDGS-025 on 11 May 1967 during a Sea of Japan transit of Task Group 70.4. The investigation set forth the finding of fact, opinions, and recommendations as to the cause of the subject collisions, the resulting damage, responsibility for the collision and recommended administrative and disciplinary action.[54]
The Commander of 7th Fleet concluded that ultimate responsibility for both collisions rested with DD-022 and DDGS-025, respectively, and that Stephen W Mc Claran, USN, Commander of the USS Walker (DD-517), acted ‘intelligently and competently throughout his encounters with the Soviet vessels, and that no blame whatsoever should be attached to him’. Likewise, the Commander-in-Chief of the Pacific Fleet commented that Walker ‘competently and professionally performed his assigned mission’.[55] And yet, nowhere in that entire 100+ page investigation report, is DD-022, the Soviet destroyer that collided with Walker on May 10, 1967, mentioned by name—let alone ‘Besslednyi’.
[1] ‘Kenneth C. Kimbal, USN, on duty at Pearl Harbor’, Vestnik (Herald), Feb. 22, 1967, p. 3.
[2] http://www.usswalker.com/historydetail.htm; This information was provided by Dick Purvis, TM3 (DD-517, March 1962 to May 1965).
[3] J Finney, ‘A US Destroyer in Far East Bumped by Soviet Warship’, New York Times, May 11, 1967, pp. 1, 5; http://www.usswalker.com/historydetail.htm
[4] A month prior, USS Walke (DD-723) had departed Long Beach, California for deployment to the western Pacific. However, while passing the outer breakwater, a major fire broke out in her aft fire room, the boiler room at the rear of the ship. Although the destroyer’s damage control efforts succeeded in putting out the blaze, while being towed back into Long Beach the next day, her towline parted and she ran aground. Later that day, she finally entered the Long Beach Naval Shipyard for repairs to her hull and main propulsion plant; Walke III (DD-723), Naval History and Heritage Command (NHHC); https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/w/walke-iii.html
[6] See David Winkler’s ‘Shouldering Incident Reminiscent of Sea of Japan Bumpings’, Naval Historical Foundation, 2016.
[7] Naval History and Heritage Command (NHHC); https://www.history.navy.mil/research/histories/ship-histories/danfs/w/walke-iii.html
[8] David Winker, ‘Shouldering Incident Reminiscent of Sea of Japan Bumpings’, Naval Historical Foundation, June 30, 2016; AmEmbassy MOSCOW telegram 716,10 August 1966 with MFA Note No. 33/USA RG 59, State Department Central Foreign Policy Files, Box 2874, folder POL 33-6 US-USSR 1/1/66, NA. The note stated that on July 25, 1966, a Soviet destroyer (Hull No. 66) had to stop twice to avoid collisions. The first incident occurred with the USS Radford and the second with the Walker.
[9] S Labaton, ‘John Finney, 80, of The Times; Wrote Widely on US Policy’, New York Times, 30 Oct 2004, p. A17.
[10] ‘A US Destroyer in Far East Bumped by Soviet Warship’, pp. 1, 5.
[11] Ibid.
[12] Boris Karasev’s profile and photo on Odnoklassniki, the Russian social network; https://ok.ru/profile/566743605371
[13] Photo: Naval History and Heritage Command (NHHC) No. K-36401 USS Walker (DD-517)
[14] ‘Я служил на эм Бесследный в 1968 г но про это столкновение от сослуживцев не слышал может быть это секретно но вряд ли Кокая то утка непонятная Да на фото не вижу РБУ 2500 БЧ3’.
[15] A conversation among former Besslednyi crewmen on Odnoklassniki, the Russian social network; The discussion began on June 4, 2016; https://ok.ru/group/52838105022581/topic/65458764546165.
[16] ‘High Seas: A Game of Chicken’, TIME, Vol. 89, No. 20, May 19. 1967, p. 35.
[17] ‘A US-Soviet Bump on the High Seas’ (On the Newsfronts of the World), LIFE, Vol. 62, No. 21, May 26, 1967, p. 36.
[18] ‘Указанное столкновение произошло в 115 милях от советского побережья, к востоку от залива Владимира’ (‘What Happened in the Sea of Japan? Interview with Commander-in-chief of the Navy S G Gorshkov’), Izvestia, issue 115 (15509), May. 17, 1967.
[19]https://www.history.navy.mil/content/history/nhhc/our-collections/photography/numerical-list-of-images/nhhc-series/nh-series/USN-1123000/USN-1123797.html
[20] Warship International, Toledo, Ohio: International Naval Research Organization (1967), Vol. 4, p. 92.
[21] F Farrar, ‘Russians Hit US Warship Second Time’, Chicago Tribune, May 12, 1967, pp. 1-2.
[22] ‘COLD WAR: Soviet Ships Rub Ours the Wrong Way’, (New York) Daily News, May 14, 1967, p. 40.
[23] ‘USSR’, Jane’s Fighting Ships 65-66, 1969, p. 458.
[24] A Pavlov, The Project 56 Destroyers (Yakutsk, 1999) / А. С. Павлов, ‘Эскадренные миноносцы проекта 56’, Якутск, 1999.
[25] CMDR T Martin (USN), ‘Dangerous Maneuverings – The Russian View’, Professional Notes, Proceedings, US Naval Institute (USNI), Feb. 1969, pp. 144-146.
[26] ‘Soviet Ships in the News’ Notebook, Proceedings, US Naval Institute (USNI), Feb. 1973, Vol. 99 No. 2, pp. 118-119.
[27] W Arkin and J Handler, ‘Naval Accidents 1945-1988’, Neptune Paper No. 3, Greenpeace/Institute for Public Studies (Washington, D.C.), 1989, pp. 36-37; https://fas.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/NavalAccidents1945-1988.pdf
[28] ‘What Are The Russians Up To Now?’ US News & World Report, 1967, Vol. 62, p. 8.
[29] ‘Naval Accidents 1945-1988’, pp. 36-37.
[30] Ibid.
[31] Washington (UPI): ‘American Destroyer Rams Red’, Madera Tribune, Vol. 76, No. 185, Feb. 2, 1968, p. 1.
[32] Washington (UPI): ‘US-Russian Vessels Collide’, Pittsburgh Press, Feb. 2, 1968, p. 8.
[33] J Smith, ‘2d Day, 2d Scrape’, Washington Post, May 12, 1967, pp. A1, A22.
[34] ‘Edges’ (a noun) is not a Russian word. Besides, Soviet destroyers during the Cold War mainly had adjective names, with endings such as ‘-ий’ or ‘-ый’ that may be transcribed in English as ‘-y’, ‘-yi’, ‘-ii’, and so forth. Examples include ‘Веский’ (‘Veskii’), ‘Бесследный’ (‘Besslednyi’), and ‘Гордый’ (‘Gordyi’). Perhaps, the line should have read something like this: ‘The US destroyer Walker sideswiped the ‘edges’ of the Soviet destroyer Besslednyi’.
[35] ‘Shouldering Incident Reminiscent …’
[36] Ibid.
[37] Following the 1974 resignation of Richard M Nixon, Gerald Ford became the 38th President of the United States.
[38] ‘2d Day, 2d Scrape’, pp. A1, A22.
[39] Ibid.
[40] A Sobolev, ‘Новое столкновение в водах Японского моря: Попытка спровоцировать крупный инцидент?’ (‘A New Collision on the Water of the Sea of Japan: Is it a Try to Provoke a Major Scandal?’), Novoe Russkoe Slovo, May 12, 1967, p. 1.
[41] Ibid.
[42] Ibid.
[43] Ibid.
[44] Sobolov’s memoir later appeared as Chapter VIII: ‘10th OPESK (Operative Squadron of the Pacific Fleet) in the Memory of Shipmates’ from a book by I Khmelnov, E Chukhrayev, et al. ‘The Pacific Squadron’ (‘Тихоокеанская_эскадра’): Moscow: Oruzhiye i tekhnologii: 2017;25region.info/glava-viii
[45] M Khramtsov, Трагедия была рядом : из записных кн. Комбрига (The Tragedy in the Immediate Vicinity: From the Brigade Commander’s Notebook), Владивосток (Vladivostok), Aug, 1, 2005.
[46] Ibid.
[47] ‘Shouldering Incident Reminiscent …’; ‘The Voyage Together with Soviet Ships Was a Pleasant Event …’
[48] Ibid.
[49] Ibid.
[50] Ibid.
[51] ‘10 мая он, при скорости около 28 узлов, [Walker] навалился своим правым бортом на левый борт советского эсминца «Веский» (бортовой 022)’.
[52] A Russian-language military forum: https://forums.airbase.ru/2004/07/t26907_2–opoznavanie-sovetskikh-korablej-i-katerov-po-bortovym-nomera.html
[53] ‘Shouldering Incident Reminiscent …’
[54] Investigation Report concerning the 10-11 May 1967 Walker collisions; FOIA (JAG) DON-NAVY-2020-007742 (partial grant/partial denial).
[55] Ibid.
Dr Paul Davidson served as a reservist Commander on the Directing Staff at the Australian Command and Staff College in 2019. In civilian life he was an Associate Professor of Management at QUT in Brisbane, during which time he taught at the RAN Staff College (1997-2000). In a 30-year university business education career, he has written 10 textbooks on Management, and over 100 other publications. He is now serving as Deputy Director of Robotics, Autonomous Systems, and Artificial Intelligence, Warfare Innovation Navy.
Mr Bill Streifer, a resident of Crestview, Florida, is a freelance journalist and researcher; and the only American on the Editorial Board of Vostok (East), Journal of Oriental Studies, published by the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow.
Streifer’s publications have included the following: ‘Anything Could Happen: Newly Declassified CIA Documents Tell an Entirely Different North Korea ‘Pueblo Incident’’ in the North Korean Review (Sept. 2016); ‘The Pueblo Incident: Locating the ‘Hidden’ Spy Ship’ and ‘The Scissored ‘Pueblo’ Record’ in the International Journal of Naval History (Sept. 2020).Recently, Streifer’s article, ‘Dr. Fritz J Hansgirg and Heavy Water Production: The Untold Story’, was published in The Bulletin of the History of Chemistry, a peer-reviewed journal.
